I agree with your first point, but the latter two:

—GPS data that could be stored and extracted from the dealership and sold or given to the government, insurance companies, and law enforcement. —GPS data that could be sent in real time if the car has a cellular connection or hijacks the cellular connection in your phone when you connect it to the car.

Why do you think this is more likely to happen with this new regulation, when most modern cars already have a functioning GPS module for navigation and cellular connection for software updates?

No

Uhh... Germany would like to have a word

Most carriers do offer some uncapped plan, I think, but it's expensive and not the default

Not if the site is actually GDPR compliant they are not. You are only allowed to set tracking cookies after consent has been obtained, which cannot be assumed before the visitor has made a choice.

I understand it as an attempt to get very basic, manual syntax highlighting. If all you have is white text on black background, then I do see the value of making keywords easy to spot by putting them in all caps. And this probably made sense back when SQL was first developed, but it's 2023, any dev / data scientist not using a tool that gives you syntax highlighting seriously needs to get with the times

The described problem wasn't that the car didn't see the lines, it was the car steering into oncoming traffic when it couldn't see the lines. Lidar could potentially very well help with that, by giving the car a better model of the surroundings letting it better reconstruct the intended road path even when the lines are faded, and also see oncoming traffic better and avoid it.

No one can tell me Apple's curation is worth a 30% cut.

I mean, it obviously is, otherwise companies wouldn't be paying it. The difference is that in the case of the distribution platform, it's worth it not because it would add any value to the game itself, but because of the monopoly of the platform, which provides value to nobody but the platform.

The person formerly known as Anthony goes by Emily now, let's try and not use deadnames :)

Windows: "Time for updates! Stop everything you're doing and please wait...please wait...please wait...please wait..."

How am I hearing about this all the time, but it has never happened for me? Every windows update for me so far has always gone the same, unintrusive way - when it's time to shut down the PC in the evening, I notice there's an "Install Updates and Shutdown" option next to the normal "shutdown" option, which I use if I'm not in a terrible hurry right now. Takes a little longer to shut down, next boot will also take a little longer, but that's it. I've literally never had these unwelcome interruptions I hear so frequently about.

It's a way to verify that an app, or any package of data really, actually comes from the source you're expecting it to.

It's based on some clever math, but basically, an app developer has two very large numbers that share a certain mathematical relationship, but if you only know one of them, it's extremely hard to calculate the other one. One of those numbers (the private key) they keep securely to themselves, the other number (the public key) they publish permanently for everyone to see.

Now when the releases an app or an update to it, they put both the app and their private key into a special formula, which produces a new big number, called the "signature". Then, they publish both the app and the signature to the play store.

Now, when your app store sees an update of the app, it won't just blindly trust it, but first check that it's actually legit, so that it doesn't accidentally install a virus or something. To do that, it downloads the app and the signature, and puts them into another special function, together with the public key that was used to sign the version of the app that you currently have installed. Now the clever part is, because of the special mathematical relationship between the public key and the private key, this function can check whether the signature was in fact produced by combining the app with the private key of the developer, without actually having to know that private key. This way, it can now be sure that this app update is actually coming from the original developer - unless they have been compromised and their private key leaked.

So, technically, saying "it has the same signature" is not quite correct. The signature changes with every update. The thing that's the same and allows to install the update is the key being used to generate the signature.

This I very close to how (asymmetrically) encrypted messaging works, btw. If you have a key pair like above, you can encrypt a message with one of the keys in a way that it's only decryptable with the other one. This way you can have people send you encrypted messages without anyone else knowing the encryption key, not even the sender of the message.

This feels very close to the paradox of tolerance, honestly. To achieve maximum tolerance, you can not tolerate those who are intolerant themselves, or they will destroy you from within. I think something similar applies here. To achieve a maximally open system, be open by default, but only to those who actually share the goal to keep the system as open as possible, and defend vigorously against those who don't.

And that's precisely why so many people are calling for everyone to defederate immediately from anything facebook-owned. The only way to prevent this is to not even let them get started.