The Securities and Exchange Commission filing comes after GoPro has already shared that it is considering a potential sale, news that followed a a $93.5 million net loss for 2025 and $432.3 million in 2024.

Psst. Your management is atrocious.

Maybe that guy in the black leather jacket can pay for everybody’s credits. Y’know, extend and embrace the grift.

That’s why I rely on Lemmy for my information about . . . um . . about . . .

Well. Owls. I guess.

And dull things.

💪

Don’t stick your thing in it!!

Remember Wally? Ooof. I mean, kind of a jerk and all but. What a way to go.

Great Scott!

And why not? The platform has been running flawlessly for years now. Those ‘hu-mans’ are basically cruft now.

Came to comment the same.

Getting in touch with Creative was a frustrating process.

They do not have any security contacts. In fact, I wasn’t even able to find regular contacts that wasn’t just a support form on their website. I tried (two times) to get in contact with them via the web form before giving up and contacting SingCERT to act as an intermediary, hoping they would have better luck reaching Creative.

Initially, SingCERT didn’t seem to be able to get in contact with Creative either. It took Creative nearly two months to respond to SingCERT. Unfortunately, their response was that “they do not consider this to be a vulnerability, as it does not present a cybersecurity risk”. I don’t know how they reached this conclusion, but it became clear that Creative had no interest in responding to or addressing this issue.

That and it has a microphone built in.

Know your place, trash!

-Special Agent Generalissimo Larry Ellison, OBE, Secretary of Cool Shit, ret.

When printed guns are outlawed, something something

Assembly Bill 2047, the California Firearm Printing Prevention Act, passed the state Assembly by 58 votes to 19 and has moved to the Senate.

Uh oh! Sounds like somebody could use a few more giant lines of cocaaaaiiiiiine!!

The saga has drawn speculation from other experts, like William Dormann from Tharros, who said that “MSRC used to be quite excellent to work with. But to save money, Microsoft fired the skilled people, leaving flowchart followers. I wouldn’t be surprised if Microsoft closed the case after the reporter refused to submit a video of the exploit, since that’s apparently an MSRC requirement now.”

. . . In this day and age, when AI-powered security research has arguably made the standard 90-day disclosure-to-patch window completely obsolete, and both time-until-exploit and unused exploits are both nearing zero, Microsoft and other software players would do well to adjust their policies.

That’s such an insane aside. 90-day disclosure-to-patch. Craziness.

On the other hand, this is exactly the way microsoft has been for - easily - 30 years. Like, 1996 microsoft could be slotted into today and literally nothing would change. Other than Nadella would probably be on a bunch of coke.

“Critics”

Very cool idea! Going with the Coyote theme maybe name it Wile E?

That’s true but the pricing doesn’t match the expense by a long shot. The question is - what is going to give out first? Capital, or the all-you-can-eat pricing? (and yes the latter is closing as we speak)

Oh that’s fun!

Or, install ghostwriter to launch at login.

2026’s Google I/O (Google’s annual developer conference) has been a disaster for the web. The conference-driven development’s forcing through of the Prompt API, a set of Modern Web Guidance skills for AI systems to use that are already showing major accessibility shortcomings, and a whole ton more AI-spangled sloppery, is rushed and unwelcome.

I think the most damaging announcement is the changes coming to Google Search. Rather than a list of relevant links, a search on Google will be more aggressively prioritising the LLM-generated summary, now complete with vibecoded tables, graphs, and interactive elements.

There has until now been a social contract. Website owners let Google scrape their sites and present them in Google Search, and, in exchange, Google Search sends traffic back to those sites. Google wins via adverts on the search page, and sites win due to however they monetise traffic. More largely, everyone wins because there is a financial incentive to create and produce new content.

However, Google killing their side of the contract ends this. If Google only takes and never gives, then sites cannot profit. What is the incentive to publish if the only outcome is feeding Google’s AI with no return? What sources will LLMs have to pull from if all the sources are defunct? How far will Google go folding adverts into their AI output?

I can see the huge short-term gain for Google, but I see no long-term path – not even an unsustainable one. This feels like the end, but of exactly what I’m uncertain.

All of my peers (bar the ones that work at Google) are shattered in a way I’ve never seen before. I don’t know where we go from here.

Great.

Great.

I thought it said 170. But that’s the full version. 20GB for the shell & OS’es d/l a la carte.