No. It is a security-aware stance. I get you are not able to see that. Makes you part of the problem. And we are heading for a cliff due to stupidity like yours.

Indeed. Will be funny so see what happens with "AI" agents. Because letting them do things with emails strikes me as a sure recipe for disaster.

You are confusing a text-channel with a DTP tool. Yes, I get you are stupid and contrarian, but this statement is really, really, really dumb.

Better software. I have accidentally opened malicious attachments myself or rather tried to. Know what happened? Absolutely nothing because my email setup does not call external applications.

In a modern IT infrastructure, you get logs as to who downloaded what, and you will have alerting on that because one thing to catch is some user machine getting hacked and the attackers accessing a lot of files.

As usual, you are without insight. This is about selling to private customers.

In an entirely different situation. Apples and oranges.

In Germany, for example, messing with any core car system means it is not legal to drive on public roads anymore and your insurance is void. Hence really stupid idea.

AFAIK, the findings were that Bosch did not aid the fraud and had no design requirements to prevent what happened. You are blaming the maker of the screwdriver because it can be used to break open doors.

That is because it was not designed by security people. Engineers are often easily scammed, because most of them assume people are honest. And, to be fair, that is usually the case on engineering, because a lot of engineering designs get tested harshly in actual use. But not all and when you test for one of those you need the security engineering mind-set. If they even had one competent, say, IT security expert or general fraud expert in there, the fraud would have been discovered pretty much immediately and would likely never have happened. Opportunity creates criminals.

That is BS. It assumes a level of insight and control that is not there. Not even very strict regimes like the 3rd Reich or North Korea manage to "design" most things. At best, they can install some guardrails.

But thanks for using an Ad Hominem. It nicely shows you do not even believe your statement yourself.

That does not work well, AFAIK.

I doubt I can be drunk enough to fall for this crap even temporarily. What this reminds me of is the complex hallucinations some religions produce to make it harder to find out they are built entirely on hot air.

Indeed. Many of these people struggle hard. Reducing struggle to reasonable levels is commonly regarded as a good thing (unless you are a fascist or follower of some other inhumane ideology). Since it can only be managed, the potentially problematic question of a "cure" that does change personality characteristics (think lobotomy or other non-reversible atrocities) does not apply.

I disagree. The question is stupid. What you actually need to do is _read_ the paper, because they will have explained their approach. Examining diagnosed people comes with some caveats, and requires an estimate and insight into non-diagnosed people. But there is nothing wrong with the approach. And there is the problem that you cannot actually do this on non-diagnosed ADHD people, as they a) are hard to identify and b) are not taking drugs for ADHD.

So, no, not a scientist. Just a FUD pusher. Caveat: I am actually a scientist.