That is the root of most arguments I have seen, both pro and anti gun.
If people fundamentally disagree about whether the government should have a total monopoly on violence they are unlikely to come to agreement on the issue of gun control.
I'd rather recognize a fundamental values difference with someone than try to argue a bunch of rational points in bad faith, though. No sense raising blood pressure in a discussion that is doomed to be unproductive for both people.
Full disclosure: I am personally on the "Belt fed machine guns should be dispensed from vending machines in elementary schools" end of the spectrum. My views probably don't matter to my point above, but more openness about bias is better.
"A bail document seen by The Telegraph refers to an allegation of possessing a firearm with intent to cause fear of violence and a further allegation of stalking related to a photograph of a house that appeared on his social media."
just variant #9812981837 of the "which opinions, MFer??" goose meme merry-go-round
Ah it wasn’t clear that he had posted the picture of the house. (The article I read simply said they asked about a picture and he denied knowledge of it) if he posted it that changes things.
I suppose if you posted a picture of my house and immediately thereafter a picture of yourself with a gun I’d call the police too.
It’s not an article about vulnerable boot loaders. It’s an ad for their AI offering. That they turned their AI loose on some boot loaders is not material to the intended affect of the ad.
I think that finding and fixing this many vulns is a worthwhile achievement, no matter how they did it. But it does detract from the quality of the article that they are pushing CoPilot so heavily.
Did you read the OP link ? They go in far more details than just presenting what they did with AI, and they actually found several exploitable vulnerabilities, not just with AI, but with other techniques such as code analyzing or fuzzing.
AI is in he title, but the content is not entirely revolving around it.
reply