Bitch about MS all you want, they took security problems very seriously after XP and fixed almost all of it.
Is that why we were discussing one of their allegedly patched vulns still not being patched years later... like two weeks ago? They take stock prices seriously, security not so much.
It's fundamentally impossible for an operating system to protect you from the manufacturer of that operating system. That trust is unavoidable.
Apple made their OS open, then closed portions of it, so you cannot trust them, just like all of the other closed source vendors. That doesn't mean no operating system is trustworthy, only that Apple is no more trustworthy than Microsoft.
"The fact that they managed to keep up with this and publish massive amount of patches is a sign of excellence."
That's assuming they did meaningful fixes and not just some AI slop bullshit that will create more problems than it fixed.
I don't give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt, they have proven that is not sensible time and again.
Oh look the dipshits who get mod points haven't heard of Snowden either
The ancient American cars people are thinking of when they think of Cuba were made of thicker, softer metal, which is easier to work on. Those vehicles were made of 100% virgin steel. Modern cars have substantial recycled content and the steel is much harder, therefore harder to work, and they use harder steel specifically so that they can make it thinner, which is also harder to work without destroying the metal. You simply cannot restore a modern vehicle as easily as you can the older ones, even putting complexity aside.
If you have a cell phone, every single movement you make is already tracked.
That's literally what this story is about.
Realistically, this will affect very few people
Realistically, this will accomplish nothing significant in the positive direction, while it will hurt a few people. In the process it will cost a lot of money. Therefore it's a shit plan.
The only reason we don't have warrantless searches and other intensely invasive government surveillance right now is it's specifically banned in the US Constitution.
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH
"we don't have warrantless searches and other intensely invasive government surveillance right now"
HAHhaHAHAHAHHAHahAHAHA HaHAHHA Ha HA HAHHAHAHAHAHAH
Then you're suggesting nothing, so why bother posting?
I like to place reading comprehension tests on the internet for people to, apparently, fail.
Why should that be on the taxpayer not the car owners?
No one suggested that it should be. Don't make things up to be upset about.
The precise automation systems depend on humans doing their job correctly.
This is a signal that they will be underpaying these employees even worse than they are now. They are expecting churn and turnover so they don't have to pay people at salaries earned through years of service.
The AI solution won't need the data to be perfect going in. Of course, the data coming out also won't be deterministic, as you say. It'll be GIGO as per usual.
Creating an infrastructure for making that possible while protecting user privacy is genuinely hard.
What you're saying is that the infrastructure doesn't protect your privacy from Apple now. If they had built an infrastructure which protected the users from being snooped on by Apple, then it would also do the job of protecting them from being snooped on by other providers. Instead you have only their word that they are not misusing your data, when they could have made it impossible.
People who trust Apple are exactly the same as people who trust Zuck.
Maybe you have working caller ID in Germany? We don't here in the USA, in that it can be spoofed easily. The telcos can stop it but choose not to.
if social networks are the problem, lets shut em down.
There should be something like social networks, but with a scoring system controlling what you see so you aren't deluged with bots, and which is also peer to peer. Because social networks aren't the problem, having them controlled by people who think those who trust them are "dumb fucks" is the problem. (Not that they're wrong.)
I think you are expecting way too much there.
Never fear, my actual expectations are low.
Consciousness appears to act a single-threaded program.
The subconscious has entered the chat. But... quietly.
Anyway that's nonsense. Attention is single-subject. Consciousness is not, not even close.
[Crash programs] fail because they are based on the theory that, with nine women pregnant, you can get a baby a month. -- Wernher von Braun
