Please don’t. Just use an openstreetmaps application instead. CoMaps is pretty solid. Jumping from one private/closed source company to another is not really the best route towards privacy.

I don’t think the article is saying the business tactic is novel. It’s pointing out that they are having trouble executing it. Being stuck for 6 months trying to distribute $38B worth of debt is not a good indicator, especially as the AI world is still full steam ahead on generating more of this type of debt.

My background is very much not in this world so caveat my questions/response below with that mind set. I do however try to practice decent personal opsec such 2fa (TOTP), password manager with random generation, etc.

I feel like a lot of what you stated was covered in the article. For example the article states that problem isn’t the number of stakeholders, it’s that none of them are consumer advocacy groups.

I understand that the author maybe leaned on the password sharing example too much but I think that was in an effort to present the material in a friendlier manner to the average reader. The closing statement makes it clear it’s not really about Netflix, etc. The main concern is that attested passkey requirement will now be the easiest way to force specific software and hardware upon user. The GraphenOS example is a good one.

You might not use the attested flag in that manner but I have zero doubt that once passkey adoption rate passes a certain threshold Google will be more than glad to miss-use that flag to lock people out of their gmail account unless they have the most recent phone and software.

Do you have any examples of any public service requiring attested keys? No, because it really doesn’t make sense. But because the protocol supports it, people shouldnt use passkeys? Shitty hot take.

I think this is a bad take. “Because this potential is not being misused right now it won’t be a problem in the future” has not really served us well thus far.

My understanding is that the article is saying that passkeys are giving away too much control to the second party. That can and will be abused.

But again, layman’s understanding from my end.

You underestimate how many people have just forgone the usage of search engines. Most people these days just go to their preferred AI site or app and just take at face value whatever slop it spits out. No one reads or verifies anymore. It would be something if they were using that “saved time” on something productive but alas it’s just to go back to doom scrolling or something else just as meaningless. It’s depressing :/

Two recommendations would be to use “overlords” instead of “landlords” I think former is a better catchall than the latter.

Second recommendation, on the “Find an App” page it should auto-scroll to the list below when you select one of the large pills. Or alternatively, do away with the big selection pills altogether. No reason to have two filtering methods that accomplish the same thing on the same page.

It is important to note that this was an observational study, meaning it can only show an association between higher xylitol levels and cardiovascular events, rather than proving that xylitol directly caused them, and further research is needed. But it is not a green light to have more sugar instead, as we still need to reduce our free sugar intake

Correlation vs Causation caveat is strongly needed here

I had a Costa Rican iced pour over this weekend that was fantastic. It was at a local coffee shop and I liked it so much I had to bad a small bag of the beans even though it was really pricey. I’m hoping to try replicating it at home with my V60 later this week.

Thanks for the clarification. I originally tried to access the piefed post but it wouldn’t load so I worked off the assumption this was a natural lake.

I’ll edit my original post with a note to clarify my misunderstanding.

Note the text below was based on the assumption this was a natural lake. Please see the reply comments below providing further clarification. The homeowner cleaning up his shorelines is a drop in the bucket compared to the fact that an entire swamp was replaced with an artificial lake. Leaving my original comment intact for posterity inspire of it being incorrect in this context.

I think the problem is that this is NOT the natural state of this specific shoreline. If being left alone resulted in trees and grass growing then a sandy “beach” shoreline is not in balance with the local ecosystem. Trimming the grass and clearing a small path for access would have been okay but nuking that span of shoreline has now introduced significant erosion risk. Grasses, shurbs, and roots play an important role in preventing erosion. Maybe the 50-100m stretch won’t be a big deal in the long run but if all the homes in the area follow suit then long term large scale problems will arise. Even still at a small scale, I can already see how close this shoreline is to their home. They have eliminated a decent bit of erosion preventing vegetation that served as a buffer from the back yard of their homes. A few seasons of high and low tide cycles will, at best wash away their “pretty walking area”, and at worst undermine the stability of the soil near the building foundation. There is no easy “undo” for the damage they have done, the closest thing is artificial erosion preventative measures which will be concrete, metal, or some other manufactured system that will be much more of an eye soar then the original condition they apparently hated so much.

We are witnessing the decline of reading comprehension and critical thinking

I should have clarified, guilt and location matter. If it’s in public space then all bodycam footage should be free game. That’s no different than if someone recorded it from the side of the street. If it’s in private space then it should be based on guilt. But again, I don’t like where that can go as well because the inverse is cops come into your home shoot you and that footage is locked away because it was recorded on private property and you are no longer around to consent release of that footage.

It’s up to the public how they respond. The point here is not setting a precedent for police withholding bodycam footage regardless of who request. We can’t open any doors for police to try and withhold footage more than they already do. This time it just an embarrased celebrity but next time it might be copes wrongfully arresting, killing, etc. I do tngicr a shit about JT but I do care that body cam footage stays public information.

Friendly rebuttal. I don’t like this version either because of two reasons. First is that it is still using stolen material to do any of this “creative work”. Second: the knob twiddling, mixing colors, and all versions of that are integral to the creation process. Happy accidents are why we have a lot of what we have in the creative world. Somone chasing a specific sound might discover their own sound while twiddling away for hours. They will be able to do that in a much more replicable and modifyable way than the black box that is “AI”. But that’s just my opinion as an amature creative.