The best way to get people to switch is to make it painless.

I used Chrome for a decade straight. The past two years though, I switched to Edge, across all platforms. Why? Microsoft made it easy to try - everything imported, *including* all my saved passwords and form fields, and all of the extensions just keep working.

The same is simply not true of Firefox. It imports your bookmarks and expects that to be enough as if it is 1998. There is no effort to import all of my saved settings, tabs, and profiles, and no effort to automatically install equivalent extensions to what I am using. They make it too hard to test drive their offering.

Belief in the "free markets" apparently only goes so far as the movements of the invisible hand aligns with your personal and religious belief system.

JP Morgan
Santander
EY

Are these fly hy night companies?

Ethereum is used for a lot of legitimate applications only. Entire companies run their apps on Ethereum.

But it really doesn't matter because it uses negligible electricity so who cares?

Not all crypto is like this. Ethereum moved to a proof-of-stake model for specifically this reason.

The person in question (https://www.linkedin.com/in/jasonb16/) seems to have come from the FBI and NSA background and has never worked for anyone but the federal government. As a result, they are likely to have a myopic view on the art of the possible.

I suspect Meta and Google are far more adept at processing and gaining insights from OSINT than anyone from the FBI.

These steps have been going on by these companies for three years straight now.

Either fire them or give up. There's no middle ground anymore.

Frankly it's becoming exhausting.

So let me get this straight...

None of these employees management chain can get them to go back to the office?

You think a strongly worded letter will get them to act when their manager can't?

The employees are completely insubordinate. Either fire them with cause, or don't.

These workplaces are acting the same way as someone in a toxic relationship, thinking that they will be able to "change" them with words.

You're not going to change them. Either let them go, or put up with it as is. There isn't another third option.

You really shouldnt comment on things when you obviously have no clue as to the background because it makes you look foolish.

That's not what happened here whatsoever. The woman was hit by a HUMAN driver, and FLUNG INTO THE PATH of the cruise vehicle, which WAS following all of the rules. The vehicle was able to STOP INSTANTLY due to it being autonomous, which indisputably saved the woman's life. At that point though, she had fallen to the road and because the car couldn't see her, she ended up being drug to the curb, as it parked itself (which it is programmed to do after any collision when it is safe to do so). This dragging is what all the controversy is about, because a human would likely have known something was up and not drug her... what is never brought up is she would already be a corpse becsuse the human would have already killed her.

I am replying to the parent who is saying "the tech isn't ready yet"

There is no threshold where it will be "ready", I'd "ready" means 100% guaranteed to never harm anyone.

The fact is every day we delay deploying these systems, we are directly responsible causing thousands more deaths. That's a fact.

Ability to run any browser extension you want for one.

iOS does not allow browser extensions because of Apples iron grip on the engine. Over on Android people have the full power of browser extensions, it is so, so much better.

If this situation had involved a human driver - that woman would be dead.

Yes it is horrible that the car drug her. But what is constantly ignored is the initial collision - which was entirely the fault of another HUMAN driver - would have been FAR WORSE with a human driver's poor reaction time. She would have surely died.

The reality is that the entire situation was 100% human caused, and the autonomous vehicle saved her life. But that is not a sexy narrative for the media, nor regulators.

You don't seem to understand how most cyber attacks work. There is no need whatsoever for a system to be connected to the internet to be subject to a cyber attack. Many cyber attacks leverage physical ingress. Stuxnet is one major well known example but there are countless others.

What's more... why bother with this when all you really need to do is take over the CNC and forge orders...

Now instead imagine that one of those "third-world countries" initiated a cyber attack on Russia that led to it launching one or more warheads at the US, and at the same time initiating an attack on China that led to it launching against Taiwan.

You're illustrating my point.

eBay started as a P2P selling site. It was not for "serious sellers", it was to sell one-off things.

Catering to "serious sellers" and all their affiliated baggage and issues - and having too easy of a dispute process - is what ruined the entire platform.