Not necessarily. Cellular problems are often a back-haul issue and that is something Starlink does much better at. The flip side, is that I would not want to use a Starlink in even a moderately dense area.

They might have cell service, but it is often a weak signal that is then sent by microwave from tower to tower and those links often don't have enough bandwidth for anything useful.

I have some friends who lived on a property that was only 10 mins from the nearest town of 83 000 people and the reception was so bad there that they had to go by satellite dish which had latency so bad that they could not video conference. They signed on as soon as there was a Starlink beta program in their area and I heard from them that getting StarLink was a life changer even with the early glitches.

I'll second that. You are not alone. The surface Duo phones are great for getting work done.

Why should Netflix care if you are actually watching it or not? You pay for a subscription and for whatever reason that was the content you played. Netflix will therefore keep playing that content. When it comes to revenue, it just doesn't matter what you do with the content.

At any rate, whatever flaws there are in the stats, they are far more accurate than TV viewership numbers.

Foundation is Apple, Amazon did take over The Expanse and did a good job with it.

Itâ(TM)s interesting since the creators tend to think thatâ(TM)s enough. The server is able to verify (and require) through user verification that a challenge was presented and answered correctly by the user. I assume that doesnâ(TM)t protect from the theoretical device that always returns yes, I do not know how they deal with the potential for nefarious authentication devices other than advising people not to use them. I am not a fan of the synced keys that are common with cell phones since it weakens the âno direct access to key materialâ(TM) design and makes key theft more of a potential problem.

They are also phishing resistant, unlike TOTP.

Thatâ(TM)s an argument against biometrics as a factor, passkeys already are MFA though.

Phone is one option but not the only one, hardware tokens like Yubikeys can also hold passkeys.

I wish articles like this would stop the focus on biometrics. It is one option to unlock the key storage but not the only one.

I guess Mission Center is mentioned but the point still stands.

Iâ(TM)ve seen this talked about a lot in the past day, but no mention or comparison to other tools that already do this, like System Monitoring Center or Mission Centerâ¦.

Other than rust, what makes this one better?

That's a good point. I am leery of software solutions like phones or password managers where the keys are synchronized (therefore key material is available "somewhere") and potentially vulnerable to yet-unknown attacks. More trusting of the hardware tokens, after some number of failed pin attempts they clear the data. No doubt there are vulnerabilities in their firmware too that will someday be discovered but I'm not a big target, I'll notice if someone steals my keys.

Then you would unlock the local passkey vault with your password instead, and that password never leaves your device.

It's not really confusion, they are using FIDO2 with a nicer name and the FIDO2 tokens can store them. A Yubikey 5 can hold 25 of them. This is a change from MFA where the Yubikey generates the response on the fly so there is no limit.

The primary user-visible difference between Passkeys and MFA, is the passwordless "Passkey" implementation locks the keys and the MFA does not. Apple's keychain for example stores both MFA and passwordless certificates as "Passkeys". It can also sync them between devices, although this is worse for security, I think Windows Hello can probably sync them too.