I don't think it's likely any time soon but forcing Apple etc to provide drivers would be a pretty natural extension of the 'right to repair' and other tech regulation demanding interoperability, to guarantee M1/M2/etc devices remain useful beyond their years of macOS support.
The permissions list on the play store was completely useless from a privacy standpoint. Even power users could to just about nothing with the info.
The situation now where you approve or reject permissions as they are used in the app is vastly better than the original android model of being shown a wall of text with the options to either give away all of your data and security or not install the app.
I used them as a signal of the developer's intentions. An app that asked for too many that I couldn't logically relate to the app's features was a red flag.
There was no reason to remove them from the store page. In general, there's no reason to remove additional information, that too info which was already hidden behind an obscure button that only a few power users ever checked. The dynamic permission model is the better runtime one but there's no good-faith justification at all to delete information about permissions. The latter is like the documentation for a feature and removing it is like hiding documentation.
The permissions list allowed you to make a better-informed decision before you download the app, even though you can't change what permissions an app requires you could shop around for apps without specific permissions. This was never incompatible with ad-hoc approving or rejecting permissions either.
This only works for utility apps which are really the minority of apps that users install. There is only one app to access my bank account, there is only one app to stream netflix on, there is only one app to access government services on.
Outside of flashlight and QR scanner apps, there is basically nothing the user can action aside from completely rejecting the wider service over some ambiguity in the permissions list.
Aside from utilities many games have lots of similar competing products where you can differentiate on permissions/ads/in-app purchases/etc: crossword puzzles, sudokus, games for younger kids like dress up or coloring in stuff.
> The permissions list on the play store was completely useless from a privacy standpoint. Even power users could to just about nothing with the info.
This is not true. I avoid apps that require unreasonable permissions. I don't expect regular users to know what is reasonable or not, but hiding this information would definitely make installation process less convenient for me. Then again, I no longer use Google Play store and I install very few apps anyway, so maybe I'm not exactly their target user.
you bet I'd never install a TODO app that needs to read my phone contacts in the past. It's not even possible to see if apps have in-app purchases anymore on Google Play.
It was only useless for you, I don't have time or KB to waste on my data plan.
I remember the situation where Google used to bundle permissions in illogical ways. it's been too long to remember specifics but it essentially meant an app had to request the ability to access unnecessary things and required the dev to explain in the release notes as to why.
Usually they weren't illogical but they were hard to understand for the user. Bluetooth scanning for example requires the location permission for example, which seems illogical until you find out that advertisers worked out they could put bluetooth beacons all over the place and track the users location by checking which beacons are in range.
So apps have to request all these scary permissions so they can do regular things. But there is really no alternative.
One example I remember is that music players used to require reading the phone status in order to be able to pause playback during a call. I think these days you can mostly get by using the audio focus APIs instead, but historically that wasn't the case.
I like having hair but recently noticed mine is thinning now, it kind of sucks but we made it into our 40s so I think we got pretty lucky because at our age nobody is ever going to really care if we have hair or not. It doesn't even really disadvantage us, especially compared to the changes other people have to endure like obesity, amputation, heart attacks, strokes etc.
The first issue is Apple's vision of privacy requires absolute trust in them and providing them with access to all your data so they can leverage whatever parts they decide is useful for their software.
The second issue is Apple facilitated the modern form of having no privacy - apps with discrete access to all our private data, tracking us in real time, using APIs Apple designed, using an approval process Apple cheaped out on, and they have profited immensely from this state of affairs.
The third issue is Apple is often at odds with consumers, there is an entire Wikipedia article about their litigation from when they fucked people who buy ebooks, tech workers they employed, parents who let their kids play iOS games, people who bought laptops with butterfly keyboards, developers they chose to compete with, they often do things contrary to our interests and rights.
Ugh. I really liked that "nutritional label" because the advance warning tells me upfront if the developer values my private data. I would prefer app stores be similar to health warnings on cigarette packets, because predatory data collection and billing practices are so entrenched.
> I would prefer app stores be similar to health warnings on cigarette packets, because predatory data collection and billing practices are so entrenched.
yes, exactly
but on the other hand (and just a guess) but likely "conversion rates" were lower with the labels.... so off they go
I have always loved this method of debugging because printing messages outputs a chronological summary spanning the entire execution, and only relevant information is included.
I'm looking forward to quitting the App Store once sideloading is allowed, once I can get my iPhone software from GitHub I won't go back to apps vacuuming up my data under Apple's oversight.
I like to use a library called Puppeteer which is an API for Chrome/Firefox, in conjunction with a testing library (mocha) to verify UI works as expected.
My UI tests start at a page, navigate to a target, try and fill out the form, verify error messages occur, successful submission occurs, resize to test responsiveness, dark mode etc. You can even have it type into Stripe element fields that are generated by their JS within iframes.
I really like the Noctua cards they're collaborating on, it's not really necessary to go water-cooled once you've got a 4ish slot card/heatsink with quiet 120mm fans!
Sure, but especially in a data center that’s a huge waste of density for compute. Only a single card in the space for four. Even less, really, because that card ideally has a gap for the non-blower cooler
Water cooling is just a way to transfer the heat to a larger heatsink somewhere else. It doesn't magically absorb the heat but just adds complexity and overhead. If there's a way to make a direct heatsink work, then that's the more convenient option every time.
For datacenters it would make more sense to make it all water cooled though, since you can likely have one central loop connected to an HVAC unit or something.
Water cooling is more than that. Heatpipes have much lower transfer rates than pipes with water flowing. Pound for pound you dissipate a lot more heat with water being pumped through the rad.
Ignoring that, putting the radiator anywhere other than the precious motherboard real estate has a lot of value. It's such a waste to hang a 10 pound piece of copper over all of those fast, unused PCIe lanes.
I think there are some cases with a daughterboard containing the GPU slot in a separate “heat compartment” from the rest of the case. The PCIe is extended over to that board so everything else should still be standard. It probably adds some small latency, though.
It also removes a big chunk of metal and fans taking up space on your motherboard, covering other slots. It adds complexity, not really sure what the "overhead" here is that you're referring to.
This sounds interesting, I popped the key cap off that button and also the print-screen button since I was amassing a sizable collection of accidental desktop screenshots!
Edit: It's not in the K2 manual but there is a shortcut, FN + L + lightbulb key that works to lock it -
