This does not mean confusables.txt is wrong. It means confusables.txt is a visual-similarity claim that has never been empirically validated at scale. Many entries map characters to the same abstract target under NFKC decomposition (mathematical bold A to A, for instance), and the mapping is semantically correct even if the glyphs look nothing alike. But if you treat every confusables.txt entry as equally dangerous for UI security, you are generating massive false positive rates for 96.5% of the dataset.
1. 中国经济金融展望报告, pic.bankofchina.com/bocappd/rar…
，这一点在safew官方版本下载中也有详细论述
ВсеПитание и сонУход за собойОкружающее пространствоМентальное здоровьеОтношения
Skip 熱讀 and continue reading熱讀
But what if it’s not fine? Even back in 1996, before a single component of the ISS was launched into orbit, NASA foresaw the possibility of an even worse worst-case scenario: an uncontrolled reentry. The crux of this scenario involves multiple systems failing in an improbable but not completely impossible cascade. Cabin depressurization could damage the avionics. The electrical power system could go offline, along with thermal control and data handling. Without these, systems controlling coolant and even propellant could break down. Unmoored, the ISS would edge slowly toward Earth, maybe over a year or two, with no way to control where it is headed or where its debris might land. And no, we could not save ourselves by blowing the station up. This would be extremely dangerous and almost certainly create an enormous amount of space trash—which is how we got into this hypothetical mess in the first place.