rockskon

23 ms·

451.
by rockskon 2y ago
What? Smart phones are famously high-margin devices. What do you mean "prioritize price"? Not for most smart phones.
452.
by rockskon 2y ago
Given the stated use cases of the post I responded to was electric vehicles and mobile devices, my response was framed in terms of that. Consumer devices - especially phones - famously prioritize battery life.
453.
by rockskon 2y ago
Lesser energy density is a pretty big caveat that can readily make or break the commercial viability of this technology. How big of a difference compared to lithium ion is the energy density?
454.
by rockskon 3y ago
Because the problem is what Google did to the standard in opposition to just about every non-Google group, not that there was a standard called "manifest v3" at all.
455.
by rockskon 3y ago
Why reframe the topic to something irrelevant? What the standard started out as is not what it ended as. The final result is the only thing that matters.
456.
by rockskon 3y ago
I don't like Google being able to unilaterally dictate major internet standards in opposition of just about every non-Google group.
457.
by rockskon 3y ago
How are they private though? Unless they relay your search it is the exact opposite of private.
458.
by rockskon 3y ago
I don't know what to tell you if you sincerely think the Pentagon invests more than a tiny preponderance of its budget in Silicon Valley.
459.
by rockskon 3y ago
In some jurisdictions, yes. A number of other jurisdictions have legislated their own Net Neutrality rules though and the issue is still a relatively hot topic in internet policy circles. So ISPs are waiting for all controversy around it
460.
by rockskon 3y ago
? There's DoD research labs. Every service has one. They're not even hard to find. Literally google a service name + "research lab".
461.
by rockskon 3y ago
The Pentagon has more image problems than being a difficult customer to work with. The "mission" they tout as being the main driver to work for then is often ill-defined and what is best known typically has an atrocious public ima
462.
by rockskon 3y ago
Less popular? For any reason other than increased price?
463.
by rockskon 3y ago
You request your information from LexisNexis at https://consumer.risk.lexisnexis.com/ to find out.
464.
by rockskon 3y ago
That's no reason to make it easy on them. Their ability to do bulk surveillance is limited by resources. Don't lower their resource requirement.
465.
by rockskon 3y ago
That logic quickly turns into a stupid word game. What's the difference between a reward for sharing data on your hard stops vs a penalty for not sharing data on hard stops?
466.
by rockskon 3y ago
Google has such an extreme bias for popular websites that they now routinely ignore words used in your query if it means recommending a popular website or recommending the results of the closest-sounding search if it's a popular search
467.
by rockskon 3y ago
What? Malware ads masquerading as legitimate websites are common and Google hasn't visibly done much to combat them.
468.
by rockskon 3y ago
Eh. Some things can still change going forward while others won't. The future is unwritten. I see cultural change as analogous to steering a large ship. You won't be doing any sharp turns but you can gradually move it in a diffe
469.
by rockskon 3y ago
Well it's not going to do so well for that at the LVCC given the distance away from hotel parties.
470.
by rockskon 3y ago
Federal government is mostly a miserable place to work if you enjoy up-to-date tech and flat organizational structures with high autonomy to get your work done. Also a miserable place to work if you enjoy earning money.
471.
by rockskon 3y ago
By that same logic the present state can be described as most users not knowing how to opt-out which is predatory. Given the history of online advertising it can readily be inferred that ads do not provide enough value for almost any user t
472.
by rockskon 3y ago
LARPing will not change things, no. People here, if organized, could absolutely change things especially considering the resources at the financial disposal of those here. No, I don't mean issues like what you see endlessly litigated o
473.
by rockskon 3y ago
Cynicism like this is poison for changing the political system. Not only have you ceded all ground to the copyright industry - you also discourage others from trying to make a difference. The public isn't as powerless to enact change
474.
by rockskon 3y ago
.....? Are you claiming Apple would have to pay fixed costs a second time because new users were added to the already existing service? And are you claiming that 1 million dollars is a lot of money to Apple, a company worth over three milli
475.
by rockskon 3y ago
Sure, but let's not fool ourselves. It isn't exactly a cost center for Apple to run the service nor would it be to scale up usage to include Android users. The cost would be a rounding error to Apple. From a business perspective
476.
by rockskon 3y ago
Okay? Not sure why you're bringing up a what-if that didn't happen. Beeper Mini didn't hack into Apple's servers. I was responding to someone who said the extra overhead for running a chat service that has more people
477.
by rockskon 3y ago
The resources are negligible and not worth mentioning. Chat, encrypted or not, is not an expensive service for Apple to run. There are much better business arguments to make here then "oh no! The 3 trillion dollar company might have s
478.
by rockskon 3y ago
With point #1..... I've often been concerned that focuses on the most aberrant and rule-breaking of people inevitably broadens the range of the scope of behavior that gets targeted over time. When the most severe of criminality is les
479.
by rockskon 3y ago
Is it a major legal risk for volunteers? In most jurisdictions I've only heard of awkward conversations with police not familiar with what Tor is, but beyond that? Not much outside of jurisdictions that already aren't friendly t
480.
by rockskon 3y ago
One that challenges traditional notions of property rights when attempted to be enforced in this manner. They might win in the short term but I can't imagine that would serve the train company well in the long term - lawmakers (who are

More ›