1) If it really was a bomb and went off, the pilot wouldn't be there to explain to the press anyway.
2) How likely would a bomb's name really be "BOMB" vs anything else? If the latter is any higher, wouldn't it be reasonable to always turn around whenever the any other name shows up? In that case, all Bluetooth devices should be strictly banned in the cabin. But TSA is not doing that (not yet).
Yesterday I found an app that I need to keep my bluetooth headphone from entering sleep mode. It is Sound Keeper: https://veg.by/en/projects/soundkeeper/. And it uses exactly the same approach talked in this article. For example, normally its filename is SoundKeeper64.exe. But if you rename it to SoundKeeper64AllOpenOnly.exe, it switches behavior to operate on "All" devices with the "OpenOnly" mode.
> At this time, 70% of the ad revenue is deposited into your in-situ wallet.
Brave needs to know when and which ad has been shown to the user, to deposit that ad's revenue right? That means whenever an ad is shown "locally", it still needs to contact Brave server with user's identity behind of some encryption. Brave then shows the proof of ads being presented to users to ad provider to get revenue.
Sure, the user's interests are studied locally (and inefficiently because it runs on user's computer), but the result feeds back to Brave. How does that improve privacy?
At some point, Brave may either leak the data accidentally or decide to sell the data, because the data, which capture each uniquely identifiable user's interests, is valuable.
2) How likely would a bomb's name really be "BOMB" vs anything else? If the latter is any higher, wouldn't it be reasonable to always turn around whenever the any other name shows up? In that case, all Bluetooth devices should be strictly banned in the cabin. But TSA is not doing that (not yet).