Its fair not to trust Apple or any company, but Google and a lot of companies were scanning the cloud versions without the negative press Apple got. My understanding is Apple proposed scanning on-device because images were encrypted in the cloud. Uploading and have manual review process seems like a big ongoing cost.
Personally, I dont think Apple is doing anything with photos it stores in the cloud.
Like the first article says, technically they could, because they store the encryption key for user-convenience. Turning on Advanced Data Protection should take away their ability to decrypt photos. But there are a whole bunch of caveats if you're talking about all cloud their data and that has changed over the years.
> If you look at how Apple detects contraband imagery, they hash every image that gets uploaded into the photos app. Those hashes are transmitted to servers that compare them to hashes of known contraband.
You're spelling out a specific process in detail--which is the only reason I'm picking on details. Do you have anything documenting what you're describing?
From what I remember, Apple's system was proposed, but never shipped. They proposed hashing your photos locally and comparing them to a local database of known CSAM images. Only when there was was a match, they would transmit the photos for manual confirmation. This describes Apple's proposal [1].
I believe what did ship is an algorithm to detect novel nude imagery and gives some sort of warning for kids sending or receiving that data. None of that involves checks against Apple's server.
I do think other existing photo services will scan only photos you've uploaded to their cloud.
I'm happy to make corrections. To my knowledge, what you're describing hasn't been done so far.
I have no idea about Android, but my understanding is for wired CarPlay a GPS in the dash is optional and for wireless CarPlay its required. The thinking is you can use a larger, better placed antennae. If you're using wireless CarPlay you may have your phone hidden away.
Honestly, I tend to rely on the "brand" of where I'm getting the recipe. Ratings are only useful if you trust the site to have good ratings (either an active audience with similar taste or editors filtering and publishing with similar taste). I haven't seen it much, but I also worry about food safety for random recipes.
I always see this as a stated reason, but I'm skeptical unless it's cargo-culting like "no copyright intended" on YouTube videos (but this is a lot more work). I can't see Adam and Joanne [1] or Holly [2] suing for copyright because when someone stole their Frito Pie recipe and left off the story at top. Especially, when they both have Google-defined tags to grab only the recipe and ingredients. As others have mentioned, the bigger sites (Allrecipes, food network, NYTimes, binging with babish etc.) tend not do the story thing.
Do you have any other info on copyright as a reason?
I earnestly think it's motivation and there's this societal pressure that software "is too hard." Just like your mom can use the Facebook app just fine. I have trouble using it, I'm worried anything I type into a box will turn into a public post with notifications going into everyone's inbox, and I've also mostly avoided it for over a decade. My grandmother over a decade ago figured out how to buy a webcam, install it, and use the software when grand kids were born.
Ugg. I've seen that system used at other places and it's miserable. Devs had accounts but users and interns used a shared account. You get a vague ticket opened and they forgot to add their name. Also, would updates get blasted to everyone at the company? I'm pretty sure our's just turned them off for that account. So they don't get pinged when the ticket is resolved or needs feedback.
Maybe. Real time and production often has special needs general purpose tools don't cover. A lot of delivery codecs focus on things like lossy compression and buffering. I know from video production and computer graphics, delivery codecs are miserable to work with for reasons such as: not allowing arbitrary channels (if you only need 1 channel or maybe you need 5 for an alpha and bump map), playing in reverse, cutting in on arbitrary frames, different compression on each channel (lossy rgb, but lossless alpha), etc. My understanding is that Bink is often used for realtime playback of multiple elements integrated with the 3d environment (triggered explosions, HUD elements, streaming textures) so it needs to be performant, handle many simultaneously, and integrated with the engine since you'd be applying transforms and LUTs.
It'll be nice if there are great, free, off the shelf codecs and tools, but at least right now almost every current AAA game seems to use Bink.
Apple got over having a "camera bump" on their phones years ago. On laptops they have way more options--the most straightforward would be to put a matching notch in the bottom-case for when it closes.
Finally higher quality build-in cameras are being included in iMacs. I hope very soon they start making their way into their laptops.
