Wait so who is being dishonest, the old article, the new one, or both?

Grit is something you gain once you already have an intrinsic motivation, such as already having a belief you can do this. Something has to spark in people that they’re capable in the first place.

I’d like to revisit and see if in 6 months time you’ve actually left or if you just were angry.

I meant to apple specifically… pretty sure you don’t lose your job switching devices usually

Always worth trying a different model, especially if you’re using a free one. I wouldn’t take one data point to seriously either.

The data is very strongly showing the quality of AI answers is rapidly improving. If you want a good example, check out the sixty symbols video by Brady Haran, where they revisited getting AI to answer a quantum physics exam after trying the same thing 3 years ago. The improvement is IMMENSE and unavoidable.

It was overvalued when crypto was happening too, but another boom took its place. Of course, lightening rarely strikes twice and all that, but it proves overvalued doesn’t mean the price is guaranteed to go down it seems. Predicting the future is hard.

As they say, the market can remain irrational far longer than you can remain solvent.

Hah! Indeed

if there was anything i was going to bet against between 2019 and now, it was nvidia... and wow it feels wild how much in the opposite direction it went.

I do wonder what people would think the reasoning would be for them to increase in value this much back then, prolly would just assume crypto related still.

It’s not impossible they could’ve seen AI investment coming but it would’ve been very hard

“Don’t just do something, stand there!” - I love this quote. Standing there or being there for someone is amazingly helpful and it’s a skill to do it, congrats on working on this.

I mean, you can buy goods and services within china, and you can sell those goods and services. The “horseshit” exchange rate can’t deviate too far from the real value or it incentivises laundering too much. The exchange rate isn’t _that_ bad as a result.

You’re very entitled to your opinion, but it should be fairly obvious why this isn’t reasonable from their perspective. Put another way, let’s just say I think apple is glad you’re not making decisions about how their operating system should work. It’s an OS built for users, not those who wish to have iron control over everything. Allowing that would be disastrous for most users just to appease the very small percentage who’d want that.

How is allowing the user the power to disable software on the device they own "disastrous" for anyone

In general or in this case?

I'm also curious about this specific case.

In general: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_XaJdDqQA0

It opens the door to tech-illiterate users being tricked into disabling security features, doesn’t it? Not saying I agree with it but I imagine that’s the motivation.

That's like saying houses shouldn't have doors in case the unwary are tricked into letting thieves into their homes.

No, it’s not.

Same reason we don’t let people set their banking password to “password”.

What is the attack chain enabled by letting me disable the com.apple.mediaanalysisd job?

Show me where I said there was one? You’re raising this in bad faith.

You're the one concern trolling over security.

Oh, so first you put words in my mouth, and now the moment you get called out on it you accuse _me_ of trolling? Get a grip son.

You had full root for more than a decade on any macOS machine.

And then you didn't. What's the purpose of saying this?

All consumer-operating systems also used to be single user with administrative access by default. Shall we return to that, too?

The point of saying this is to let you realize that the last ten years weren't a disaster.

We also used to use wep encryption on wifi networks

Think it through just a tiny bit more. It’s more socially acceptable to be angry back at someone who is confronting you directly than someone who may or may not be making an example of you but in a passive way. Therefore it’s less likely the other individual will confront you back, or perhaps more importantly it would make them look more unreasonable for doing so.

Social pressure is a real thing and it affects both behaviour and outcomes, it’d be silly to ignore that.

> It’s more socially acceptable to be angry back at someone who is confronting you directly than someone who may or may not be making an example of you but in a passive way.

I actually agree with this. And similarly, I'd argue that it's more socially acceptable to use this audio repeater than to "nicely" confront someone who is so brazenly violating social norms.

Exactly!

The people who react angrily to someone asking them to keep their noise down are very likely the same people who react angrily to someone interrupting their call or entertainment with loud noises, especially noises that just repeat what they're saying or watching. I agree social pressure is a real thing, but if you don't have the courage to ask them to kindly keep the volume down, how would you have the courage to do this?

These questions have pretty straightforward answers. No, the first one isn’t a reasonable assumption because people react VERY differently to passive vs direct action. This isn’t controversial. As for your second one, easy, because one takes less “courage” than the other.

I also disagree with the entire premise that it’s about courage in the first place. You can have the courage but decide the other method simply has less downsides. No need to pretend otherwise.

They definitely already have your face though…

The more examples in various situations they can get, the higher their accuracy.

They definitely already have enough accuracy.

From where? Not everyone even puts selfies on the Internet.

If you’re 99.9% of people this isn’t even a reasonable question to ask because the answer is so obvious. If you’re the final 0.01%, they still will have it, just from when you last went anywhere with surveillance ever.

Honestly, it's probably already happening, but I would not be surprised if retail stores that check your ID also have cameras snaping your face and selling that to data brokers.

Anything you can image that is bad with privacy, figure what is occurring is far worse.