Skip to content

Perplexity offers to buy Google Chrome for $34.5 billion

Technology
51 43 22
  • 400 Stimmen
    36 Beiträge
    131 Aufrufe
    W
    Yep, and when you click a button that liteally says "make this discoverable on search engines" which is off by defualt, its the later.
  • Lemmy has a problem

    Technology technology
    36
    2
    50 Stimmen
    36 Beiträge
    291 Aufrufe
    D
    Lemmy has a lack of women problem because Spez probably isn’t shadow banning women as often as men. Fuck Spez.
  • First rack at home

    Technology technology
    1
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 33 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    81 Aufrufe
    G
    Yes. I can't imagine that they will go after individuals. Businesses can't be so cavalier. But if creators don't pay the extra cost to make their models compliant with EU law, then they can't be used in the EU anyway. So it probably doesn't matter much. The Llama models with vision have the no-EU clause. It's because Meta wasn't allowed to train on European's data because of GDPR. The pure LLMs are fine. They might even be compliant, but we'll have to see what the courts think.
  • 527 Stimmen
    123 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    B
    I'm not saying to waste space... but when manufacturers start a pissing match among themselves and say that it's because it's what the customers want, we end up with shit. Why does anyone need a screen that curves around the edge of the phone? What purpose does this serve? Who actually asked for this? I would give up some of my screen area to have forward facing speakers. I want a thicker phone that has better battery life. I also want to be able to swap out my battery. Oh, and I don't want the entire thing encased in glass. If we're so concerned about phone size then they should stop designing them so that a case is required.
  • 17 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 1 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    80 Aufrufe
    L
    I think the principle could be applied to scan outside of the machine. It is making requests to 127.0.0.1:{port} - effectively using your computer as a "server" in a sort of reverse-SSRF attack. There's no reason it can't make requests to 10.10.10.1:{port} as well. Of course you'd need to guess the netmask of the network address range first, but this isn't that hard. In fact, if you consider that at least as far as the desktop site goes, most people will be browsing the web behind a standard consumer router left on defaults where it will be the first device in the DHCP range (e.g. 192.168.0.1 or 10.10.10.1), which tends to have a web UI on the LAN interface (port 8080, 80 or 443), then you'd only realistically need to scan a few addresses to determine the network address range. If you want to keep noise even lower, using just 192.168.0.1:80 and 192.168.1.1:80 I'd wager would cover 99% of consumer routers. From there you could assume that it's a /24 netmask and scan IPs to your heart's content. You could do top 10 most common ports type scans and go in-depth on anything you get a result on. I haven't tested this, but I don't see why it wouldn't work, when I was testing 13ft.io - a self-hosted 12ft.io paywall remover, an SSRF flaw like this absolutely let you perform any network request to any LAN address in range.
  • I made a porn scroller without all the clutter

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    20 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet