Its being pounded into their head almost daily (and from all directions) that AI is the future and the more AI the better. Their boss, the industry, other managers, heck probably even their children.
So any big AI initiative they are apart of had succeeded before it even starts!
Or its a phone alternative for younger kids that keeps an actual phone out of their hands, allows for worry free communication while they roam the streets and is backed by arguably the most privacy focused of the big tech companies…
(disclosure: my 8 and 10 year old have them, works great for everyone involved)
Its the only device in our household that I have utterly failed at securing or blocking content from our children on.
My son has found about 25 different ways to access YouTube across our Android, Android TV, Apple and Roku devices. I have found ways in almost all of them to "nicely" block youtube for him (while keeping it for me or keeping the device functional).
Roku is the only one that just doesn't give a crap. Screw Roku.
I think this is a very strong and simple argument to use with regulators, politicians etc.
When I put my credit card into Apples ecosystem they take a 0.15% cut of the transaction and appear to be very happy with the results. When I put my application into the ecosystem they take 30%..
You can then break down why this is, but boy is that an interesting contrast.
I would prefer to take it broader and codify it in law that:
1. The terms and conditions of a product, service, etc. "primarily" aimed at a consumer have simple, human readable terms. Like a food label or similar to the broadband label.
2. The terms are presented and acknowledged PRIOR to purchasing (not after opening the package, driving off the lot, putting the DVD into the player). The company needs to find a way to deliver the T&C's before purchase. If you need me to agree to 50 pages things before I can use your product, I didn't really purchase it, I am receiving a license to use it....
3. If these terms and conditions will be changed retroactively (for existing customers) that must be optional, opt-in and not required to continue to use the product.
I think this would stop a lot of the shenanigans companies pull on end users, that they DON'T pull in B2B environments.
Z-wave also uses 900mhz in the US, which penetrates walls better and has less competition with 2.4 (Zigbee). So while its closed, it usually more performant than Zigbee (in my experience...)
Yes this is indeed a problem. You can get around this by piping the Z-Wave or Zigbee information into a MQTT server and basically run them as separate networks, with Home Assistant and MQTT tying it all together. But you will need some type of Zigbee to Ethernet adapter (Sonoff makes one, Raspberry Pi, etc.) or Z-wave to ethernet adapter (again Raspberry Pi). It's definitely clunky. But doable.
I am running multiple Zigbee networks near each other (in a house and in a detached garage) with Home Assistant, MQTT server and a Sonoff Zigbee bridge, with Tasmota.
On paper (aka the laws of the United State) FISA applies to things that physically reside in the US.
"The FISA Court’s only jurisdiction is “to hear applications for and grant orders approving electronic surveillance anywhere within the United States.” 50 U.S.C. § 1803 (a) (1)."
There is absolutely an opportunity cost for all of the stuff you own. I won't publish my entire thinking on this, but after seeing my parents collect, hoard and store things for years and years, I place a high value on not having something (I tell myself that I am letting the store hold it for me.)
I still have too much stuff and its a fraction of what my parents had.
But this was doing the opposite...it was effectively making the test harder every year. If one wanted to game the No Child Left Behind Act, shouldn't you endeavor to make the test easier every year?
International users that have Advanced Protection enabled would in theory be safe from all of the 3-letter agencies (like safe from those agencies getting the data from Apple...not safe generally).
Realistically we are talking about FISA here, so in theory if the FBI gets a FISA court order to gather "All of the Apple account data" for a non-us person, Apple would either hand over the encrypted data OR just omit that....
Based on the stance Apple is taking here, its reasonable to assume they would do the same in the US (disable the feature if USG asked for a backdoor or attempted to compel them to decrypt)
Yes, a large percentage of of the consulting / services business that you would know the name of are organized like this. For services / consulting it makes a lot of sense.
I mean he has a point. Things are incredibly complex now adays, I don't think most people have time to "understand the system."
I would be much more interested in rules that don't start with that... Like "Rules for debugging when you don't have the capacity to fully understand every part of the system."
Bisecting is a great example here. If you are Bisecting, by definition you don't fully understand the system (or you would know which change caused the problem!)
So any big AI initiative they are apart of had succeeded before it even starts!