![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/8140dda6-9512-4297-ac17-d303638c90a6.png)
Zigbee or really any Bluetooth alternative.
Bluetooth is a poorly engineered protocol. It jumps around the spectrum while transmitting, which makes it difficult and power intensive for bluetooth receivers to track.
Zigbee or really any Bluetooth alternative.
Bluetooth is a poorly engineered protocol. It jumps around the spectrum while transmitting, which makes it difficult and power intensive for bluetooth receivers to track.
In summary, a bunch of 60 year old C developers with social deficits hijacking the conversation when he gives a talk or tries to get anything done. E.g. the link was people interrupting a QA session to complaining “I don’t want to learn Rust”.
The government had a warrant, read the article.
It’s just made confusing by the fact that the thief had signed into the victim’s phone, so it makes for a good clickbait story “police got the wrong guy’s data”
If by “when asked” you mean “given a search warrant with very clear evidence that this man had stolen a car”, then… Yes? I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove here.
The ex-boyfriend had signed into the guy’s phone. It’s not like the police just cast a wide net and randomly got his data.
Look I never said I disagree. My point to OP is just please don’t make up shit that straight up isn’t true. Pick a real issue, not some made up paranoia.
Re 1: People keep lumping Google with Amazon and Meta, but Google does not sell your private data and alerts you if it finds out the government to accessed your data. People keep assuming that because the general tech community sells data that Google does it too, but check their privacy policy or just ask anyone who’s worked there. They don’t.
User data at Google is locked up tighter than fort knox. That’s why the Snowden leak was such a huge deal, because the NSA was taking advantage of a security flaw that Google didn’t know it had to scrape user data. Google patched it immediately after they found out.
Amazon, Meta, and Uber, are much less scrupulous.
TIL there are like no women on lemmy
Because security through obscurity is not security at all.
I’ve been a big fan of monorepos because it leads to more consistent style and coding across the whole company. It makes the code more transparent so you can see what’s going on with the rest of the company, too, which helps reduce code islands and duplicated work. It enables me to build everything from source, which helps catch bugs that would only show up in prod due to version drift. It also means that I can do massive refactorings across the company without breaking anything.
That said, tooling is slowly improving for decentralized repos, so some of these may be doable on git now/soon.
Yes. The problem with cookies was that they could be used to track and identify you. If this can’t do that, then what’s the issue?
They just added a fee so that AWS can’t copy it without paying. What’s the big deal.
Regarding the cognitive dissonance required to A) value decentralization of power, and also B) support the CCP: 🤦
It’s simple: People who gain from misinformation create platforms that empower bots and sockpuppets.
Nit: One engineer at a company saying something is not the same as that whole company saying something. I wish they would just say “Google employee insists…”