Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C
Posts
0
Comments
131
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • False, you need to learn what bills are and how they get their titles.

    Again, just calling something a CR doesn't make it one. Budget reconciliation bills are different as they get special privileges in the senate (no filibuster). Anything else can be called whatever you like. There's no special law or rule that governs what can and can't be called a CR. That's why this is being referred to by democrats as "a dirty CR".

    https://www.coons.senate.gov/news/press-releases/ranking-member-coons-announces-opposition-to-house-republicans-dirty-cr

  • You don’t understand what a CR is if you think it’s permanent. A continuing resolution is stopgap funding when a budget reconciliation fails to be passed.

    A CR is just a title applied to a bill. This wasn't a CR, it was named a CR. Just calling something a "CR" means nothing. If this were actually a CR the dems in the house and most of the senate dems would not have opposed it.

    As for Trump's executive orders, those are just decrees that can be legally challenged. Much like Trump decreeing "The 14th amendment no longer counts" just saying it doesn't make it so.

    Again, Even if we take the veto out of the equation, have you thought about why the Federal Workers union was opposed to this "CR"? Why would the union for the workers that would have been most impacted by a shutdown oppose a simple stopgap CR?

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/federal-employees-union-tells-congress-132950031.html

  • Again, if it were so true and advanced Trump's goals, why didn't he veto the CR? Why did he push republicans to vote for it? Why was the Federal Workers Union opposed to it passing?

    You edited up above that "it's temporary". No, it isn't. It wasn't a clean CR and it vested a lot more power into the administration to make budget decisions. A shutdown would have been temporary, but it also would have caused a massive shock to the stock market (which is almost certainly the real reason Schumer and crew voted for it).

    Why are you calling the propaganda office to get answers? Do you think Schumer's staffers are going to tell you anything other than "This was the absolute most perfect and most bestest thing Schumer could have done!". It's literally their jobs to justify Schumers actions.

    This bill supercharged and codified the DOGE actions. Now, instead of having any sort of leverage to stop the Trump admin and Elon from their actions. Instead of strong arming the republicans to actually compromise on SOMETHING in the budget bill. Schumer and crew have given them everything they asked for and they walked away with smiles on their faces. Literally. Republican senators were shocked and delighted it went through.

    All but 1 house democrat voted against this. All but 10 senate democrats voted against this. The vast majority of democrats in congress understood that this was a really dumb bill to let through. Stop listening to Schumer propaganda and just think about this. Schumer, as the senate majority leader, went against the will of his party.

  • This is stupid lie that Schumer was peddling.

    Trump could have vetoed the budget and forced a shutdown. If he got more power that way don't you think he would have?

    Stop acting like the ten Democrats that didn't get the memo were somehow justified in messing up the nation.

  • Honestly, I'll take that any day of the week. It's far better than someone like Newsom who is actively courting right wing figureheads so he can agree with them about how bad progressives are.

    The party would be so much better if we could get rid of the members that hate progressives.

  • Oh you've seen nothing yet. They are also going to ANGRILY FURROW THEIR BROWS. Really I don't know how the republicans can withstand such stiff opposition.

  • Does money want this?

    Like really truly, I'm seeing fucking bloomberg and forbes come out against trump.

  • I heard they have black paddles and everything.

  • And frankly, the US isn't the only trade partner in the world.

    It's a large economy but not the only economy. These tariffs from the US are dumb because the end result is that the US will be excluded from world trade just like Iran or North Korea is.

  • Cool. As an opposition party you make them do that.

    You don't fucking work with the Nazi party, who is currently actively dismantling the government, because you are afraid your defense contractor constituents won't be happy.

    The democrats got literally nothing from the republicans. That's absolutely not compromise, it's just being an ashamed republican.

  • Just reread it and no, it's not a BT vulnerability. The "erase flash" command is something that has to be done by software running outside the BT stack. You can even see that inside the slides. The UsbBluetooth software is connected to the device with the flawed bluetooth chipset.

    The vulnerability is that if you have this chipset and compromised software, someone can flash the chipset with compromised flash. They even say that it's not an easy attack to pull off in the article.

    In general, though, physical access to the device's USB or UART interface would be far riskier and a more realistic attack scenario.

    In otherwords, the attack is something that can only be pulled off if there's also a security vulnerability within other parts of the hardware stack.

  • I just re-read the article and yes, you still need physical access.

    The exploit is one that bypasses OS protections to writing to the firmware. In otherwords, you need to get the device to run a malicious piece of code or exploit a vulnerability in already running code that also interacts with the bluetooth stack.

    The exploit, explicitly, is not one that can be carried out with a drive-by Bluetooth connection. You also need faulty software running on the device.

  • I think we are basically already there with ESPs :D.

  • Security wise, unless you are being specifically targeted by someone, you are almost certainly fine. And if you are being specifically targeted, I think someone hacking your ESPs is the least of your worries. A malicious attacker that knows your physical location can do a lot more scary things than just spying through ESPs.

  • You're fine. This isn't something that can be exploited over wifi. You literally need physical access to the device to exploit it as it's commands over USB that allow flashing the chip.

    This is a security firm making everything sound scary because they want you to buy their testing device.

  • The strategy is wildly different. Kamala did reach out by abandoning popular positions and instead focusing on virtue signalling garbage "I own a gun" "look at how tough on crime I am" "Liz Cheney likes me".

    Bernie's message is different. It's M4A and worker's rights. He's not putting out different messaging from what he's always pushed for.

    You want to say it's because he's a man, but that's not it. AOC and Elizabeth Warren both have similar messages and both are fairly well received.

    Kamala's messaging failed because like Hilary it was essentially "Trump is bad, you have to vote for me" and nothing else. She failed to present any sort of plan for the US. I mean, FFS, she spent part of the campaign doing "me too" to Trump policies like no tax on tips.

  • No. It's obviously the space telescopes.

  • The summer wildfire and hurricane season is going to be wild.

    Between gutting forestry services, national park services, weather services, FEMA... Yeah...

  • Our gov is showing us what they do with the tax money. It is, in fact, all public information you can get with a couple seconds of digging (and has been that way for a LONG time).

    https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/

    The only real black boxes of the government are military and espionage spending. Everything else is out in the open.