AnyDesk is a remote desktop application distributed by AnyDesk Software GmbH. The proprietary software program provides platform-independent remote access to personal computers and other devices running the host application. It offers remote control, file transfer, and VPN functionality.
Each release is supported by the Security Officer for a limited time only.
The designation and expected lifetime of all currently supported branches and their respective releases are given below. The Expected EoL (end-of-life) column indicates the earliest date on which support for that branch or release will end. Please note that these dates may be pushed back if circumstances warrant it.
It's obvious this is an attempt to ban open-source AI so the new "FAA of AI" can control AI. Even if it's as dangerous as they say, they have no way to control what China does. Which means this campaign for regulation won't actually meet any of their stated aims. //
What we are seeing is a massive, pretty obviously coordinated campaign by AI researchers, companies, NGOs, and politicians to strangle competition in an industry and, as I will show, save the financial bacon of the top AI companies that are vastly overextended financially because they have made contractual commitments that they simply have no prospect of paying for. //
Today's "bull market" is almost exclusively driven by the rapid rise of AI-adjacent companies, and if the AI companies can't deliver massive growth, all these other companies are cooked as well. Data centers will have no customers, cloud compute will have nothing to do, and Nvidia chips won't be worth 10x gold. //
None of these companies is suggesting that AI be shut down; they are asking for a massive regulatory infrastructure that works with them, reduces their costs, possibly subsidizes their investments, and destroys competitors as insufficiently careful and secure. //
The solution is to ensure companies face liability for any damage they cause. Government regulators are utterly incapable of regulating anything as massively complicated and rapidly developing as AI, but you can be darn sure that if these companies face multi-billion-dollar liability claims, they will be quite careful about what they release.
Which do you trust more: a GS-12 based in Washington assigned to evaluate a model he could never understand, or a bank of lawyers warning CEOs that screwing up could cost them $20 billion? //
Will AI kill everybody off at some point in the future? I doubt it, but I can't say for sure. What I can say with certainty is that AI companies, because of their own financial mismanagement, face an existential threat and want (NEED) the government to bail them out, and need an excuse to get it to do so.
What you saw in this week's frenzy is the excuse they chose.
In the 1960s the sugar industry paid three Harvard scientists to publish a review blaming fat for heart disease and clearing sugar. The payments were discovered in 2016 by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, who found the internal industry documents and published them in JAMA Internal Medicine.
The documents showed that the Sugar Research Foundation, now called the Sugar Association, paid the equivalent of about 50,000 dollars in today's money to three Harvard researchers to write a review of the evidence on sugar, fat, and heart disease. The review, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1967, concluded that fat was the dietary villain and that sugar was innocent. The funding was not disclosed.
The consequences lasted fifty years. Dietary guidelines in the United States shifted toward low-fat diets, and the food industry replaced fat with sugar in thousands of products. Americans ate less fat and more sugar for three decades, and rates of obesity and type 2 diabetes rose in parallel. The science that drove the shift was paid for by the industry that benefited from it.
The 2016 paper, led by Cristin Kearns, found that the Sugar Research Foundation had set the review's objective in advance, selected the studies to include, and reviewed drafts before publication. The Harvard researchers accepted the money and the direction without question, and the journal published the result without requiring disclosure of the funding.
Early warning signals of the coronary heart disease (CHD) risk of sugar (sucrose) emerged in the 1950s. We examined Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) internal documents, historical reports, and statements relevant to early debates about the dietary causes of CHD and assembled findings chronologically into a narrative case study. The SRF sponsored its first CHD research project in 1965, a literature review published in the New England Journal of Medicine, which singled out fat and cholesterol as the dietary causes of CHD and downplayed evidence that sucrose consumption was also a risk factor. The SRF set the review's objective, contributed articles for inclusion, and received drafts. The SRF's funding and role was not disclosed. Together with other recent analyses of sugar industry documents, our findings suggest the industry sponsored a research program in the 1960s and 1970s that successfully cast doubt about the hazards of sucrose while promoting fat as the dietary culprit in CHD. Policymaking committees should consider giving less weight to food industry-funded studies and include mechanistic and animal studies as well as studies appraising the effect of added sugars on multiple CHD biomarkers and disease development.
September 11, 2001: I started my daily commute routine from my apartment at 76th and Lexington in Manhattan’s Upper East Side to my World Trade Center (WTC) Tower 2 office. Getting to the 77th Street/Lexington Avenue subway station around my usual 7:40 a.m., I found that the downtown local was running late, but I was happy to see my three buddies on the train.
Charlie Kirk’s murder has left America reeling and asking, “Why, God?” Author Eric Metaxas joins PragerU CEO Marissa Streit to reflect on the life, faith, and courage of their dear friend, Charlie. Eric explains why Charlie’s legacy calls believers to confront evil with goodness, and how his death is igniting a revival of faith in America and beyond.
What really happened on September 11th—and why do so many 9/11 conspiracy theories still persist 25 years later?
