Because today is the day that I read the blog post.
I agree with you that Apple taking action on the account is not wholly unreasonable. What I found shocking was the inability to contact someone who could resolve the situation. I know this is a common issue with Google, but had expected Apple to be different.
> What I found shocking was the inability to contact someone who could resolve the situation.
But they did. The first person was unfamiliar with the issue, likely because the Apple Card program was relatively new at the time. They opened a case to escalate.
Apple’s phone support has been relatively good in my experience. I expect they’d have this situation more integrated into first-line support in 2025 than they did when the program was new.
Identity services from the large companies are very convenient, but the citizens of Google, or Apple, or Microsoft are largely faceless and rightless citizens of a corporation with no ability to contact anyone for anything.
The story and lesson is simple is to tie as little as possible to identity systems using a domain you don't own.
This isn't a statement of expecting perfection from any group, just the opposite, of knowing that things can happen unexpectedly, where is the middle ground in a relationship that impacts the user more than the company if the ID is lost.
Reading the paper, it looks like they just demonstrate classification by left loop/right loop/whorl. That's a long way from recreating a full fingerprint.
I feel like someday we’ll be able to parse the electromagnetic waves that emit from our brain as a result of our basic internal thoughts. That is, it should be theoretically possible to read minds at a distance.
They are pretty similar. When you look at things like privacy and security in light of human actions and behaviors, then look at our ability to record the entropy from those actions, a whole lot of what we thought was private can be divined by those that can collect enough of this waste.
>Extensive experimental results in real-world scenarios demonstrate that
Printlistener can attack up to 26.5% of partial fingerprints
and 9.3% of complete fingerprints within five attempts at the
highest security FAR setting of 0.01%
As well as using extremely stale sources, the Wikipedia article fails to separate airlines from other forms of civil aviation.
US airlines have a fatal crash rate very close to zero. 'General aviation', which roughly means private light aircraft, is a very different world and has roughly 1 fatal crash per 100,000 hours flown, making it less safe than driving. Chartered flights are somewhere in the middle.
There's not much sense looking at the overall figure for aviation; the different categories really are very different.
It looks like this is still missing many matrix operations like QR, SVD, einsum, etc. Is there a clear route to using these on the GPU in Python on Apple Silicon? Last I checked the PyTorch backend was still missing at least QR...
factorization methods are somewhat uncommonly used in deep learning (the likely target of this framework) and have compute properties (such as approximate outputs, non-deterministic number of iterations) that make them unlike the BLAS++ standard APIs.
einsum seems like a reasonable thing to request, but it's hard to be performant across the entire surface exposed by the operation.
Exactly right that this targets a narrower surface to enable many deep learning models. I wonder how uncommon it is to hit some operation that is not included, though? It seems pretty common from a PyTorch MPS tracking issue:
NVIDIA's moat is not just in providing BLAS++ operations, but extending this to a wider range of cuSPARSE, cuSOLVE, cuTENSOR, etc. Without these, it feels like Apple is just trying to play catch up with whatever is popular and unsupported...
Historically, Apple didn't have cursor customization built into the OS-- cursor color customization was new in Monterey (macOS 12) and cursor size customization is only a few releases older (I can't find exactly when it was added). Classic Mac OS didn't do it, either, AFAIK (although I'm sure there were third-party options).
Windows (as of 11) still has the same custom cursor capabilities it's had since Windows 95, plus some bits (it can generate cursors with custom colors on the fly now). Applying custom cursors is pretty easy, and the 95-era properties sheet is still readily accessible (besides cursor schemes, there are other options there that haven't migrated to the modern Settings app).
You can also do like me and just make your cursor gigantic. I keep it at about 75% of max size. My co-workers may make fun of me but using huge text and a giant cursor has actually caused my eyesight to improve in the last 2 years or so. n=1 so entirely anecdotally of course. :)
I don't know if they've fixed this, but it used to be that the pointer target was inside the black border, not at the actual tip of the pointer. That's not really a problem if the pointer is at the default tiny size, but when you make it bigger suddenly everything you point at is offset by the thickness of the border, which makes it borderline unusable.
Eugenics: the study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable.
I'm out of variations but if you make a claim post a source. The previous commenter has been downvoted for (rightfully) asking for evidence to accompany its claims, you double down on providing no evidence and making even larger claims.
I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but if you make a claim and don't provide evidence you have presented a non-argument.
I think its self evident why that is a poor approach to understanding anything other than your own opinion so I wont bother explaining why to you, I don't think you'd care.
Why should anyone believe you won't pass that email, along with the address of the sender, to people with nefarious intent? Good faith would be to do a simple web search, or reflect on events in society for the past year and a half, that would give you at least some sense of the answer. No need for anyone to risk being on the incorrect side of the same mob that came for anyone who dared speak of the lab leak theory. Google, Bing, Yandex, and others are ready for your query.
This is a peer-reviewed paper, but I also have trouble calling it a study. The underlying article makes a philosophical argument but is not a typical research study (which I take to mean the collection of original empirical observations).
Super important to note that this is vaccine effectiveness against infection. It does not address the effectiveness of vaccines to prevent hospitalization or death.
Protection from infection is sort of like cleaning up a spill on your doorstep. Curing an active infection is more like cleaning up after someone deliberately blew dirt throughout your whole house, and hid some extra in nooks and crannies.
I agree with you that Apple taking action on the account is not wholly unreasonable. What I found shocking was the inability to contact someone who could resolve the situation. I know this is a common issue with Google, but had expected Apple to be different.