I'm browsing this article on my "hacking device" (my laptop) while using my "hacking program" (a web browser with devtools) to enjoy the experience.
Later I might take my "child mauler" (dog) on a walk.
For a site with "tech" in the name, I expect significantly better than this nonsense. Flipper Zero is a nice packaging of dev tools but nothing fundamentally new. If it makes the author feel better, we can repeat the attacks with a simple esp32 and save a whole bunch of money - though we'd lose out on the cute animations.
What in this article is nonsense? It did a decent job of explaining that it needs to be compiled from a 3rd party firmware, how the attack works and a video of said attack.
I wasn't particularly appreciative of the phrasing in the opening sentence:
> Thanks to a popular and relatively cheap hacking tool, hackers can spam your iPhone with annoying pop-ups
Because it seems to place blame (possibly unintentionally) on "a popular and relatively cheap hacking tool" rather than "an individual's choice to annoy the shit out of others".
I agree there are uses of the word hacker that don't mean to exploit, but the author here is not using the term in a positive sense. The author is clearly using it in the perjorative.
Later I might take my "child mauler" (dog) on a walk.
For a site with "tech" in the name, I expect significantly better than this nonsense. Flipper Zero is a nice packaging of dev tools but nothing fundamentally new. If it makes the author feel better, we can repeat the attacks with a simple esp32 and save a whole bunch of money - though we'd lose out on the cute animations.