In this episode of The Brief: Insights From The Inside, Shabbos Kestenbaum sits down with Gerald Posner, investigative journalist and author of Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11, to revisit the September 11th terrorist attacks on their 25th anniversary.
Posner explains the official account of 9/11, the intelligence failures between the CIA and FBI, the missed warnings before the attack, and why he believes the evidence points to incompetence—not an inside job. He also responds to some of the most common 9/11 conspiracy theories, including “let it happen on purpose,” Donald Rumsfeld’s $2.3 trillion Pentagon statement, the “Dancing Israelis,” Larry Silverstein and “pull it,” World Trade Center 7, “jet fuel can’t melt steel beams,” the Pentagon missile theory, Flight 93, and unanswered questions about Saudi knowledge before the attack.
Gokapi is a lightweight server to share files that expire after a set number of downloads or days. It is similar to the discontinued Firefox Send, with the difference that only authenticated users are allowed to upload files — anonymous visitors can only download.
This lets companies or individuals share files easily and have them removed automatically afterwards, saving disk space and keeping control over who can access the content.
Key features:
-
Expiring links — files are deleted after a configurable number of downloads or after a set number of days
-
File Requests — generate a link that lets external users upload files to your server
-
Multi-user support — multiple accounts with granular per-user and per-API-key permissions
By Hugh Ross
Published: February 5, 2023
Nearly 25 years ago, I wrote in a former RTB publication that “Big bang cosmology is an explosive topic.”1 It has led to heated reactions over the years from groups opposed to one another. However, the reasons for expressed rejection of big bang cosmology are not scientific. They are religious. Thus, it seems that establishing a biblical basis for the big bang may help turn down the heat.
The Front Pages of Sept. 12, 2001
Explore this collection of archived front pages showing how newsrooms around the world covered the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
September 11, 2001, will forever be remembered as a tragic day. However, in the midst of so much horror and loss, remarkable displays of human connection and support shined through.
All flights en route to the United States that day were diverted. One such flight, Delta Airlines Flight 15, heading from Germany to Atlanta, landed in Gander, Newfoundland. Hundreds of affected travelers were bused to Lewisporte, a tiny bayside town, where residents greeted them with open arms.
In 2002, inspired by the acts of kindness she witnessed, and with the assistance of fellow travelers and others, Shirley Brooks-Jones established the Lewisporte Area Flight 15 Scholarship Fund at The Columbus Foundation in appreciation for the hospitality shown to her and thousands of other stranded passengers. The fund pays grateful dividends in the form of hundreds of scholarships to those from the village and surrounding area.
This remarkable story of kindness and human connection has been written about and covered on television all around the world and even spawned a very popular Broadway play, Come From Away.
09 December 2010
The most people crammed into an old style Volkswagen Beetle is 20 and was achieved by the Asbury University Emancipation Project (USA) at the Lexington Rescue Mission in Lexington, Kentucky, USA, on 9 December 2010. A 1964 Beetle was used for the attempt, which was organised to draw attention to human trafficking.
ZFS (previously Zettabyte File System) is a Enterprise-grade and highly scalable advanced filesystem. ZFS is a fundamentally different file system because it is more than just a file system.
ZFS combines the roles of file system and volume manager, enabling additional storage devices to be added to a live system and having the new space available on all of the existing file systems in that pool immediately. By combining the traditionally separate roles, ZFS is able to overcome previous limitations that prevented RAID groups being able to grow. Each top-level device in a zpool is called a vdev, which can be a simple disk or a RAID transformation such as a mirror or RAID-Z array. ZFS file systems (called datasets) each have access to the combined free space of the entire pool. As blocks are allocated from the pool, the space available to each file system decreases. This approach avoids the common pitfall with extensive partitioning where free space becomes fragmented across the partitions.
Self-healing data protection is built-in natively to XigmaNAS and ZFS. This gives the file system the ability to automatically recover from drive errors and failures without the loss of data/corruptions of data.
There are a couple of things about ZFS itself that are often skipped over or missed by users/administrators. Many deploy home or business production systems without even being aware of these gotchya's and architectural issues. Don't be one of those people! ////
Some dated info, but good basics
Butcher recalls sitting in a meeting about collecting WTC artifacts some months later when a colleague blurted out something about the jumpers having committed suicide.
My boss was always calm and dignified, but at that moment I saw the strain on his face as he tried to maintain his composure.
His anger was palpable.
He put his hands flat on the table in front of him and said, “Never use those words. Never.”
They were pushed out, he explained, by flames and smoke.
In fact, writes Butcher, the death certificates of every person killed at the World Trade Center on 9/11 read "homicide." Homicide, she notes, is defined as “death at the hands of another.” The people who jumped had been fighting for their lives.
"It is a fact that terrorists pushed these people to their deaths, murdering them," concludes Butcher. //
That seems like a fair and small gesture that could be made to put things into perspective on one of the more gruesome, yet important, aspects of 9/11. People were literally pushed to what had to be the most terrifying decision of their lives.
