evanextreme

The cutting off a hand thing might be satire, but the threat of biometric data being replicated and used if its the only measure of authentication isn't. If we have the ability to read and scan palm prints, than the technology to replicate those prints into maybe a faux glove and trick this system isnt that far off i'd assume, right?

Comparing this system to, for instance a chip card reader, the palm print is significantly less secure because it uses a single factor (something you are) versus a chip which requires the customer to both have the card with the chip present for payment, and to know the PIN in order to authenticate. Or your phone for example, if someone steals your fingerprint (or even models your face), they still need to have your physical phone to unlock it. With this palm scanning tech, all you need is the palm and you can pay for anything anywhere because there's no secondary confirmation

Discord will always have a market as long as competing marketplaces / ecosystems exist on PC. Discord's platform agnosticism makes it a safer bet than the three companies you mentioned, all of which are incentivized to build closed content ecosystems that antagonize each other in order to move more product. There is simply no other solution that allows me to see what my friends are playing, jump into their channel, and see the gameplay broadcast live from multiple perspectives in a private environment.

The Netflix analogy is not particularly apt here either, as where Netflix produces the content, here the content is user generated. So its about technological executions, platform agnosticism, and features sets. Valve's Steam app on iOS didnt even support iPhone X screen resolutions until a year and a half ago so I wouldnt hold my breath for them to compete well in this space at all. Maybe Epic's acquisition of houseparty could cause some competition for them? But I doubt it.

sure, but other services are likely to catch up fast. speeds / input lag on stadia are fantastic.

Google sells all of these games on Google Play without any form of "revolt" from their developers. So im not sure where you're getting this idea, other than baseless conjecture

Different platforms have different baseline moderation policies, and in some cases that remains the differentiator in the platform itself (e.g. Parler). I dont think acting within the values of another site is a good excuse to not get banned by the one a community currently occupies

so you suspect that some gene (evidence for which also exists "anecdotally") triggers a genetic response only in countries where this type of food isn't regularly consumed? because then this sounds like a wild guess prompted by suspicions and pseudoscience

then why is that not the case for countries with a significantly higher proportion of soy in their diets such as countries in Asia? if what you said is true then once would expect to notice it

Right, but a great way to diffuse that anger would be to _not_ have a single account system, an idea Facebook seems to refuse outright. This is not a move a company like Facebook can make at least currently, given how little users trust them with their data

The issue is that Facebook's services (Instagram, WhatsApp) have operated with independent account systems for close to a decade, and no one account should be required to use one service. Facebook (the app) is an unrelated platform from Oculus in terms of function, so this is more like if deleting your Twitter deleted your Steam games. In that context its easy to understand why people might be a little frustrated

right, but that headline doesnt answer the underlying question. This chromecast runs Android TV, so what is Google TV? Is it an interface on top of Android TV, or the successor to Android TV as we know it? It says its coming to future TV's, so what about the Sony TV I just bought? There's so many questions about what this software even is.

Not necessarily. Since the Rift S launched and Oculus Link released, Facebook changed the branding of games that require a PC to "Supports Rift Platform" to signify that they can also be played on a tethered Quest. I expect they'll change the name in the future though

From my use of the registry on GitHub.com over the past half year or so, that seemed to be the case.

I don't think this is really analogous here. The App Store's monopoly on distribution != iOS app sandboxing, the later of which all apps distributed through non jailbroken means (including AltStore) abide by. The later is what protects iOS more than the former.

Conversely, that's probably why a lot of software engineers do read him, because he reaffirms their beliefs that big tech is in the right.

ventilators aren't iphones

As far as I'm aware, they're still working on bugs and it's not ready for release

I wouldn't say that these two experiences are necessarily equivocal. Growing up without the internet before its advent and mass adoption is a different experience than living isolated in a society where immediate connection is a norm. A better comparison would likely be to growing up without a television or telephone during those time periods.

My hypothesis is that Apple uses 'security reasons' as an excuse for their lack of dominance in voice assistants + machine learning. Siri's suggestions are virtually nonexistent compared to Google, Amazon, or even Microsoft's offerings. Siri's extensibility is entirely local, meaning that all new functions you want to develop for Siri need to be packed inside an iOS app for the user to install rather than a cloud function. Siri's 'app suggestions' to the user are also inferior, usually defaulting to the apps you used most recently.

I doubt it will, as this seems to be more of a "vault" system, similar to the already existing EA Access. How that works, is that they will release the game full price just as always, and after sales slow down they will add it to the vault. This seems to be more of a classic Netflix scenario rather than a modern one, where this is a way to make money after sales slow down.