>I'm still on 8.5.8 (Oct 2023) - it turns out I'm actually...safer?

Notepad++ site says The incident began from June 2025.

On their downloads page, 8.8.2 was the first update in June 2025 (the previous update 8.8.1 was released 2025-05-05)

So, if your installed version is 8.8.1 or lower, then you should be safe. Assuming that they're right about when the incident began.

edit: Notepad++ has published, on Github, SHA256 hashes of all the binaries for all download versions, which should let users check if they were targeted, if they still have the downloaded file. 8.8.1 is here, for example - https://github.com/notepad-plus-plus/notepad-plus-plus/relea...

Just checked my 8.7.9 that I installed in April 2025 and never updated. The hash seems to be identical to the version I installed around that time. Seems like it was a good choice to always skip the Update Dialog when using Notepad++ lol.

Older download links doesn't seem to work!?

Your demo video defaults to play at 1.5x speed

You probably didn't intend to do that

whoops I actually did set that on purpose. I guess I like watching things sped up and assumed others did too :) But you can change it.

This would be a much better link for this post

There's a lot more detail, and delivered in more professional way

If you email the mods about this (and link to your comment), they might well agree and update the post link.

>The silence of MSM (particularly the BBC) is eye-opening.

Daily reports from the BBC, and the rate of them is increasing

https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/cjnwl8q4ggwt

Some of the headlines-

New Iran videos show bodies piled in hospital and snipers on roofs

'I saw people getting shot': Eyewitness tells of Iran protest crackdown An Iranian who got out of the country describes scenes of chaos as security forces opened fire in her home town.

Photos leaked to BBC show faces of hundreds killed in Iran's brutal protest crackdown

>particularly on large containers

It's common for people to carry large metal equipment cases (for cameras, etc.) onboard

I wish he'd brought back "Don't Be Evil" to Google, as well as himself.

>"Don't Be Evil"

That ship sailed a long time ago. It then proceeded to sink, ending up a haunted wreck that we might see in a new Pirates of the Caribbean film.

Problem is, Captain Jack Sparrow these days isn't what he used to be either.

Press ESC with the C64 window focused to stop the game

After that you can type LIST to see the code, and edit it, then RUN to restart

FAQ: Is it opt in? Yes, they are saying.

>You can continue using Firefox as you always have for the most customizable experience, or switch from classic to Private Window for the most private browsing experience. And now, with AI Window, you have the option to opt in to our most intelligent and personalized experience yet — providing you with new ways to interact with the web.

The online edition was edited later.

"This newspaper report was originally edited using AI, which is in violation of Dawn’s current AI policy. The policy is also available on our website. The report also carried some junk, which has now been edited out. The matter is being investigated. The violation of AI policy is regretted. — Editor"

https://www.dawn.com/news/1954574

edit: Text link of the printed edition. Might not be perfect OCR, but I don't think they changed anything except to delete the AI comment at the end! https://pastebin.com/NYarkbwm

> The violation of AI policy is regretted.

That's a good example of when you shouldn't use passive voice.

This is a convention for journalistic corrections, e.g., "The Times regrets the error", used to note corrections for at least a century:

<https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/insider/the-times-regrets...>

Your example is not passive voice.

Yes, they are pointing out how it should have been written.

Apparently not.

On the other hand, this way you know they probably didn't use the chatbot to write the apology.

> This door is alarmed

That's just a manner of speaking in former British colonies, or at least the subcontinent. Much of formal speech like a bureaucrat wrote it because, well, the civil service ran India and that's who everyone emulated.

It’s still passive voice, the kind used when trying to avoid blame or responsibility. So pretty much fits in bureaucratic places.

That’s just…mistakes were made.

This pattern of writing goes back to the Spanish conquistadors at the very least. They frequently described their actions in a passive voice when doing something they knew was horrible, only to switch to aggrandizing active voice when writing about their successes. It’s a standard way to blur responsibility and present violence as an almost natural “fact” rather than a deliberate action by identifiable agents.

It didn’t escape everyone’s attention though. Bartolomé de las Casas definitely noticed it.

> That's just a manner of speaking in former British colonies, or at least the subcontinent.

Which is still a good example of when you shouldn't use passive voice.

Clarifying where “optimising language to evade a responsibility” evolved does nothing to justify it, which you imply with “that’s just”.

OTOH kudos to them for regretting AI slop (even if they don't want to point out who precisely is regretting). I know some who'd vehemently deny in spite of evidence.

They don't regret serving you AI slop, they regret that the "writer" didn't even read their own article and that they got caught because of it.

"We regrets that mistakes were noticed."

It's a good example of when you should use AI.

Of course, since we live in 1984 already everything is edited as is convenient. For all that technology has given, nobody talks about what it has taken away.