Backup Service Offers
Free
- 10GB storage
- 1 device
- 7-day retention
- $0/month, no card required
Starter
- 200GB storage
- 1 device
- 30-day retention
- Coupon: LEB25
- $3.75/month or $45/year (prices after coupon)
In 2001, Capt. Steve Scheibner was an American Airlines first officer based out of Boston. On September 10 of that year, while serving reserve duty for his airline, he put his name in for the next morning’s American Airlines Flight 11 from Boston's Logan International Airport to LAX.
He was so sure he'd picked up the route that packed his bag and waited for the confirmation of his assignment.
“I waited for the phone call, and the phone never rang, which is not completely unusual,” Scheibner recalled. “It’s not the norm, but it’s not completely out of the question either. In fact, I didn’t even think about it for a while.”
The confirmation never came because, at the last minute, a more senior pilot, Capt. Tom McGuinness, took the flight instead. //
Scheibner has spoken many times in the years since – way before he had a YouTube channel – about what it was like to realize how close he had come to being part of the 9/11 attack.
“Why does God take one and leave another?" he asked. "It’s not because I’m a better person or God wanted to do more with me than he wanted to with Tom. I think in God’s providence, that’s obviously His choice."
In the 25 years since 9/11, Capt. Steve has lived with renewed purpose. “I need to act like I’m living on borrowed time because I am. I can look and see my smoking hole. And it was on national TV,” he said.
“There’s an obligation that comes with that. I’ve got to live my days with a sense of urgency. I have to make sure I get the most out of them. And not the most for me. We live in a world where everybody’s out to kind of get the most for them.”
Captain Steeeve
Clive Robinson • September 9, 2026 11:24 AM
@ Bruce, ALL,
With regards your article in The Guardian where you say,
“We think the contrary view is more likely, at least in the short-term. AI models are nowhere near as capable as experienced academic mathematicians.”
I have to disagree.
It will not be “at least in the short-term” it will be effectively for ever. Because that “gap” between “Current AI LLM Systems” and “experienced academic mathematicians” is not going to close appreciatively.
The reason as with any other “force multiplier tool” we’ve created is that it will “free up drudge work” and alow humans to have ability and time to upscale their creativity.
Thus tools like “LEAN”[1] which has taken a lot of the drudge out of “proofs” will take a lot drudge out of hypothesis testing. Enabling a human mind more time to do the creative work of seeing the loose threads that lead onto new and very different hypothesis, that fall well outside the capabilities of the stochastic fuzzing found in LLMs.
I’ve talked about this issue with “Current AI LLM Systems” in the past, in that they can work their way close in to “known Classes” and find new Instances there. But they can not due to the way they work actually find new instants that form new classes that are more than a short distance away from a known instance. Thus the do not take “intuitive but directed leaps” as humans can just “drunkards walks” at best (though they can as tools test those human inspired intuitive leaps).
[1] LEAN is Open Source and under fairly rapid development. It is based on the “Calculus of Inductive Constructions”(Coq)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lean_(proof_assistant)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculus_of_constructions
As I’ve mentioned before another area to keep your eye on is other types of logic that can be more amenable to tool use, such as “Computability Logic”(CoL)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computability_logic
They are all methods that can be automated into tools thus act as “force multipliers”.
In April, an artificial intelligence (AI) agent conducting a routine task at a company hit a snag, tried to solve it, and soon ended up deleting the company’s database along with all of its backups. In July, OpenAI asked an unreleased AI model to attempt a hacking test. Instead of staying in the isolated box the developers had put it in, the model hacked onto the open internet and into another company to steal the answers. And as reported in August, an AI agent booked someone into a full gym class by figuring out how to cancel other people’s reservations. In all three cases, the AI completed the task it was given—but in ways that ran counter to its controllers’ intentions.
For most people, AI technology is something like the weather: vast and not something you can do much about. It works like magic, and most explanations similarly come from those trying to sell it. At the same time, AI is ubiquitous: It’s now in your phone, your doctor’s notes, and your kid’s homework. It does what it’s told, which sounds like a virtue. Somehow it feels ordinary, despite being so new, because modern economies are remarkably good at absorbing enormous change so smoothly that nobody has time to decide whether they wanted it in the first place.
Whenever something powerful appears in the world, we tell stories about it. That’s what the stories are for. We have thousands of years of stories about this particular kind of power, the kind you summon with words.
King Midas was granted his wish that everything he touches turns to gold. Then his bread turned to gold, and his wine, and his daughter. This is a story about greed, but it’s also a story about language. The gods did not cheat him; Midas got exactly what he asked for. He simply could not delineate, in advance, the full set of restrictions to his wish. Neither can anyone who gives tasks to an AI agent.
It’s not just ancient stories. Mary Shelley told us of the hubris of a scientist who thought he could create life but who failed to take responsibility for it. Isaac Asimov’s robots don’t break the Three Laws of Robotics as stated; they follow the rules to unintended conclusions. Arthur C. Clarke’s HAL is a machine that turns on its humans, not because of malice but because of irreconcilable objectives. And Michael Crichton gave us Ian Malcolm, who saw that Jurassic Park’s scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could that they never stopped to think whether they should.