diner cook, professionally nosey

it installs a user-login-time "startup" executable that ignores any windows directives to disable it on startup. doing so only removes the even-more-malicious taskbar-icon-creating advertisement-notification-creating process. no matter what you do, the sleeper "updater" process starts when you log in, and runs perpetually

it sends & receives encrypted network traffic both periodically and non-periodically. both are bad, both are suspicious, and a program doing both is more suspicious than the sum of their parts. and to boot: acrobat will polymorphically edit its code after such network activity

this isn't new: it has always done this. now, it does not even do the thing it is meant to: provide a way to interact with documents, which is amongst the very first features computers were built to provide. you can merely open PDFs and read some of their content in the narrow space between the requests for adobe to give them your money, and interface for features you cannot use (because you don't) or do not, have not, and will not ever need

adobe and microsoft would very much like the user's cultural norms around computers to allow for advertisement built into the local software and even operating system itself. the web being 100% advertisements was not enough! sure enough, acrobat will hijack the windows notifications system thing to give you the 2026 equivalent of pop-ups

i don't really know enough about windows software equivalents, so i'll paypal $20 to the first person that reblogs this with a list of 3-5 PDF reader/editor/etc acrobat equivalents that meet the following criteria:

open source, locally-built executables must match checksum of prebuilt distributed executable

no paid features/premium version/subscription/whatever

not a toy hobby project thing, must be windows-users-proof

KDE Okular: is a decent viewer and can also do basic annotations, and is so not-a-toy that you can even download it on the Windows app store.

And saying stuff like "[sighs] he says he can help" often prompts Rook to ask "who's he?", which is always met with "the demon". It's unhelpful and vague, but it feels very intentional. He's trying to distance himself from Spite. There's a couple of reasons why I see him doing it 🤔💭

To separate himself from Spite down to the existential sense. He's afraid of losing his true self in the corruption, a sentiment that reminds me of that note we find in one of the cells with a "failed experiment":

The act of giving something a name kind of humanizes it, which could be a problem. First of all, he doesn't want to get emotionally attached to Spite, since he wants to find a way to separate them. But the fact of the matter is Lucanis already emphatizes with the spirit.

Talking to him after Spite's "tantrum" proves as much - he says no-one ended up in the Ossuary willingly, not even the demons. You can tell he's conflicted between wanting to get rid of Spite and not wanting to think about it too deeply, because if he does, he might change his mind.

Isn't that why one of the rules in a Nuzlocke is to name everything you catch? Isn't that why sometimes people won't acknowledge what their relationship to each other is? Without a name, it's easier to let it go. Not to mention he can't be caught suddenly ~caring~ about Spite when the other companions (except Emmrich) are still freaked out by him.

So, instead of calling him by name, Lucanis is trying to establish that he's on the same level as his rescuers about this whole "demon" thing. If he started treating Spite like a person, suddenly there'd be doubt about how far along the possession is. Lucanis doesn't need us to find him to be more of an "abomination" than he already is.

Lucanis starts the conversation saying,

I've been thinking. Treviso is as safe as we can make it. So when my contract to you is fulfilled, Spite and I will go our separate ways. Literally. I'm going to seek out a way to separate us, wherever that takes me.

Which may initially sound as though he just wants to get rid of Spite no matter what.

HOWEVER!

The dialogue goes some fascinating places...

Rook: And what about the other person in this equation? How does he feel about it? Lucanis: He dreams of freedom. I've... shared those dreams. He never chose this, Rook. Something must change.

_

Rook: If you can manage it, that's a good idea. Lucanis: It's the only answer. For both of us, and for my family's safety. Rook: So why don't you sound happier about it?

_

Lucanis: Being possessed... It's not like separating oil and water. Each element permanently infuses the other. Spite wears my face. Uses my skills. I know I've grown stronger, so... Say I cast out Spite, with all he's learned from me. What then? What if I free myself, but unleash a true Demon of Vyrantium?

First of all, I think it's interesting that not only can Lucanis use Spite's abilities to empower himself, he himself seems to have grown physically stronger from their connection, as well. He talks about it as though it's something that could last without their connection, too.

Second of all, he definitely sympathizes with Spite and has very mixed feelings about the idea of their separation.

Anyway.

Rook can be either reassuring and/or doubtful about it.

Rook: A demon who's worked in a team, saved people and made friends. Lucanis: He'd lose them if I cast him out. Rook: You keep saying that... like you'd miss him. Lucanis: He's been part of me. He'd be alone. Rook: Spite will only be alone if he chooses to be. But you can't control that.

_

Rook: You sound like you've still got some doubts. For all you know, Spite comes out with your knack for vanilla-and-nutmeg tarts. Lucanis: Rook. Rook: My point is, you don't know what will happen. Lucanis: I know that Spite - a part of me - would be alone. Rook: Spite will only be alone if he chooses to be. But you can't control that.

_

Rook: If it came to that, you could handle him. Or are you worried you wouldn't be able to put him down? Lucanis: I worry that I'd... miss him. Rook: If Spite gets his freedom, it's his choice what to do with it.

The conversation continues:

Rook: All you can do is trust that you're making the right call. For both of you. Lucanis: (sighs) I know. But from someone else, it's easier to believe.

This has been a common method for a long time in some states

It is still monarchy logic.

You are still advocating for monarchy logic.

It also does not prevent political assassinations, At All, because what you are describing is a hereditary oligarchy which has historically actually led to MORE assassinations, since now the assassins know exactly who will be getting into power which gives them the opportunity to groom a replacement and then assassinate the current guy.

I might translate this article later today. This one was the most complete one, even in Italian news it's not talked about that much.

Found an article on this in English

Also a different, unrelated article about concerns & possible violation of international law in using another of the film’s locations

The fun part is that you could do this extremely easily by just bundling a key with an item you can't buy unless you're 18. Like a beer that includes a PGP key, or a pornographic magazine with a page that's a randomly generated key.

The site/app doesn't need to know WHO you are, only that you have access to something you can only get by being 18. This way they're putting the burden of verifying your age onto someone else, someone else who is already legally required to do exactly that.

But no one is interested in developing this because the point of age verification has never been age verification. it's always been governments trying to tie a real-world ID to internet identities, and companies trying to get more private information on users so they can sell it to advertisers.

This is peak for me. You just can't go wrong with it. It works for any kind of relationship: lovers, parent and child, siblings - just the whole "I'm going to show you what love is and I hope you'll never get tired of it" and "I don't see love very much; I'll never get tired of your version" just. Gets me man. There's nothing better.

Except for this alternative: