Good. Ad blocking is security and anyone that tells you different both doesn’t care about your computer security, and also wants to sell you something.

That 2/3 to 3/4 of computer programmers, computer security experts and advertisers seems low. I feel like that should be closer to 90%

That’s exactly what they did.

Nintendo’s argument was that the software itself primarily facilities piracy and that to use it, you either had to circumvent protections on your own hardware to extract the keys or pirate someone else’s keys.

They’re still wrong for abusing DMCA to remove the software, but it would take an expensive and lengthy court battle to get them to back off

This is not really the same thing.

The Apple lawsuit was about running unsigned code on the iPhone, which courts deemed that Apple couldn’t use copyright as a tool to enforce its walled garden.

Nintendo isn’t arguing about people modifying their switch to run homebrew. They’re arguing that to use Yuzu you need to provide it with a copy of the decryption keys and system firmware which must be either extracted from a Switch or distributed illegally.

This is a much stronger case in Nintendo’s favor, than the Apple jailbreak one. Although, I suspect the Yuzu dev has a better case as it’s already legal to back up discs and ROMs as long as you dont distribute them and they’re not responsible for other people’s actions if they choose to break copyright

Sounds like you want Noscript in addition to uBO

I suspect that the UK will just say “either you add the backdoor or you don’t operate here”

Which from a cynical perspective is just an easy check for hackers to see if a particular target is vulnerable by seeing if they’re allowed to operate in the UK

I mean, this was disclosed to AMD a few months back and there actually is a patch available currently for Epyc CPUs.

It’d be nice if they waited until all the patches were out, but I’d rather this than a full zero-day exploit of this scale in the wild.