CloudTalkin
About
- Username
- CloudTalkin
- Joined
- Visits
- 103
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 3,435
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 919
Reactions
-
Judge blocks Trump plan to ban TikTok on Nov. 12
That's a bit of an overreaction don't you think? Those warnings won't make a bit of difference. History has proven that emphatically. People generally don't care. There's also absolutely no need to include the word "foreign" in your warnings hypothetical. The word "governments" is singularly sufficient. Only the first two warnings make any sense. Both those warnings (minus the foreign22july2013 said:TikTok is a threat, but not as big a threat as all the cameras and microphones that people put in their homes or outside their homes for uploading video and audio to the cloud. Many of these services upload their data to servers in China, and these servers are, by law, accessible to the Chinese Communist Party which is most likely collecting data on every person on earth.
Congress should mandate that all products which have optional upload services (including TikTok) come with product labels or daily pop-ups indicating their security and privacy concerns. Cigarette packages come with warnings, and here are a few similar warnings that would seem appropriate for webcams and always on home speakers:
WARNING: Foreign governments can legally use the images and audio you upload against you.
WARNING: Foreign governments are collecting data on you from this product without your permission.
WARNING: Foreign governments intend to use data collected by this device against you.
WARNING: This product's recording features could cause serious harm to your children including abduction.
With these warnings, the three complainants in this case would still be able to earn their income, but people will become better educated over time of the risks they are taking.
)are already stated in almost every privacy policy of almost every company that has a privacy policy. Companies like Apple, Google, MS, heck even FB publish this info in their Transparency Reports twice a year. Some reports: https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/ , https://transparencyreport.google.com/?hl=en ; , https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsibility/law-enforcement-requests-report .
Your third and fourth warning are simply FUD.
Not sure why you think people aren't educated about the risks of the products they use. I think most people are aware. They just don't care. They don't care because they realize the chances of actually being affected by any of this is extremely unlikely. It's similar to stories about a new vulnerability discovered that affects Macs. First Reaction: Oh no, someone can get into our computers. Reality: Yeah, not really anything to worry about for 99.99999999999999999... 999999999999999999999999999999999% of the people.
Daily pop-ups is a horrendous idea. It's a perfect example of the Boy Who Cried Wolf fable. Take a moment to think about how many products would fit your "have optional upload services" criteria. We live in an IoT era. Almost everything we use has optional upload services and most of it is manufactured outside of the US. It would make Microsoft's infamous UAC pop-up seem like a walk in the park.
-
Judge blocks Trump plan to ban TikTok on Nov. 12
Hahahahahahahaha! My mans and 'em got dunked on by some Tik Tok kids and got all pissy. Trumped up ←(intended) some fake national security concerns cuz his feeling got hurt by some kids on the cyber. Petulant man baby using the government for a personal vendetta.
-
Apple ordered to pay VirnetX $503M for infringing patents
Not likely. Why do you think Apple will fare better on this appeal than they've fared on all the other appeals? Apple has been soundly trounced by VirnetX in multiple trials and appeals. The cases have been going on for a decade and Apple still hasn't prevailed. Back in March I said Apple is employing the Samsung defense of just appeal until everyone get's tired. It's not working here because the verdicts keep getting worse. You should probably look into the history of the cases before confidently proclaiming an Apple victory on appeal.ThinkmanDuv said:Unbelievable……VirnetX is a known serial offender ALWAYS litigating in TEXAS, where the accused always ALWAYS ALWAYS loses. No doubt Apple will win on appeal. Talk about a situation the Congress should be looking into that might actually fall under their purview, rather than badgering Tech companies with issues of which they have little or no understanding!
-
Apple drops to fourth in worldwide smartphone marketshare, report says
Ship and sold mean the exact same thing. Apple used to use the word "sold" to mean when the phones shipped to their customer (Telecoms and retailers like Best Buy, Target, Walmart, etc.) It has been a part of the disclosure in their filings for as long as I can remember. The portion of their sales that count they way you're thinking is the product that is sold via Apple stores (physical and online) and some education sales. And no, all phones are not sold. Apple and the other OEM's do periodic channel inventory corrections to adjust for unsold items.Kuyangkoh said:How can IDC says Market share on smartphone ships? Are all been sold ?? Or just in the store? They should track ownership not ships..... -
MagSafe 15W fast charging reportedly restricted to Apple 20W adapter
Opinion. Reason for differing charging rates: Apple uses custom power delivery profiles... for every adapter they make. Power adapters: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210133
Every profile is different. None of the Macbook adapters match the 20W adapter's pd profile. USB-C has 5 standard power delivery profiles. Not really sure why Apple chooses not to use any of them.
The 5W adapter outputs 5V-1A
The 10W adapter outputs 5.1V-2.1A
The 12W adapter outputs 5.2V-2.4A
The 18W adapter outputs 5V-3A or 9V-2A (USB-C)
The 20W adapter outputs 5V-3A or 9V-2.22A (USB-C) ← My guess: Match that pd profile or no soup for you. In this instance, soup is 15W power delivery, not crab bisque. 
