Thanks for sharing!

As far as I know, there is no such list (yet).

What should be done:
Escalate it to the people responsible for IT administration & security in your company or institution. They’ll deal with it.

But the default step if you suspect of being infected is not to use the device at all until you got a green light for it from the security/admin folks. Power down, disconnect from any networks, either via physical cables or wireless, unplug external storage devices and wait for further info.

I’d say give it a try and see for yourself.

I can just recommend using Firefox for a multitude of reasons. However, I am biased as I have been using firefox for almost two decades and did not have many reasons to complain.

I understand that you made such an experience, but I can’t share it though. I’ve been a Firefox user for almost as long as Firefox exists, which is almost two decades. (I think I joined somewhere between 2005-2007). I’ve tried other browsers, sometimes I had to. However, I didn’t notice any benefits compared to Firefox. Especially not in performance. Even though benchmarks have always shown clear differences, they weren’t significant enough for me to consider switching, as the difference really didn’t impact my browsing experience.

Regarding the memes: That was just a random annectode which I found suitable here. I don’t claim it has been that way since the beginning. (Can’t relate to that anyway.) But given that it has been around for a while, I don’t see how performance can be an argument in favour of Chrome in this.

I’ve been a loyal Firefox user for almost as long as Firefox has existed. So I’m probably a bit biased. However, when I used other browsers, and if it wes just to try them out, I didn’t notice any benefits in terms of loading websites and executing their scripts. This includes Chrome. In benchmarks there are obviously differences visible, but to me as a user they didn’t matter. I wasn’t so short on time that I needed those microseconds. So I really don’t get how performance could be an argument in this.

Restore Privacy – Alternatives to Google Products – The Big List (2024)

How was it more performant? As I remember it, Chrome was loading websites not noticeably faster than Firefox, as website loading speed depended and still depends mainly on your internet connection and hardware anyway.

As I remember it, Chrome exploded because it was pushed onto users at every possible opportunity while Firefox depended (and still depends) on users actively looking for it.

Used Google or Google products? Get ads for Chrome. Wanted to download Google Earth? You had to activly uncheck a box such that Chrome wasn’t going to be installed as well. Meanwhile no ads and not the same amount of exposure for Firefox.

That way they achieved a critical mass and snowballing did the rest. There were so many users using it that it was considered a good choice just because it was used by many people.

Regarding the performance aspect, if there even was a noticeable difference, it was worse than Firefox. Where else did the “Chrome eating RAM” memes come from?

This becomes even more ridiculous if you consider that we wasted about 1.05 billion tonnes of food worldwide in 2022 alone. (UNEP Food Waste Index Report 2024 Key Messages)

But no. Supermarkets will miss out on profits if they ban people from their stores who can’t pay.

Seems illogical? Because it is.

That’s a good way to use it. Like every technological evolution it comes with risks and downsides. But if you are aware of that and know how to use it, it can be a useful tool.
And as always, it only gets better over time. One day we will probably rely more heavily on such AI tools, so it’s a good idea to adapt quickly.

I am absolutely with you on that one.

But I think it’s tied to how we do business and less a problem which is very specific to the movie industry. Or in other words: it’s our fucked up capitalism in action again.

The workhorses of such shows get almost neglected while the shiny poster people and producers get most of the share.

And that’s basically everywhere the case. CEOs, managers, superiors are making insanely more money than those who are contributing a lot of work. It’s an unfair system which is holding the movie industry tightly in its grip as well.

There is just that teeny tiny ethical problem of not paying the creators and distributors for something we enjoy. This becomes a practical problem as well. If they make less money, it’s likely that even more movies or series get killed or never even started.

Idk what to do.

We, yesterday for a train ride. We, next week, for the way back. We almost every month for that purpose.

Also, at least where I live, they are increasing prices.

Makes me feel like it’s time to dust my old pirate hat…

Install an android emulator. Problem solved.

Start pirating again. Problem solved.

Make your own movies and shows. Problem solved.

Start a company, get rich, buy Netflix, problem solved.

Stop watching stuff, do something else. Problem solved.

Found a secret society, infiltrate politics worldwide, stir chaos and destruction, let the world burn and built a new Netflix from the world’s ashes where you still can download stuff. Problem solved.

See? It’s not that hard!

(In case it wasn’t clear, I am joking.)

Stack Overflow, technically a neutral term. Idk though whether the name in such a context would violate any trademark laws even if it’s a non-profit platform.

Snack Overflow

Nullpointer Exception

Access Violation

Not necessarily, no. There are a plethora of non-profit services and pages on the net.

What platform do you think you used to write that commeent?

Regarding platforms of for-profit companies, you are more right than wrong though.

Because it’s original work they contributed for free. Lending others that kind of expertise and time, just that it get’s used by a machine learning algorithm, which aims to reproduce this, without giving it back to them or the community in a similar free manner, feels violating.
Apart from that, creators feel ownership over their content and it feels wrong not to be asked what happens to it. (Although those probably wouldn’t – or shouldn’t – use SO anyway, as their content gets commercialised anyway by giving it SO for free.)

You know, there are a lot of people who like to be told a story and immerse themselve into such lore and reallymenjoy such scenes.

Despite that, the cutscenes in games of the TLoZ series are really not that long, which you would probably know, if you would’ve played the games.

To add to this:

Imagine someone would sneak into your home and steal your shoes, socks and underwear just to get off on that or give it to someone who does.

Wouldn’t that feel wrong? Wouldn’t you feel violated? It’s the same with such AI porn tools. You serve to satisfy the sexual desires of someone else and you are given no choice. Whether you want it or not, you are becoming part of their act. Becoming an unwilling participant in such a way can feel similarly violating.

They are painting and using a picture of you, which is not as you would like to represent yourself. You don’t have control over this and thus, feel violated.

This reminds me of that fetish, where one person is basically acting like a submissive pet and gets treated like one by their “master”. They get aroused by doing that in public, one walking with the other on a leash like a dog on hands and knees. People around them become passive participants of that spectactle. And those often feel violated. Becoming unwillingly, unasked a participant, either active or passive, in the sexual act of someone else and having no or not much control over it, feels wrong and violating for a lot of people.
In principle that even shares some similarities to rape.

There are countries where you can’t just take pictures of someone without asking them beforehand. Also there are certain rules on how such a picture can be used. Those countries acknowledge and protect the individual’s right to their image.