Post B69aI3U4BP1rznZ2Bs by IzzyOnDroid@floss.social
 (DIR) More posts by IzzyOnDroid@floss.social
 (DIR) Post #B69Z2t0ClsZdBondSa by IzzyOnDroid@floss.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Oh, the clowns are back in town 🤦‍♂️ Seems to be the same file as last time, I guess (that is: none)? Or do I misread their report? 🤔 Too much "AI" there, I guess – while much lack of NI? How comes that "service" is still in business?!?#Google #SafeBrowsing
       
 (DIR) Post #B69ZhGZWYj43sBZgW0 by IzzyOnDroid@floss.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       The only legit reply to that: "All indicated URLs have been dealt with." Not lying, I really checked them "all", didn't I? How could I have missed even a single one of them?(and why did I write "too much 'AI' there"? Well, things that hallucinate facts and then cannot point to existing proof – what does this remind you of? Do they need to fill some quota ("that many threats detected") to justify their existence?)
       
 (DIR) Post #B69aI3HevX6XNJl7qq by Archaide@bonn.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @IzzyOnDroid it is such an effin shitshow.🤮 Sorry for my diction.😒
       
 (DIR) Post #B69aI3U4BP1rznZ2Bs by IzzyOnDroid@floss.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Archaide Well, how else should one call it? What worries me most there is that that company tries to be the central point of failure for the entire Internet. And wants to play the same role for the entire Android eco system. They prove day by day they're incapable of keeping their own house clean – so much of "finding stuff on other people's websites/stores/apps" seems to be pure projection. Which store has the highest percentage of malicious apps? (rhetorical question)
       
 (DIR) Post #B69i6SJArOOp94RuL2 by IzzyOnDroid@floss.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @daniel Aw, good catch: they didn't state for whom those might be unwanted 🤔 Now it suddenly makes sense! 🤦‍♂️Did I always look at it from the wrong end then? No URL specified == none unwanted? 🤔