I’m confused. Are you upset the app is being removed? As in you don’t like webapps, you want them as apps?

James Cameron is genuinely a world expert on submersibles. He made The Abyss and Titanic because he loves the deep sea

He made Titanic solely as an excuse to go down to the Titanic and film the wreck. He didn’t even have an idea for the story when he pitched the movie

Then he became the first person to ever design and dive his own submersible to Chellenger Deep, and only the second ever submersible to reach that depth (after the US Navy’s Trieste)

The main issue with the Titan wasn’t as much the depth as it was cyclic loading

Good news, this video is not very optimistic

Either Kurzgesagt changed the title, or it’s A/B testing with multiple titles. When I watched the video yesterday, it had the same title as OP used

The odds of that are very near zero. They’re including things like brand names and logos as ads. The Lemmy logo itself would be considered an ad

They’re not getting numbers in the thousands by only including intrusive ads

What is being counted as an ad for these things? Is branding slapped on a product an ad? If a car with a company logo drives by my window, is that an ad?

I’m in a similar ad boat to you in that I actively removed most ads from my life. I work remotely and often go a full day without going to a commercial venue. I still see a lot of things that could be classed as ads

As a random example, I just looked at my key chain. My car key has a Ford logo. The key chain was a freebie from a now long-defunct car dealership with their logo. I have a light on it sold by Battery Junction and manufactured by Titanium, with both logos prominently displayed. One of my keys was cut by a local locksmith with their name engraved on it. This could be considered as exposing me to 5 separate ads just on my key chain

To get a figure in the thousands, they probably have a very inclusive definition of an ad. I’m sure we’re exposed to more ads than we realize

Disclaimer: The app is closed source, so all we can go off is the developer’s word, although the fact the government removed it is a strong indicator they don’t have access to data from the app

The developer stated they do not even retain any identifying data, so the only data the government could get is public anyway. Through Apple they’d be able to see who downloaded it, and likely when it was used. Your defense would be easy enough though: “I just wanted to make sure the libs weren’t harassing our fascist patriotic ICE agents near me”

Both iPhones and Android phones can be configured to your desired security level. Both are used by various government agencies around the world for their most important secrets. Neither are secure out of the box. You have to harden them to your desired level of security

Arguing whether Android or iOS is more secure is a bit like arguing whether an SUV or pickup is safer. It doesn’t matter which you pick when basic security steps are magnitudes more important: Wearing a safety belt, having a functioning air bag, driving a safe speed, not driving drunk, etc.

No sideloading and no unlocked bootloader means you can’t sideload malware or install malware-preloaded ROMs

It’s a simple configuration change to disable it and can be done with any corporate MDM system, making this a moot point. Not to mention too many people don’t understand security, so Android is taking away sideloading anyway, FoR sEcUriTY

No root also means you can’t just install malware that uses root access

The vast majority of Android phones do not come with root access. For both, you generally have to elevate access yourself

Long OS support means fewer people run around with iPhones that are 5 OS versions behind

If you’re running an out-of-date OS, clearly security is not a priority

There’s no tiny boutique iPhone manufacturers who sell phones that come pre-loaded with malware

Supply chain attacks absolutely can happen to iPhones as well. There are plenty of re-sellers

You missed the actual security benefit over iOS that Android cannot compete with: Apple controls the entire software chain from security patch to OTA update. This allows them to patch and release a fix for critical vulnerabilities far faster than any Android device possibly could. Apple does not need to get the approval of an OEM (such as Samsung), and, due to special deals, they do not need to get the approval of a carrier (like Verizon). Android devices typically need to get approvals from both before releasing updates (although Google flagship phones can bypass one, and can fast track the other)

The downside there is there are no checks on Apple. They could release a horribly vulnerable patch with no additional checks in-between

In terms of security alone, iPhones easily beat most Android phones

That’s not how security works in the modern tech landscape. No major OS is going to meet a high security standard out of the box. All of them have to be configured to the desired security level, then be added to ongoing security efforts. Every major OS can be secured to the highest security standards

The primary difference is how much effort each takes, but even then there isn’t much of a difference. You’ll find tooling and in-house expertise makes a much larger difference than the OS

The myth that some OS are inherently secure really needs to die off

Usually when people complain about DNS, they’re talking about stability issues. In this case I think he’s pointing out how centralized it is, and how a bad actor could cause significant issues

At a local level, the most common issue I know of is ISPs blocking sites at the DNS level by feeding in fake information that redirects you to one of the ISP’s blocked/parked domains. Usually implemented to prevent customers going to piracy sites. It’s not much of an issue to subvert currently, as you can simply use any public DNS provider

That being said, much of that has been consolidated into a dozen or so tech companies. In the current political climate, I could see a coordinated effort happening between those tech companies to block sites deemed non gratis. Obviously there’s still ways to subvert it, but the vast majority of user’s won’t be able to

Yes, but Oracle’s stock skyrocketed based on the unprofitable OpenAI promising to buy >100B worth of AI data center space from Oracle. Nvidia stock also surged on the news, since Oracle builds those data centers with Nvidia chips

Obviously OpenAI doesn’t have the money to pay Oracle themselves, so Nvidia has helpfully given them the money

So now we have an incredibly large cyclic corporate dependency of money from Nvidia -> OpenAI -> Oracle, then back to Nvidia. Definitely not a financial disaster waiting to happen

Why not? All the Fox and Facebook misinformation radicalized them once. Why couldn’t they change again?

While the idea behind AI was that it would automate manual tasks and help workers focus on more value-added activities, some workers fear it will outright replace them — and that’s already happening

Yeah, it already happened to the journalist that would have written this article. I find it a bit funny that the picture caption is just the prompt they used to generate it