If you want Star Trek to keep going, I'd suggest putting that on in the background and just letting it play, episode after episode.

So you think they are lying about it being Bluetooth? It either exceeds the power limits for licence free operation in the 2.4GHz band, or it's some other variation of the protocol like a different frequency?

They seem to imply that they are using standard Bluetooth chips.

Unless the receiver is on the ground. If it works one way, it will work the other way. No need to launch so much mass to prove it, you can put the low power Bluetooth end in space.

Unless the goal is to spy on people's Bluetooth connections from orbit. If they just demonstrated a receiver sensitive enough to do that, they will probably be getting calls from various government agencies today.

I think it's fine as long as they have good ideas to keep it fresh. Prodigy was a really good example of that. The first show that wasn't even about a Starfleet crew.

You don't really need to export them, since you always need a backup way of accessing the account that you can use to log in on a new device. Recovery codes or authenticating with another device, or you could use a very secure password (and other 2FA mechanism).

The fact that you can't export them is part of why they are secure. They can't be stolen off your computer without multiple zero day exploits that break into the most secure parts of the OS and hardware. You can also store them on a hardware security key like a Yubikey.

It's terrorism & that's what I've called it. The Palestinian resistance has next to no effect on Israeli military forces, as we've seen over the past few decades. Also, by international law, under the Geneva Conventions, the Palestinian people do have the right to resist occupation & to take up arms in order to do so. Think of it like the Jewish guerrilla forces that resisted the Nazis during WWII. Hollywood has since made several films glorifying them.

You know it's only a matter of time!

This is good! MORE companies to sue! or your family to sue after they kill you.

The very fact that they're able to do that, rather than having to sell the app outright, is prima facie proof of an unhealthy ecosystem with inadequate competition.

I've used Logic on the Mac, but I prefer Digital Performer. Others prefer Cubase. Only one of these three exists in its full form on iOS. The same is true across a wide range of products.

The problem is that there's no advantage to using an iPad over a computer for any of this stuff and a giant pile of huge disadvantages (limited screen size, limited storage, limited connectivity, etc.), so most users don't really want to use these apps on an iPad, so the developers mostly don't bother to port their full apps to iPad. And realistically, I don't see that changing any time soon.

As for the whole "App Store Only" on Mac thing not happening, if Apple thought they could get away with it, I'm pretty sure they would, but they couldn't, so they won't. They would have to go back in time and build the platform that way back in 1984, so that people wouldn't have thousands of dollars in software that can't be readily shoehorned into that distribution model.

But the App-Store-only model definitely holds back the iOS platform. If you could run actual Mac apps on iOS, all of those limitations would go away, and the iPad would be a viable second computer for a lot of people while traveling, and could replace the computer for a much larger percentage of people than it currently can. And the fact that Apple still hasn't recognized this and opened up the iOS platform is what makes me so certain that if Apple could somehow make Mac users stomach the idea of not allowing direct distribution, they would. Fortunately for everyone, there's zero chance of their users accepting it.

It's more about the fact that Boeing C levels don't seem to care at all about human lives, and are more than willing to sacrifice them to lock in next quarters' bonus. Passenger, whistleblower, what about my god damn 3rd yacht??

More accurately, we thought we could exploit them like we always do, but it turned out they were not going to fall into the debt traps and the sell-us-your-assets traps. Now we are upset that they are out competing us, especially since they don't conform to our economic model, which we were assured was the best and only way that could work.

I don't know what you think Passkeys are, but they aren't that. They are more secure than passwords and also have the added bonus of making cookies redundant.

What don't you like about them?

That would have to be addressed on an application-specific basis. Debating the issue "in general" doesn't make much sense.

Definitely humans provide care in a way an algorithm cannot. On the other hand, when the summary does get around to mentioning what Kaiser is actually doing, it's monitoring sensors. Computers are pretty damn good at maintaining vigilance in sensor monitoring, in a way people are not. That's why we have fire alarms even though humans can also feel heat and smell smoke.

Apple or Amazon would also be decent homes for Paramount, IMO, for the same reason as Netflix.

Sony, IMO, is already way too big in the content industry. Antitrust regulators should absolutely step in and block any consolidation like this.