I am not deep enough in it, but from the arch-announce mailinglist:

From the upstream report [1]:

openssh does not directly use liblzma. However debian and several other distributions patch openssh to support systemd notification, and libsystemd does depend on lzma.

Arch does not directly link openssh to liblzma, and thus this attack vector is not possible. You can confirm this by issuing the following command:

$(command -v sshd)

However, out of an abundance of caution, we advise users to remove the malicious code from their system by upgrading either way. This is because other yet-to-be discovered methods to exploit the backdoor could exist.

https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/03/29/4

You think that after 99% of the US population decided to stop supporting climate change by not buying meat from billionaires, those 99% would still allow them to continue? Not for their own taste and convenience but for some billionaires profits?

They would sell $165 billion worth of meat, 22% of all meat products consumed in the US to a handful of billionaires and the US government? Ignoring the international business.

Billionaires would never touch that meat. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/jan/10/zuckerberg-cattle-hawaii-beef-environment

Take a look at the Cargill family, 14 billionaires. From the wiki about the current CEO:

In 2019, former U.S. Congressman Henry A. Waxman, in a report by Mighty Earth, called Cargill “the worst company in the world” and noted that it drives “the most important problems facing our world” (deforestation, pollution, climate change, exploitation) “at a scale that dwarfs their closest competitors.”

Do you think that is because they use every cent to burn coal and oil in their backyard, or

do you think it is because they produce and sell products to consumers which can not be produced without harm to the environment?

99% of the planet could produce zero pollution for the rest of our lives and it wouldn’t even make a dent in the amount of pollution created by the billionaire class.

How do you think they would create that damage to the environment if nobody would buy their products?

I have the wiha 44008 with interchangable heads, it fine if you don’t need different heads all the time because changing the heads takes some time.

Has the defintion of unione civile changed?

This is an example for greenwashing which this law wants to prevent:

https://www.profil.at/oesterreich/greenwashing-warum-heumilchtrinken-kein-beitrag-zum-klimaschutz-ist/402576365

So it was always the way that same sex marriage was accepted and nobody had to fight against people who claim “but the bible …” “It is between a man a women and nothing else” “next you want to marriage you dog”, right? There where never people who fought to change the system because the system and the laws have always been perfect?

Or maybe we just think that words has a meaning.

I guess you have a strong opinion on calling a bond between two man or two woman marriage?

I have made none of those points you ask me to defend? I answered one your hopeless stupid questions and now you come up with with points nobody made.

You are done and not entertaining, just worrying.

How is it for those people

In the same way people who don’t want to get drunk drink alcohol free beer if they like the taste. And there is no moral assessment in drinking one or the other. I gave you a possible reason. Just like the person which drinks alcohol free beer might have to drive. It is a reason, you get all emotional and I think you should work on that or else you end up like the antivegan meatflakes. Good luck

You asked for reasons

Why, pray tell, are you insistent on diluting the clarity of that label? Is it so aesthetically pleasing to you that you just cannot help yourself but enjoy it even though you don’t want to have to do anything with meat?

And I gave reasons

it is for those who want to stop supporting the destruction of the planet and the murdering of billions of sentient beings for their pleasure.

Your cognitive dissonance fries your brain.

I tried very hard to have this discussion without getting into ethics,

It is for people who want to proclaim superior morality

You go into it. Not me.

Tell me what part of which animal “Steak” is and show me there are no variants and you win.

It is not only steak, it is milk where the industry lobbied hard to prevent the use even though plant milk is older than the milk of other species.

Are you cognitively capable of looking at those latter two terms without moralising? If yes, why not the the previous two?

You are the one who brought up moral, maybe that is a you problem you should take care of without projecting.

Who do you think acts more superior, those who kill others for pleasure and destroy the ground, water and air by doing so, or those who don’t need that? Lion on top of the food chain, thats what you are, right?

Well, I guess it shows that some people learn only shapes instead of reading.

Still unclear who was killed, maybe there are some more shapes around? They indicate what Animal it was, you know there is more than one?

Now imagine if you will, we could use that space where it says “pig” and replace it with “saitan” for example? Mind blown, if you put 2 or more of these cryptic runes together we can transport more information.

I don’t care much for it, it is for those who want to stop supporting the destruction of the planet and the murdering of billions of sentient beings for their pleasure. It makes it easier for them if they don’t have to change too much.

Yes, I think I advocated here alone two to three times for that and I will stay by your side if you do demand that.

We could make it easier for all with a “animal product” label but at the moment it is only the animal industry which is lobbying for restrictive product names.

If you don’t want to then legislate for a label like the (V)egan label and put it on all products made from animals, I would still support you.

I am all in for clear description of food and a big label if it contains animal suffering and the destruction of the eco system or if it is plant based.

I too eat in the dark.

I have never seen a plant based product labeled the same as a animal product. What I see is is [Beef steak] or [Plant based Steak made from…]

Vegan products have a clear label on them and they want you to know that it plant based because people buy it for that reason, be it to avoid animal cruelty, the destruction of the environment or their own health.

I’m telling a vegan that reading ingredients could be even harder if we don’t regulate and use the right words.

The ingredient list is already regulated. We could make it easier for all with a “animal product” label but at the moment it is only the animal industry which is lobbying for restrictive product names. I am against restrictions of names but in favor for a clear declaration of ingredients.

I’m all for veganism and vegetarianism. And for plant based products. I also like to fuckong know what I am buying without having to dissect it.

Then go vegan and learn how you have to truly dissect food and read the ingredients to find if it contains something like pig bone powder.

If you don’t want to then legislate for a label like the (V)egan label and put it on all products made from animals, I would still support you. Telling a vegan how hard it is to read ingredients is weak.