Btw, to this day, there are people who think moon modes actually work like this (they don't, they just invent craters)

I present you a world record: industry's largest watermark of 34 million pixels.

There's a certain Telegram feature used for most simple form of scams you could possibly imagine. Instead of taking time for growing multiple channels with something that interests their followers, a significant channel's owners post invite links to empty channels with manual acceptation, promising whatever kind of content gullible people would want to see.
Such a channel collects a number of join requests only to turn into a "legitimately followed" scam place, right before accepting all of the requests.

Why do I mention this? Telegram doesn't let you see or cancel the pending requests as a user. A just little bit tech savvy person who'd have been duped would realize that the request is taking too long for acceptation and possibly cancel it if such an UI was available. Telegram could also limit the maximum time a request can remain unaccepted before cancellation, for example to a month, for the sake of making the scammer life a little bit harder. Another option would be to require second confirmation that mentions the channel name from the moment of your request, you'd get an option to join or resign and you wouldn't count as a member before it.

Personally, I'd want it to be educational, so that old people would make the connection between scams popping up in their chat lists and the kinds of promises they were given. Their worldview could genuinely change once they start seeing money behind the "wholesome", "secret" and "alternative" and realize why they're specifically targeted.


(It's a month old post I decided to post now after seeing this scheme is alive and well, I felt like describing it is somewhat unproductive compared to directly filling a report, but official interactions tire me and maybe someone could make it reach the right place better than I can)

I can't think of a good caption, just usual iOS sideloading experience. I still wonder how three letter agencies bear with this system while limiting the money trail, it seems impossible.

So GN8 can absolutely do it at 16:9 in 30 fps (duh, I don't think any sensor vendor would dare to advertise DAG/DCG if the lightest realtime configuration couldn't be handled), 4:3 and whether it's anywhere to be seen on P10 is TBD

Now that I think of it, most of the compact Pro influx won't be unlockable without bribery, luck or significant leaks. It's why "the best compact phone" to me is still OP13T, even with its OIS-less telephoto.

I overlaid the two Xiaomi 17 Pro renders visible in Xiaomi teasers and it seems clear as a day that only the bigger one is getting a massive periscopic telephoto despite all of the space on both devices. What you can see on the smaller model is at best a 1/2" format.

On Pixel 9 Pro, a 4:3 most-likely-DCG has the ID 14. It's 12-bit and offers a lower amount of noise than default mode. This may suggest some greater intentionality behind exposing it later on P10P.

From my awareness, it looks exactly like DCG, so yes, Google very likely could expose it a generation earlier if it overlapped with their interests

Previously we made a post about a cancer patient being a victim of a malicious Steam game. It is a cryptodrainer masquerading as a free-to-play video game.

Based on reports and conversations occurring online, this is the malicious video game:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/3872350/BlockBlasters/

Chat, I'm not video game developer, but this file looks strange. Why does this video game contain a .bat file that looks for your browser credentials and crypto wallets?

Keep in mind that Google wants all apps to have the internet permission without asking you for it.

By "wants", I mean it's already a thing on all global stock ROMs that I've seen, there's no internet toggle and especially you're not asked for it when running the app or warned that a given app update features the internet permission. It pokes a massive hole in the whole concept of sandboxing.

It shouldn't be allowed to look this good with their bootloader unlock policy.

Sign-in with passkey being a smaller button than sign-in-with-our-competitor? What are they doing?

It doesn't look like Samsung changed their mind or figured things out on the actual stable (S25U) build of OneUI 8 as per a user. Flashing it force-locked it in practice, but a rollback is thankfully possible. To do something like this, without an explanation at least to commercial partners, is rather unexpected.

This is an official app from Tor project. Seems like a good example on how Google seems to do a "poor" job at explaining the developer console toggle behind the sideloading restriction. This also means that Google owns the signing key of this app and can technically distribute a backdoored version of it. The person managing the developer account most likely knows how it works and it's immensely sad that they can't inform users to avoid the Google Play distribution.