If this is like the Google Built In that other car manufacturers (GM, Mazda) are using then, no, it won't support screen mirroring
Horseshit. Nothing about Google Built-in (the name is Android Automotive) blocks screen mirroring. In fact there are native apps for both CarPlay and Android Auto for Android Automotive and they work perfectly fine on many implementations (e.g. Polestar supports screen mirroring from both platforms).
Your garage sale has no impact on the national market. The fine is issued under the DMA, a law that specifically applies only to products or services which move so much money (multiple billions in revenue) and affect so many people (double digit millions of monthly active users) that it affects national markets in its industry.
If your garage sale grew to that size it would mean you are Amazon, and you'd be of course obligated to comply with a metric dickload of laws.
Distinction without a difference. They've never policed it. Technically the LG software being loaded very much is a utility app. Unfortunately it loads other shit too which again to my point: has nothing to do with WHQL certification since WHQL certification never checks the associated utilities.
It's a goddamn monitor.
If this were 1999 I'd agree with you. But even if your monitor is 100% compliant with signalling, what colours is it displaying? I'll tell you now with 100% confidence, if it's an OLED screen, they are the WRONG ones.
Default signalling is great for default devices. Most devices do far more than just defaults. The LG monitor that kicked all this off has:
a) a custom colour gammut
b) a built in calibration device which requires a driver
c) built in speakers
d) built in microphone
e) built in LED lighting.
Sure your dumb terminal will display text, but I suspect most consumers actually want all the advertised functions to work, and that requires not only drivers, and ICC profiles, but also custom software.
Nothing non-sense about it. The world is full of devices which do more than the basics. If you want to actually use the *advertised features* of your device you need some ability to install something requiring admin privileges.
Take LG OLED monitors. Sure you can plug them in and they'll display video. IN THE WRONG COLOUR because 100% of OLED screens don't follow sRGB colour formats, and therefore you will require fetching something online about the model to make the device work properly.
My keyboard? Yeah it'll type, but that's it. It is advertised with the ability to sync lighting to the game I am playing. That doesn't work out of the box. I need some way of getting something online for it.
If all you want is the basics, more power to you. Most consumers actually want their features which were advertised to them to work out of the box.
What do you think how this goes if somebody manages a supply-chain attach on this, especially on, say, an industrial control system that cannot simply be turned off?
IT CAN SIMPLY BE TURNED OFF. There's literally a windows setting to disable both installation of drivers via Windows Update, and installation of any software from driver manifests. You not knowing how to use your computer is not a problem for industrial systems who presumably have competent people managing their computers.
The "issue" here is a feature that has existed in Windows since the early days of Windows 11 and has a specific toggle in the settings should you want to disable it. That "issue" allows users to use their hardware's features (some of which require apps to control) without trawling the internet looking for the software from the website of the peripheral manufacturer.
The only real issue here is that LG shat the bed by including unwanted non-related software. MS should police this, but ultimately the software feature is a good thing.
Except WHQL explicitly does allow this, the driver manifest can point to associated apps in the Microsoft Store and WHQL certification doesn't extend to the apps. Fun fact LG monitors have done this for years. The difference is that in the past the software automatically installed was actually wanted, e.g. LG Calibration studio is was automatically installed when I first plugged in my LG monitor I bought 3 years ago.
You don't need admin privileges to install software from the Microsoft Store or for Windows update to provision drivers. An unprivileged account doesn't fix this.
Yes but this is literally required for hardware. Hardware needs drivers, and since the days of plug and play we've had drivers automatically install for hardware.
Either that or it was an oddity the GP noticed. I travel a LOT. In the past 4 months I've flown British, KLM, Air France, Garuda, Iberia, Turkish, Qatar, TAP, Ryanair, Singapore, and in 4 days I've a Qantas flight.
I've seen *no* illuminated no smoking signs on any of these flights, and the British Airways plane was an older Bombardier even that didn't have it.
New aircraft still have illuminated "no smoking" signs above every row of seats too, even though it hasn't been legal to smoke on any airline for over a decade.
No they don't. Or if they do it's by a stupid airline. It's been a LONG time since I've seen an illuminated no-smoking symbol. Most planes have replaced this with a symbol of a phone to show you shouldn't use devices during take off and landing.
Maybe smoking is really really bad in your country? But even Air France doesn't have them anymore, and smoking is a national sport in France.
Off shore oil and gas industry do this for helicopter transfers. Here's a google image search of the BOSIET course that is mandatory for all helicopter trips: https://www.google.com/search?... It's a mock helicopter fuselage that gets dropped into a swimming pool, and probably one of the more fun courses in industry.
Refusing to leave is a sign of not knowing what will happen. When you know you have slides, that detach into a liferaft it's a very different experience to someone shouting at you to get out of the plane. These safety briefings very much are education.
From having some emergency response training, I have learned that most people, in an emergency, are sheep, and will follow any directions that seems to be reasonable
This is true, but for that to work you need a small number of capable people. Just flight attendants is not enough. The Pan Am crash also had flight attendants and most people died, and the evidence after was people had NFI what they were doing.
Go up to a random person and ask them if they know where the life jackets will be. I'm sure most people will tell you it's under the seat, even the sheep.
GCC can do it.
But it didn't.
Good coding practices (setting pointers to NULL after freeing memory) prevent exploitability.
But they didn't.
You can frame it any way you want, the end result is that exploits were found and patched. You assertion that it could have been done another way is irrelevant since those tools and practices have been available for a long time, and yet the zerodays persisted.
If you can't learn to do it well, learn to enjoy doing it badly.
