Any (sealed) container designed to hold hot things should have a pressure release system.
It can be seals that buckle before the lid. It can be a tiny hole with a soft rubber stopper. It can be one of many things that cost a couple of cents extra and a bit more engineering and testing effort.
The cheapest disposable coffee cups I've used have a tiny hole for the express purpose of not pressurizing and spilling hot liquid everywhere.
There's a lot of conversation in the comments about "was there was an expectation that the pressure release valve would be there" There absolutely is a safety expectation that a sealed container of hot food is designed with a pressure release system.
BTW the fermented food thing is a misdirection. The pressure release system should have released pressure way before it even reached ballistic territory.
My steam cleaner recently was recalled and sent me a new cap with a built-in pressure-locking valve. People were opening it too early and getting burns. Heat and pressure can be very dangerous.
at the same time, I've never had any faith in that software.
maybe because of it's association with really cheap, buggy hosts i explored in my teenage years. maybe because of their largely unnecessary complications (except enterprise maybe). maybe because of the tendency of large bloated depressing organizations to use these even in places they shouldn't.
not that many software have faith in are faring any better in this cve-storm.
Exactly. Any security person absolutely KNOWS that the distros are still going to be vulnerable. They're exploiting this process loophole to knowingly cause chaos and gain notoriety.
At this point this is not really white-hat/ethical hacking anymore.
Ofc the kernel-distro security loophole is stupid and should be patched ASAP, but that doesn't absolve this company of wrongdoing.
If the return policy explicitly allows "change of mind", I'd say it's in the gray area. Though ofc it isn't sustainable if everyone starts doing this. I assume there's a ((returns:buys)/payment identity) metric to ban the largest offenders.
Also, there should be some universally accepted way to have access to your data and a secure personal computer in the duration your device is getting repaired.
Also, there should be some universally accepted way to have access to your data and a secure personal computer in the duration your device is getting repaired.
Yes, exactly. When getting your car repaired there’s loaners or rentals to allow you to keep driving. Why isn’t a loaner computer a standard thing?
Private companies now can link all your online activities to you. Not an advertisement ID, but directly to you and your loans and your health data and whatever they're selling in the black market. Every data breach is a 100 times. It was already almost possible to directly know about you by buying data, now it's easier.
The point of this is not to verify age really. It is to verify identity. There's no way to prove someone is some age without presenting a legal ID.
Also, it's not just porn, facebook, online gambling etc. It is the OS based on some bills. So ALL your activities.
> There's no way to prove someone is some age without presenting a legal ID.
Sure there is.
Verifiable Credentials and other similar standards allow this to be delegated in such a way that there is no need to present ID or even let the site know who you are. The site can issue a request to a third party that simply provides back "Yep, we attest that this request was approved by someone over 18".
Depending on the exact scheme, the request may forward you to a broker, who will then forward the request (and your web session) on to the trusted third party of your choice which has already performed ID verficiation (usually a bank). The bank sends a signed response back to the broker, the broker sends a signed response back to the requesting site.
Is it perfect? Maybe not 100%, the broker knows there was a request from a restricted site forwarded to a given bank. The bank knows you have approved a request. There is likely to be an identifier of some sort sent from the site all the way through to the back-end so you know you're not being MITM'd. But in theory nobody should have the full picture.
No practical way I should say. Realistically, it's pretty clear that lawmakers really just want to shove it through in the simplest way possible. Which is probably private third parties.
And private third parties are very shady. They have effective monopolies and no significant public face to care about. I think we have seen this pattern play out in healthcare, compliance and other industries already.
Also idk about banks being the effective gatekeepers to the internet and eventually all technology. Just feels like its not their place to do that.
Read every alternative volunteered here. Imagine any world where in the next 5 years they can't be enshittified, sold to a predatory private equity, their support lines AI-ified, their headcount reduced by 40% without your knowledge, etc etc. 27 years is a very long time.
A competent IT person can have a backup plan for every expected failure. They can't control registrar level screw ups.
Companies explicitly selling you "bulletproof domains" like MarkMonitor have screwed up big time.
Also as an IT guy, asking to register a new domain with X is much easier than asking to transfer a long held domain away from Y.
500mg from a capsule and 500 from cough syrup 4 times a day is still fine. With a 100% safety margin still.
If you’re taking more meds than that without clinical supervision Id say something is wrong in the system or your medicine practices.
Where I’m from it’s common to walk to the nearest pharmacy and get meds when needed. Even over the counter stuff like paracetamols. And talking to the pharmacist. They’ll ask what you’re already taking and tell you what else to get.
There is no other technology to do age verification at scale.
Apple, Google and such will contract out this age verification to a third-party which will ask you to upload your ID and a 3D face captcha, which the third party will delete within 15 days, but somehow magically still make it into an unfortunate, unavoidable data leak a couple of years later.
I think you are assuming what their definition of "verify" is going to be, but it's not actually written in the text of the bill, so we don't know. Similar laws in some states only asked the OS to collect the age, it specifically doesn't say that the information must ever be accurate, stored or used for anything.
Collecting the age will be done via a photo of a legal US state ID. We can take bets but, as the article points out, only two vendors can do this and this is how they do it.
Edit: "fire reward receptors in my brain" is probably nonsense scientifically but hopefully it gets the point across