I would just follow their advice, download the newest version from their site directly and use the new versions installer to update manually. I would probably do the same thing when the newest version with certificate and signature verification releases, after that I would assume you should be good to go. However its probably also worth scanning your system for malware just incase you updated during the time frame the attack was live.
The article literally states that should you download the latest version from their site directly and then use the installer to update manually. Who knows if those who were effected already could have something else compromising the update/install process. I wouldnt update from the built in updater until the new fix with certificate and signature verification is released.
If you think one of your differing opinions/misunderstandings causes everything else that person has said to be invalid when your remark basically implies you agreed up to that point, you really need to take a step back from your tribalism and learn some nuance.
And to be fair they are not stating that an actors opinions on politics are irrelevant, they are clearly stating they shouldnt be treated as an expert on the matter based on the context of their comment.
If I am looking for a relevant policy maker and someone with experience in getting policies passed in a government, using an actor, firefighter, musician, dance teach or engineer as anything but a way to gain insight into the area a policy is being written for is generally a dumb idea unless the aforementioned person transitioned from politics into their new field of career.
I am not going to ask a comedian how to design software, their opinion on my applications design maybe relevant and guide my design philosophy but acting like they would have insight into the best data structures and tech stack to use in order to develop that application would be no better than prompting an LLM write it for me. They arent an expert and shouldn’t be treated as such.
Its clear thats what the person you replied to was getting at, so maybe take a step back from being so reactionary because it sounds like you probably have some common ground thats being lost due to the medium we are interacting in.
While I agree with you I did just want to point out one thing.
This:
it’s mathematically impossible to fake.
Is not entirely true persay, every hashing function does have collisions that can occur. But the likely hood that someone baked an exploit in that kept the application functioning while adding their backdoor all the while somehow creating a hash collision with the original fingerprint is practically zero and honestly if someone did pull that off, fucking hats off because that has to be some sort of math and coding wizard beyond most. I should also point out that the file size would most likely/have to be different so there should be other methods of detecting the compromised build regardless.
Sorry I know that was very pedantic of me but I did want to call that out because its technically possible but the actual likely hood has to be so miniscule its almost irrelevant along with the fact that other tells would surely exist.
First off stop looking at all home ownership and the percentage owned by corporations as that does not dictate pricing as a whole, you should be looking at what percentage of houses that are being purchased over that past few years are owned by investors. Those new purchases and homes that trade hands are what drive the cost of a home. Most of that 91% is not continously buying and selling, they are holding on for long term and even passing on properties to their kids. The corporate entities on the other hand are buying up surplus real estate to drive the pricing of the market as there is very little liquidity in the housing market when you compare it too the shear total amount of residential properties in existence.
A good way to determine what percentage of the housing surplus (the real liquidity in the market that drives the price as a whole) is owned by corporate entities would be to look at different data points. Like say what percentage of vacant homes are owned by corporate entities. Here you get much more staggering figures like the fact that corporate entities own over 50% of vacant residential properties.
Take exhibit a:
And exhibit b:
Source: https://nationalmortgageprofessional.com/news/investors-hold-most-empty-houses
Now corporations holding over 50% of the liquid market of housing is a much more substantial fact here and highlights how they are controlling the market as a whole to drive prices up for their benefit while pricing the average person out of ownership market and into the rental market.
Now that we can see they DO control a majority of the liquidity of the housing market lets also see what percentage of rentals are owned by corporate entities as well.
So lets actually brake down your little 9% figure and explain why its a terrible metric that obscures reality and is just also misleading, as you seem to think 9% of residential properties being owned by corporations means on 9% of residential housing is owned by corporations.
I am going to be using US rental housing stats from 2020: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R47332
First we have:
Ok so first we can see that a lot of residential rental properties are single unit properties. Over 85%. But how does that actually relate to the amount of units available for people to rent and does that meam that your little 9% of properties could be hiding the real kicker that corporations own most of the actual residential rental unit supply?
Oh so its does hide the fact that most of the rental units available are in multi-unit properties. So while 85% of all residential properties are single family unit rentals, that 85% only covers about a 1/3 of the rental market, with the rest of the market being dominated by multi unit properties.
Hmm well surely since you seem to think owning 9% of properties is small and irrelevant to the housing and rental market that must mean that most of those multi unit properties must also be owned by individuals and not corporations right?
Hm I guess not. I guess while single family units make up 85% of the properties it turns out most rental units are in those massive multi unit properties. Meaning just shy of 2/3rds of the rental unit market is owned by corporations.
So lets recap here shall we.
Corporations own over 50% of the liquidity in the residential housing sphere so they have a massive influence on the pricing of houses on the market.
Corporations also own nearly 2/3rds of the rental market supply when you amount for units instead of just properties. Also granting them the ability to have a massive influence on the rental price market.
So yeah your right corporations may only own 9% of residential land across the US, that completely hides the ugly truth that they control the market by dominating the liquidity which underpines the pricing of housing market for ownership and also obscures the fact that on that 9% of land they have so many multi-unit properties that they own nearly 2/3rds of all rental units allowing them to control the pricing in the rental market as well.
So no the problem is corporate greed in the housing market you are just too willing to listen to corporate propaganda that misrepresents reality by cherry picking what statistics they push out to the public to placate them into feeling like its their neighbors or generic human greed that causes these problems not them.
Next time before you start acting so stupid maybe actually check the sources and dig into how they got their numbers in the first place to make sure it paints an accurate picture of what you are buying into.