Soon, every electric device will require wi-fi and a drivers license to operate. The answer is easy, steal the phone, since it is now the key to unlock all appliances. Bluetooth doesn't have a lot of encryption, someone make a sniffer to capture the unlock code and replay it on command.

The fact this security measure can be bypassed, contrary to the wowsers who whinge it can be by-passed, isn't the problem: It's the fact that demanding every device watch the user (or his/her identity documents) is a demand for a panopticon,

Mass surveillance is the norm: The problem is, every mum-n-dad shop is doing it. Moving the responsibility to rich people/corporations, means less identity theft and grifting. It means, online victims have an easy-to-find culprit they can punish. The current problem is, there's no service for the OS to link to and depend on. That affects the accuracy of the solution and thus, the ability of big corporations to obey the law. Also, for some reason, it allows the excuse, that an unknown implementation is worthless, thus everyone should prefer the current system that enables malicious doxing, online robbery and identity theft.

While the Chicago School of Business and Milton Friedman argued for 20 years, that corporations should abandon social responsibility and be immoral dictators. Most of all, they promoted the idea that society had to give corporations rights but corporations did not have to care about living people. The economic gibberish of Arthur Laffer demanded all problems be fixed by sales volume and volume could be increased by lower taxes: Reagan made that official policy. It's proven to be bullshit but it is still policy, because the rich people in US congress want to pay lower taxes. Getting more money became the only purpose of corporations, and with it, the incentive to take money from the government and their employees. Any social good, such as investing in employees, telling the truth, or increasing scientific knowledge, was unimportant.

Manufacturer says this advert/WMD/frilly lace will help you, end-user says it doesn't: Sounds representative to me. Who did you want the journalist to ask?

Hiding a feature/service because the end-user doesn't like being monetized, has a name: Enshitification. That's the truth missing from this report.

Oh, Sam, we know you're not that ignorant: When your early investors demand bigger dividends, you'll trash your principles like yesterday's paper. You know, we know that.

Is this what SaaS CEOs have become: Salesmen who tell lies that everyone knows are lies, same as insurance industry CEOs. I guess, it was always so but now, you don't attempt to hide it behind the facts.

Which why music/video rights-holders demanded laws and court precedents declaring BitTorrent/Magnet servers, ISPs and CDNs guilty of copyright infringement. The court precedents are overturned in due course, the laws are an expensive game of whack-a-mole.

Unfortunately, cowards making anonymous threats is as old as daily news. Ruml doesn't deserve respect. Now, about the FBI, this abuse of public office happens because it can: It shows the moral fibre of their bosses, or lack thereof. Also, because nepo-babies truly believe they have a right to abuse other people. As Ruml shows, many poor people want the same right.

Parents think the phone will do parenting for them: When their child has a phone, many parents pretend they have more control. We see that in the parents excusing children carrying a phone everywhere with "What if something bad happens". No, what if your child is groomed by an online predator? These parents are literally phoning-in their parenting activity and want the rest of the world to stop and enable their laziness.

I've seen similar behaviour from fathers in real-life: Every other man has to get out of daddy's way or he is a pedophile. The father is pretending to be the victim.

It sounds like 1 bureaucrat decided the police can do whatever the fuck they want and people have no rights.

As always, who decides? Is it a beat cop, a secret court (which is available), or the 10th judge the police ask?

Just as a cell phone is a computer with a dedicated audio service, Google will make your car into a computer with wheels. Thus, all the problems with your phone and laptop (data security, privacy, software freezing, bug-ridden updates, zero-day vulnerabilities), will now affect your car.

What could go wrong?

There's already a movie about that, The Fate of the Furious (2017): The swarm of drone cars, not the harpooning-a-car-like-a-whale scene.

This more than ignoring the authority already given by US congress to regulatory agencies, it's normalizing the authority of corporations. Corporations are not people, they do not have rights that the law must protect.

Microsoft still wants a Google-style advertising platform, still wants to spy on their users and pirate their data but a few actual bug-fixes will stop users complaining about the product and help them accept past and future enshitification.

TL;DR: Making bug-fixes also makes users ignore their enslavement.

I replied to the wrong post: This is meant to be beside your post, not under.

Nobody complained when the USA was buying Cuba. Losing that servitude has resulted in the USA having the longest tantrum in the history of the world,

Samsung has been competing with Google and Microsoft for 15 years and is going backwards: They abandoned Tizen, their superior fork of AOSP and dumbed-down to the stock Android OS.

Their forced install of competing products, wastes data and device resources. Their only saving grace is their products are dumbed-down, not enshittified but so dumb they are not suitable for daily use.