A personal use case: my local gym that issues only physical barcode cards -- I used a different app (similar in this style) that allowed me keep it on my apple watch / iPhone instead
my use case is a loyalty barcode for a major retailer here. they provided a digital version but you had to download their app or take a picture. apple wallet is convenient, u just double tap and the Wallet loads on screen with full brightness to make it easy to scan. i dont have to keep anymore.
but on apple wallet u can't create your own a pass from a simple scan. creatign the ".pkpass" need a signature from a apple developer account.
This is especially annoying and just incredibly creepy -- I was watching a clip of Smiling Friends on YouTube (via my Apple TV), and I suddenly got a banner telling me to watch this on HBO Max.
The problem with 'well just don't buy it' is that in many product categories, enshittification has become so entrenched that there are no longer options to avoid it. The availablity of product features is driven by market forces, if it's no longer profitable to sell a TV that doesn't require online connectivity for the purposes of ads, then such TVs will no longer be sold.
Alternatives like using monitors designed for digital signage come with drawbacks. Expense, they don't have desirable features like VRR, HDR or high refresh rates, since they aren't needed for those use cases. Older TV models will break and supply will dry up.
In the long term, this problem, not just TVs but the commercial exploitation of user data across virtually all electronic devices sold, isn't something that can be solved with a boycott, or by consumers buying more selectively. The practice needs to be killed with legislation.
VRR is Variable refresh rates, so if there is nothing going on in the content, they can bring the refresh rate down and save processing, thermal issues and energy. If there is a lot going on(say a game), they can ramp the refresh rate back up super high.
There are a few different "standards" around VRR, not every device supports all of them.
Their explanation of the reason for VRR is bad. The primary reason people want it is gaming where the game is not locked to a specific frame rate. Without VRR, the timing of a frame being delivered isn't necessarily going to match when the display is expecting a new frame. This leads to one of two effects. Either the display is forced to hold an old frame for longer and pick up the new frame on the next refresh cycle, which creates stutter. Or the display switches which frame its using partway through the refresh cycle, which creates a visual tear in the image.
Source? This sort of conspiracy started with "smart tvs will connect to open wifi networks", then evolved to "it uses amazon sidewalk", and apparently now morphed into "tvs have 5g modems". Given how poorly supported the prior claims were, that does not bode well for the 5G claim.
Isn't that one of the marketed advantages of 5G. Lot of smart IoT devices including TVs being able to connect independently.
What we are lacking is implementation but the tech and probably the intent was always there. If HDMI ethernet connectivity(HEC) had gained traction, we would have seen a fire stick, apple tv or roku providing internet to your tv without asking for explicit consent.
I agree that I misquoted you, but that's a distinction without a difference in this context. "SIM card and baseband radio inside" means 5G, 4G, 3G, whatever. I still demand that you produce proof that there are TVs with "SIM card and baseband radio inside".
I was curious so I did some research. These devices do seem to be being produced, currently mostly overseas. The inclusion of 5G support does not seem to be hidden or nefarious. They provide a SIM card slot just like your phone would. Some models are incorporating a built-in router to provide connectivity to other devices. It seems like the cellular companies are promoting these TV's too, with built in service.
My opinion is this is just a consolidation of devices. I have many friends who live off their phone data plan giving hotspot to the TV and other devices. Now being moved into a common device format, the TV. I don't think they can spy any more effectively this way. Eexcept via the router integration that gives them way more access, but I'm sure this exists already as a wifi feature on tvs. Just technology trudging along. Perhaps they have a secret sim card or esim embedded, that might be a risk as the hardware is already there for a valid reason.
I don't think so, compared to transcontinental, which lately (before Starlink) has been using the cell towers on the ground + satellite backhaul -- even paying would probably still result in a garbage experience.
> The disclosures caused alarm among senior Microsoft executives, sparking concerns that some of its Israel-based employees may not have been fully transparent about their knowledge of how Unit 8200 used Azure when questioned as part of the review.
Highly likely, or at least a bit naive -- Completely reasonable to have local staff for a contract this big, but Microsoft should have independently 'double-checked' sooner
The head of that Israeli unit met directly with the CEO of MS. I don't buy a second the execs at MS didn't know what was going on. Blaming the local contractors is just MS throwing people under the bus.
I've worked for big corporations for nearly 20 years, I've seen this more times then I can count. Higher ups always happy to turn a blind eye to a bad situation as long as it's making the company money, and then immediately throwing subordinates under the bus when it bites them in the ass.
but that still leaves the possibility that it isn't locked, and therefore it is worth it for theives to steal it. Even just the chance that it's not locked would make it worth stealing.
