Everyone is saying this was impossible to solve without fixing the underlying tool, but just writing a prefixes from 01 to 12 would have been my solution.
Now you don’t even need to remember the months to select the correct one.
nonstopshirtflutter
joined 1 year ago
This depends on your threat model and circumstances:
Old versions of OS are generally a security risk.
Old hardware may lack some modern security features near the hardware level. However these usually protect against tampering with BIOS or bootloaders. In general threats like this need physical access to the machine. I don’t know much about TPM and keystorage in general, but those are what this might concern.
Other than that, old networking hardware might have vulnerabilities that are either not patched with software or are impossible to path. This extends to any device and all device-drivers, but network-devices to me sound the most exposed surface.
This risk however depends on not just the device but the usage as well. If you use it inside a local network, you lose a layer of defence. If you use it in an untrusted network, you are exposed directly.
I would usually not be concerned about old hardware as long as it can run a modern OS I trust. This means most laptops are fine, but phones not so much.
Especially phones with no access to patched applications become less and less secure as time goes by. Old hardware is a small risk; old OS is a concern; old browser on said old OS and you can bet there is at least one serious, well-known and already used vulnerability.
I’m personally tinkering with an old 4th-gen iPad, hoping to secure it or at least jailbreak it. However I am not expecting it to ever be a safe device after that, but a glorified IOT device.
Logical fallacies don’t necessarily disagree with facts. While the most common examples are simply unsupported statements that sound supported, very often we don’t have the luxury of working with clearly factual statements as a basis.
All rhetoric is at the end of the day a fallacy, as the truth of the matter is independent on how it is argued. Yet we don’t consider all rhetoric invalid, because we can’t just chain factual statements in real debates. Leaps of logic are universally accepted, common knowledge is shared without any proof, and reasonable assumptions made left and right.
In fact one persons valid rhetoric is another persons fallacy. If the common knowledge was infact not shared, or an assumption not accepted, the leap in logic is a fallacy.
I would try to focus less on lists of fallacies or cognitive biases and more on natural logic. Learn how to make idealised proofs, and through that learn to identify what is constantly assumed in everyday discussions. The fallacies itself don’t matter, what matters is spotting leaps in logic and why it feels like a leap in logic to you.
After all, very often authoritive figures do tell the truth, and both sides of the debate agree on general values without stating them. If someone starts questioning NASA or declares they actually want more people to live in poverty, they did infact spot very real logical fallacies in the debate, but at the same time those fallacies only exist from their point of view, and others might not care to argue without such unstated common ground.