Ignore network traffic until security self-defenses are in place.

Yeah, you can have a buffer overflow anytime, and they can be bad, but the situation explicitly pointed out an "invaders not recognized as evil before armed guards are posted" situation.

If this had been a bad buffer overflow that occurred AFTER the defenses were in place, maybe it would've resulted in a compromise, or maybe the defenses would've rendered it ineffective.

... the machine can be affected by outside input before it's security/self-defense system is ready?

Oops.

"Of every 2 million sold, less than 1 million are affected!"

But also, in China the government runs the country and controls the economy, not the stock market like in the US. So it's really an apples to oranges comparison.

Also "vaporizing some $480 billion in market value" is kind of hilarious. Can you vaporize something that is already vapour?

In this case it appears to be a design flaw. They all break in the same place, in the same way. iFixIt found that there is a part of the hinge right under the screen there, and it appears that sometimes it gets misaligned and damages the screen.

My memory of a systemic failure was HP laptops. They had a deal with Nvidia that meant they all used Nvidia chipsets, and they would all eventually fail as the repeated heating and cooling cycles caused the BGA soldering to fail.

It sounds like BS anyway. Their press release says

"Components sourced from U.S. and allied-country suppliers account for more than 90% of the BlueChip prototypesâ(TM) component procurement cost."

Note that they include "allied-country suppliers", and are using the cost rather than the component count.

Does anyone make high grade NAND in the US?

It's spreading microplastics throughout the environment indiscriminately.

Indeed, I think they were expecting a smooth transition.

Unfortunately a lot of hype has been put out about how easy it is to ditch Microsoft products like Office and Windows. The reality is very different. LTT released a video just yesterday about how easy switching from Windows to Linux is, and within about 10 seconds of it starting the jargon would have gone over most people's heads.

Why? Is filling the Super Bowl blimp more important?

If nothing changed in 20 years, perhaps the looming helium crisis is overblown.

Nice idea but I don't know how you would do that. Most people are like the ones in the article. They open a document, it looks broken, they blame the app that opened it. They don't care who is right or if it is standards complaint. It worked yesterday, it worked for their colleague who sent it over.

The crappy articles linked don't explain what went wrong, but I found one which did: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.techspot.com%2Fnews%2F...

It sounds like the main issue was compatibility. They had a large number of templates and documents in Microsoft formats, and had to deal with ones coming from other departments.

The problems sound like the usual ones with MS documents being extremely brittle. Because every version of Word keeps the page layout and font rendering exactly the same, nobody notices. As soon as they switch to another app, slight changes on character dimensions, rounding errors, and unimplemented layout bugs combine to break everything. The resultant document is a mess and very labour intensive to fix.

They could employ people to work on fixing that in code, but it would probably be easier to just fix the documents, or develop an agentic AI that can do it automatically.

Back to this shit again, huh? I thought the denialists had moved on, but I guess there are some stragglers.

I stick with Firefox because it is the only one that supports uBlock Origin. uBlock Lite just doesn't cut it.

There is no alternative. Now Chrome has removed support for Manifest V2, it's only a matter of time before every Chrome skin browser drops it as well. None of them are going to keep supporting it long term, and none of them have ad blocking that good built in.

Also Brave has been involved in some very dodgy stuff and there is no way I'd trust them.

That's not right. They hash the password and send a small part of the hash to a third party service, which then returns a list of all the partially matching hashes. The browser then checks that list against the full hash locally.

It's a reasonable and secure way of doing things. The only way it becomes something of a security issue is if your passwords are complete crap, in which case you have bigger problems to worry about and definitely need that warning.

Try LibreWolf if you want a browser with all that stuff disabled/removed by default.