The $5K a year just gives you a $300 per person per visit discount. So pays itself back in 15 visits or so.

...that it's just New York City. Hopefully the idea will spread.

Laissez faire capitalism is great if everyone is honest. But in this reality there are a lot of incredibly dishonest people who will do anything for a buck. A modicum of base regulation is desirable to keep consumers from getting swindled at every turn. I applaud efforts like these.

Plenty of us nerds can afford this and want to see news about this.

Another good reason to use third party software to disable all windows telemetry from first install.

I'm unclear on the exact mechanism for how the device ID was extracted by a website. Is this something available as a piece of data a site can request via edge?

Is this part of telemetry data sent back to microsoft if you leave all that enabled, at the windows level?

Use a privacy-safe brower with blocking plugins (ublock origin) and completely disable all telemetry to microsoft using O&OShutUp and WinHance to turn off every single reporting mechanism that goes back to Microsoft. And use the shell access on the first windows config screen to create a local account only. Do all of this before ever connecting the machine to the internet.

I just did a clean install of 11 (all should work with 11 as well), did the shift+F10 command prompt on setup to create a local account only and used O&OShutUp10, WinHance before I ever connected the machine to the internet and disabled all telemetry and involuntary communication with M$'s servers. Those two pieces of software are really handy.

The peak demand comes -- right at the time we'd be getting near-peak from solar.

Why isn't the USA focusing more on having people fit solar to their houses with a battery and inverter. This would take the load off the grid during these peak-sun/peak-demand periods and sure-up the grid.

This is one of the few times that the output of renewables tracks demand so why not?

...and nothing of value was lost.

Might I suggest you have your head stuck in your pet echo chamber. I believe, based on decades of OBSERVATION, that as practiced for the last 60 years unions are not in the workers' best interest and in fact often act at cross purposes to the workers' best interests and wishes. Obviously our opinions differ. I wish I could be there when you visit reality.

{^_^}

Life's a bitch and then you die. They lost their jobs instead of losing a portion of their pay. Their union "advisers" suggested their jobs were assured because the cost of transport was too high for non-union shops in other states. Generally speaking, SOME income is better than none. May be they saw it coming and figured lowered wages were not worth it? Well, they lost their jobs. And the wages they'd have had to accept were living wages, just not as high living as they were. The brothers that owned the shop took a bath, too. So nobody local "won". Real economics work like that.

{^_^}

Perhaps labor has priced itself out of the market, this time, perhaps, permanently. Their replacement has a very low wage. That is how my former father-in-law's pattern making shop in Detroit died. The union was not willing to accept wage cuts that could have saved their jobs if they could undercut the jobs in West Virginia that replaced them. Now they have a nasty problem, "How do I support my family?" Perhaps they should assign some of the blame to the union organizers who sold them the idea they could raise their wages indefinitely without any danger.

{^_^}

While it exists it is a powerful tool to expose the dirty cop minority. I figure that fact alone would put the dirties firmly against the cameras that have too little security applied to prevent a dirty from stalking somebody. (Trust me. That ain't fun based on personal experience.) You and I and, indeed, everybody else must answer for themselves whether solving a kidnap and murder even an inept cop could solve with cameras is more of a problem than our worries that some behavior we take part in is likely to put our situponparts in a sling. Life is a continuing tradeoff that has gone VASTLY awry of late with the release of violent murderers while folks like (presumably) you and I would be in durance vile indefinitely with little access to even lawyers. We're bassakwards in that regard in most large cities.

{^_^}

And they probably respect privacy in more traditional ways. (And, yes, they probably still gossip about it in some circles. But that selected out the people you did not want to get close to.)

Back in the 50s I was a VERY free range child. Now that's a guaranteed call to the parent from the child protection pricks.

{^_^}

In law, indeed the privacy was not there. In practice it is only relatively recent nearly everybody carries around cameras. The density of people was enough smaller that the illusion of more privacy than legally existed persisted. The practical privacy we had was significantly greater in most regards and, yes, less in others. Today one must actively assert privacy rights. Back then most people were not Nosy Nellies. Whether that was a good thing or not is still debatable. But, *I* liked it.
{^_^}