this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2024
492 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

59466 readers
3129 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
492
HP CEO Says They Brick Printers That Use Third-Party Ink Because of … Hackers (www.wired.com)
submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
67 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

HP CEO Says They Brick Printers That Use Third-Party Ink Because of … Hackers::The company says it wants to protect you from “viruses.” Experts are skeptical.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Some YouTuber said the only evidence if this was an hp document of their internal testing. So instead of fixing the security hole they monetize it.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

"Some youtuber"? Lol great source you have there. But yes, it's been reported that it was HP's lab that found what they concluded could somehow maybe be used as an attack vector. And other security experts have disagreed with that statement. Who knows.

(and yes I know the irony of me not providing any source at all)

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

That's not irony, that's hypocrisy.

Their source is better than your source. They at least indicated that it was word-of-mouth and didn't try and present it as anything but that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Maybe my communication was poor. Or maybe we have different definitions of hypocrisy. I never meant to claim my info to be of higher trustworthiness. Had I meant to do that I would have dug up my source, which would have been easy to do. Without source I'm just a rando commenting and I just wanted to highlight the humor in sourcing specifically "some youtuber", which is the go-to source for crackpot theories (not YouTube, but poorly defined unknown random person on YouTube). My intention was not to be the bringer of the truth. I apologize for any confusion.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

When I watch YouTube I'm usually in total brain drain mode and details have to be really interesting to be remembered.