That’s what they are saying though. These shouldn’t be thought of as “rules”, they are suggestions near universally designed to point you to the most relevant content. Ignoring them isn’t “stealing something not meant to be captured”, it’s wasting time and resources of your own infra on something very likely to be useless to you.

The law that passed congress, as written, explicitly gives the sitting president the ability to delay the ban by executive order.

Server hardware isn’t free. At the end of the day, SOMEONE has to pay the bills. Either you are the customer, or the product. If you insist on being the product, you don’t get to be surprised when platforms focus on the actual customers that actually pay the bills, by enshittifying the platform.

Zigbee devices are a pretty small minority of the larger IoT landscape. Most consumers are likely to have more wifi or bluetooth only devices than zigbee (at this point in time). The notable exception being Hue bulbs.

Apple is pretty much the only company in the smart home space right now that not only allows, but requires that devices be able to function locally, without having to call home. They CAN call home, but they continue to work just fine locally if say, the internet is down. It’s a central tenant of their homekit standard.

They claim it in the article, and in a few other publications, but I haven’t seen anything that explicitly confirms, from sunbird, that this is the case, including on their website. They also make claims on their website that conflict with that architecture, as I don’t believe it would be possible to E2E encrypt messages like they claim they do. I kinda wonder if the Mac Mini claim is an assumption that everyone just ran with, without confirming that it’s true. I could be wrong though, I’ll gladly eat my words if anyone has a primary source to cite, but that architecture and business model just doesn’t appear to be compatible with their claims.

In the article it mentions that the service is run by sunbird. Just by reading their FAQ it doesn’t actually sound like they are MITM’ing messages via some mac server somewhere. It actually sounds more plausible to me that they are doing all the magic “on device”. They specifically mention that this won’t work on multiple phones at the same time, that’s what’s tipping me off.

What I suspect is happening is that the phone itself is spoofing an actual iPhone, and connecting to Apple servers as if it is one. Normally you wouldn’t be able to do this, Apple sells the phones, so they know all the serial numbers that should be able to access iMessage, and would be able to block anything that doesn’t report to be a real iPhone. What I think may be happening is that sunbird could be buying up pallets of dead, old, or otherwise unusable iPhones for pennies on the dollar, and using those serial numbers to pretend they were an iPhone from another device (like the nothing phone) directly.

This would make sense with their business model, according to their FAQ they have “no reason to charge money” for their product yet. Buying access to iMessage for a few bucks upfront with no ongoing cost would match up with what they are claiming, and it would be extremely hard for Apple to detect on their end, as they would appear to be all sorts of models, bought at different times, in different places, and signed in by real people.

I want to reiterate that this is pure speculation on my part, it’s just a theory. Which this would mean that (in theory) chats could (and would) be E2E encrypted from sender to receiver, ultimately it’s still Nothing/Sunbird’s app, so they could be doing anything with it on device.

Yup, those clauses should be illegal. Especially nowdays. In the past, you could cross out sections you don’t agree too before signing, or negotiate the contract somehow. But now, contracts are very clearly designed as a “take it or leave it” offer, and when literally everyone in a given marketplace for an essential product or service has the same clauses, it effectively removes your rights.

My guy, the feature is literally named “Autopilot”. By definition they are advertising it as a system that can PILOT the car AUTOMATICALLY. It doesn’t matter what they put in the fine print, they are blatantly describing the system as autonomous.

I’ll believe it when I see it. Apple has a demonstrated track record of supporting their phones for years, Google has a demonstrated track record of killing anything that isn’t an immediate run-away success. So sorry Google, but I can’t just take your word for it.

That has been a feature in all of their competitors for 10+ years.

It would definitely stop pretty much any counterfeit if they added some rudimentary depth data into the image format as well, within the signed contents. That way simply taking a picture of a monitor would be obviously detectable, and not alterable without removing the signing. It wouldn’t have to be a high resolution depth map at all either.

I am an American and I use it religiously for the record. Especially for version numbers. Major.minor.year.month.day.hour.minute-commit. It sorts easy, is specific, intuitive, and makes it clear which version you’re using/working on.

This. Many of the people who still work there have no other choice. Their citizenship is tied to their employer. I feel sympathy for them.

Oh lawd he shrimpin

Don’t like that, this just paves the way to removing ad blockers, just like they’re doing in chrome

I’ve heard rumors that they are leveraging LLM’s like ChatGPT to simulate normal user activity, and that’s disregarding the fact that the API cutoff only happened 2 days ago, and many may not have switched yet. I wasn’t able to verify this anywhere, but based on Lemmy numbers alone, I think we have enough to cast reasonable doubt on the platform’s DAU. I think we’ll have a much better idea of how many folks actually stuck around in a few weeks, or even a month.