It's not apparent that this apple mdm will do internal distribution or just provide for encouraging a set of installed apps already on the app store. If it does, that would be the biggest reason for me to jump to the free product.
A simple question with a simple answer: as it has done since the inception.
If a kid wants to sneak some porn, he's going to have to hide his digital nudeymag under his digital mattress, and when it's discovered, he'll have to accept his fate as decided by his parents.
This is better framed as something like "know your actor." The goal is to have everything attributable to a natural person. Nobody wants that, though, so we have say that porn isn't for kids. (Now, there's a lot of disagreement about that, but that's another matter.)
That's correct, but what does a driver license have to do with it? A state-issued driver license is one document that can serve as identification. There are plenty of others, including those that are solely for identification. Are you unintentionally conflating them, or are you suggesting that there a eligible people who are unable to get an identity document?
When I hear this argument ("better the government do it than a private company") I recoil. The government is sovereign, only accepts lawsuits at its discretion, and can use violence to get its way. We also know for a fact that it abuses its powers and conducts surreptitious unlawful campaigns against its citizens.
I'm not on board with any of it, but the last thing I want is the government to control it.
The government is also, at least theoretically, democratic and accountable to the population.
Meta on the other hand is a dictatorship run by Zuck that's only marginally accountable to stockholders (which are only a small subset of the population).
You know meta keeps a shadow profile on every person who is know to every one of their customers, right? So even if you don't use it, they almost certainly have you in their system.
At least when the government is working, there are controls around what they can collect, what they can do with it, and who they share it with. And what they cannot do with it.
When the government is working as intended, and have not abdicated their duties to the people, the government at least has controls over what they can and cannot do. Yes, they have a monopoly on violence, but they also in theory have lots of controls.
For example, the government cannot silence your speech, but a private company can. The government cannot share your data with others, a private company can.
Unfortunately the government has abdicated their duties and so you think they are worse than a private company.
I get all of these hypotheticals, but, again, we know that it's not true. The government routinely collects and shares information that it shouldn't. We can't talk about it like it doesn't because it was designed not to. We have to contend with reality.
I don't understand the fascination with pretending. System A is bad. System B is worse. System B theoretically shouldn't exist yet it does and there's nothing you can do about it, so now you're advocating for B. What's the rationale?
I think we already laid out our argument too. A private company can do whatever they want with your data. They can sell it, exploit it, and block you from accessing it.
The government can do none of those things. They can't deplatform you. They can't exploit your data or sell it. They can't block you from it.
At least by design.
By design, having the government responsible for verifying your identity is far superior than having private companies do it, because by design they have to be truthful and forthcoming.
The flaw is that the system is failing and so right now the private system and government system are equally bad.
I agree with everything you said when considering your caveat that the government needs to act lawfully and in good faith. I also appreciate that you have probably dealt directly with similar matters. Since the government has demonstrated that it won't comply, though, I am unwilling to go in that direction, and I guess in that way we see it differently.
We might just not have the same government. I'm not American and to me this isn't a failure of government as a concept, but your government as an implementation, if that makes sense.
For recording instantaneous events, that's usually sufficient. It's often not enough for scheduling. You can always present UTC or any other zone relative to some other zone, but you need to know that zone. Maybe you're going to a conference in another region and you want to know the time of a talk in that zone because that's more important than your zone. You either need to couple the zone with the time itself, or you need to refer to it. There are good reasons either way. Having an atomic time+zone type is basically trading space for time. When its embedded, you can just use it, which can be better than assuming UTC and then looking up the zone based on, say, the location of the venue.
From his Oxford bio: "To assist in efficient look-up of words in a dictionary, he discovered the well-known sorting algorithm Quicksort."
I always liked this presentation. I think it's equally fine to say "invented" something, but I think this fits into his ethos (from what I understand of him.) There are natural phenomena, and it just takes noticing.
Children and young students, certainly. Adult students: almost 100%. If writing is your job, then by definition, and your problem is more often finding something to say, not writing it.
You’re not counting all the office workers who have to write reports or emails, or all the scammers who write those websites to manipulate SEO or show you ads.
Everyone should think twice about putting their name on AI garbage, or garbage of any kind. But wishing doesn’t stop it from happening, especially when companies are explicitly selling you on doing just that. Remember the Apple Intelligence office ads?
reply