SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Forbes 30 Under 30 list came out this week and it featured a prominent security researcher. Other researchers were pleased to see one of their own getting positive attention, and visited the site in droves to view the list.
On arrival, like a growing number of websites, Forbes asked readers to turn off ad blockers in order to view the article. After doing so, visitors were immediately served with pop-under malware, primed to infect their computers, and likely silently steal passwords, personal data and banking information. Or, as is popular worldwide with these malware "exploit kits," lock up their hard drives in exchange for Bitcoin ransom. The exploit used was a version of hackenfreude.
Forbes has recently taken some flack from Soylent News readers for its heavy-handed approach to ad blockers.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 11 2016, @09:20AM
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday January 12 2016, @03:45AM
That's right. 4 to 6 against means there are 4 chances out of 10 that Hillary will not be our next president.
As to Climate Change, most scientists and the people who still respect science are convinced, convinced by the facts, that Climate Change is real, man-made, and a problem we need to do something about. Just what measures to take is the question. You don't have to believe it to acknowledge that because so many accept it as fact, it is therefore an important issue and should have been debated.
Anyway, which seems more likely to you? A bunch of politicians and Big Oil spokespeople who are known to engage in propaganda and lying and who have massive conflicts of interest are correct and it's really the scientists who are corrupt or incredibly stupid and incompetent? Or scientists are correct and the politicians and Big Oil companies are lying or wrong or both?