Yes, but your response doesn't make sense in context. GP specifically said that there are a lot of uses "for an iCloud locked iPhone", parent debunked it.
The only economic benefit I see with credits are the rewards/protections it provides for everyday purchases. Here in the states, we don't have a cap on interchange rates for merchants. This trickles down into benefits (For example on my Amex card)
- 1 year extra warranty on top of my purchases, with return protection if the merchant
- Points / 'Cash Back' (much higher multiplier) that can be used to purchase airline tickets or gift cards
This is essentially free money and protections if you use the credit card and fully pay it off, but obviously, most Americans carry balances over and the interest charges basically negate any rewards.
> US law does not apply to foreign nationals residing in a foreign country.
I don't think parent meant it in the context of US Law, but more as a general statement, is it a reasonable precaution by MS to ban X solely on the actions of their government?
Although the presumption of innocence until proven guilty is a fundamental principle of US law and an essential part of our ideology, it is not a universal moral truth. In my opinion, it is justifiable and suitable to prohibit X from having access to sensitive infrastructure based solely on the actions of their government, especially when X is subject to the decisions of that government.
> is it a reasonable precaution by MS to ban X solely on the actions of their government?
One could argue it's discriminatory; they banned him because he's Russian.
...which is the problem with this rhetoric.
Russia and China are known to entice or coerce otherwise-innocuous civilians into acts of espionage. Their foreign policies explicitly exploit our presumptions of innocence, inclusivity and trust. Pre-emptive banning to avoid another SolarWinds is more than reasonable precaution; it's something that should have been done years ago.
But in the meantime, by our own policies we're obligated to allow foxes into the henhouse. We're shamed for discriminating against foxes if we turn them away, and shamed again for asking questions about how the Great Chicken Massacre of 2023 was allowed to happen. Chaos engineering at its finest.
Entertaining analogy! I agree with your point, but we are not obligated by policy to allow foxes into the henhouse, rather we are obligated by our social norms.
> You won’t be able to update things like Wi-Fi network settings, add additional Wifi devices, or run speed tests.
Wow, I'm not familiar if users are forced to use the Google Home app, but that seems a bit drastic to stop users from even changing the most basic settings?
The dedicated apps are being discontinued across the board. I have Google mesh Wifi system and get told that "Your network was migrated to the Home app" when launching the Google Wifi app. You can continue and it still works so far. You can also use the Google Home app now if you want to manage your wifi settings with a worse UX.
Edit: Being forced to use an app is not new. If you visit your routers ip address you get a single page that links to the app for the app stores. Funny enough it still links to the Google Wifi app and not the Google Home app.
> it’s not criminal to remove functionality from a previously-sold device
I'm sure it's not criminal, given today's laws.
Think about that statement though. It absolutely should, morally, be criminal to take away something that was sold as functioning.
Imagine in the 80s that VCR manufacturers sent people to your home at night to open your VCR and cut some traces so it could play but no longer record. Would be an outrage. Also, fortunately, was in practice impossible.
Just because today devices are built to enable damaging functionality from afar doesn't means it is suddenly ok.
I never said it was OK. The parent specifically wondered if some law prohibited this practice (which there isn't, given Google's legal team surely has all their bases covered).
Similarly I don't think any reasonable person or judge will agree bricking a device is called 'update'.
I had a bunch of IoT lightbulbs intentionally bricked by the manufacturer. I can't remember the name of the company now. Something beginning with "F," and ending with "Electric," I think. This was back in the days before HomeKit, when IoT was even more Wild West than it is today.
I had about a dozen of the light bulbs around the house, all controlled by the company's hub, and an app on the phone. One day the company sent an e-mail stating that the system was no longer supported and would no longer function, and it also sent a forced software update to the hub, disabling everything.
I searched around the internet and found lots of people who were mad that the gear they paid for suddenly stopped functioning for no reason. Lots of speculation, but nobody ever seemed to nail down why.
I don't disagree with you. But all the same, I don't buy smart anything, if there's any viable alternative. My light switches, blinds, bed, clothing, shoes, light bulbs, toaster, etc are all dumb.
If I did buy a "smart" thing, it would have to be rootable and hackable and OSS-friendly (e.g. I need to be able to control it if the company goes belly up) or I won't buy it.
> I'm not familiar if users are forced to use the Google Home app
Yup.
On a related note: I haven't been able to find a way to root it for OpenWRT. Does anyone know of any resource, other than the OpenWRT website, that could be helpful?
reply