• 0 Posts
  • 91 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 23rd, 2023

help-circle

  • It’s a mistake to imagine most regulation is just brainless nonsense. It would be like imagining the entire legal industry is composed of burglars suing home owners because they slipped in the kitchen whilst robbing the house and concluding we could easily do away with it.

    Looser regulations is incredibly unlikely to effect only or even mostly the stupid or even only or even mostly the poor. Firstly the primary food supply for rich and poor right up to the 1% generally comes from the same ultimate sources the rich just A) mix some more expensive stuff in B) have people who fetch and prepare the food for them.

    Also people are incredibly laughably bad at enacting food safety by voting with their feet even when a particular restaurant is making people sick. Oftentimes the actual sickness may take days to manifest and may not be connected obviously with the ultimate source. Now that is for things that at least directly sicken people. Things that are merely unhealthy may have an ultimate effect that is only visible at the population level where you see significantly more people get cancer in the next 10 to 20 years.



  • It’s a much higher risk than average because games are often abandoned within one year of release and still run as long as 10-15 years later and connects to the internet and other randos on the internet. See the Call of Duty games that allow you to take over the computer of anyone who connects to your online match. It greatly degrades the security of its users.

    Technically lots of things people call “malware” don’t actually do any of those things. For instance they may hijack your default search engine, pop up ads, or otherwise monetize your computer at your expense. The category that was invented by ass coverers is “possibly unwanted program” but outside of those who worry about being sued by scumbags people colloquially refer to both what you call malware AND PUPs as "malware the root of which is “bad” after all. Language being descriptive not prescriptive I think this broader definition of malware is fine.








  • There are a few fundamental differences here.

    One: the existing hardware isn’t lacking anything functional that the user requires. While it may be more secure implemented with TPM 2.0 its far from a hard requirement. After all bitlocker works on 10. The fact that you can presently work around it suggests the limitation is imposed from on high not a hardware requirement.

    Two: The hardware isn’t all that old. General duty cycle on a phone is around 3 years, about 6 years on a PC. Apple has dropped support for 6 year old phones and 10 year old PC. Especially because intel continues to manufacturer a given CPU long after launch and OEMs continue to integrate them people are going to find machines that they bought new off the shelf within the last 3 years unsupported which unlike a 10 year old Mac feels like a rug pull.





  • Fridges with computers in them but we someone missed the boat on pervasive RFID in food containers and maintaining in stock of my shit. It should be able to tell my milk is 1/4 full and 2 days from expiration and add it to an order that shows up when my calendar says I’ll be home but no what do we get? Something with 1/2 the lifespan which can play youtube videos and show you how much beer you have from the couch from its webcam.

    Why even bother.


  • They actually do use software to find deniable claims that would theoretically have to be reviewed by a doctor. The doctor pulls up a while page of to be denied claims and theoretically gives them the legally required review all at once in the 30 seconds before he hits the button. There is no reason NOT to feed propensity to accept fake denial into the equation. You could even white wash it by presuming that prior denials that stuck were indication of bad claims and assert you are measuring their proclivity for filing wasteful claims.