I always saw it testing a business relationship with the cellular industry rather than any serious effort. The iPhone wasn't successful in a vacuum; Apple Stores, relationship to a carrier, deployment of iTunes all contributed to getting traction. I'm sure Rokr had more influence than Knowledge navigator did.
A bunch of people in this thread complain how integration has gotten way worse over the years. I'm pretty confident this is banks "fighting back" with 2-fa and other additional security measures--many seem to have the goal of locking out these kinds of services. A very few seem to be embracing it (they have a token system that have revokable read-only access).
Personally, I'm looking to move banks/credit cards towards services with better integration at the expense of other things like better returns.
It sounds like you aren't looking for budgeting and just want to see categories over time (which is mostly what I want and seems like a lot of people here). However, if you are interested in budgeting, one solution is what YNAB does. You can have an expense and carry it over between months. For example, if you have a utility that's due by-monthly you can budget half every month. Or if property taxes are due twice a year, do the same. For some reason a lot of budgeting tools fail miserably at this.
> The #1 thing that I need from Mint is 100% reliable integrations
So Mint does it's own integrations instead of using something like Yodlee or Plaid. For me, Mint has been way more rock solid than sites that use the others. All of them have gotten way worse over the years as banks have cranked up security and generally been hostile to APIs like this.
Personally, I'm looking to move my financial services in order to get better integrations (specifically faster ACH transfers and integrations like Mint). There's no reason a secure solution (that doesn't involve me giving Mint my credentials and allows read-only access) can't be widely adopted.
I've had a Mint account almost since launch. I've tried multiple times over the years to pick up YNAB. Last week I started taking another stab at it. The two aren't quite equivalent.
YNAB seems to pretty actively want you to "Fresh Start." One of the giant values for me with Mint is historical information. I often will dump a CSV or troll through old transactions since I can't remember which account was used. After not touching Mint for a year I could go through and touch up categories and answer if "eating out" was something I'm doing more of in Nov/Dec than January. Or I could skim through and mark deductions when filing taxes or looking for medical expenses.
My needs have changed a lot since I was clawing out of debt. I don't really see myself setting a budget, but more tracking categories to find outliers. I guess kind of like changing my diet instead of trying to make my next meal "healthy."
That said, I'd love to ditch Mint. There are so many ads garbaging up the interface. I never found their charts all that useful. Their offers seem to be whoever bought ad space this month instead of what would improve my financial situation. YNAB is way better at things like bi-montly bills that use income split up each month.
I think it's key you have 4 ports. I think the very small number of ports and requirement of dongles in order to get enough ports (and lack of USB-C hub) perpetuates USB.
If you have 1 or 2 USB-C ports odds are you'll need a dongle. Since the only USB-C dongles don't multiply ports, it'll have multiple USB ports. If you had a lot of USB-C ports, you'd likely get adapters and switch to USB-C as you upgraded things. Now, unless you can switch to wireless, you basically have to replace it with a USB device.
I've had all 3 gens of FitBit and never had hardware issues. My gripes have all been on software (refusing to integrate with Apple Health, I don't like the new "sleep score", and I don't want a "premium" monthly payment). I did upgrade when the previous ones were no longer functional, but I had used them constantly for a few years each time.
However, I used to leave the charger plugged in my bathroom because I would charge it when I showered. I noticed the charging posts got crud on them and got smaller over time until my FitBit would no longer charge. Eventually, I started unplugging it except for when I was charging and that fixed my issue.
I know this is a completely different class of device, but even though my FitBit can last a few days without recharge, the more important thing is that it can get a full day's charge while I'm in the shower.
A 24 or 36 hr battery that recharges during a 15m shower I imagine would work for most people.
This article is a few years old, but has more of a plain-English, third party explanation: https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/01/21/what-apple-surren...
Its fair not to trust Apple or any company, but Google and a lot of companies were scanning the cloud versions without the negative press Apple got. My understanding is Apple proposed scanning on-device because images were encrypted in the cloud. Uploading and have manual review process seems like a big ongoing cost.
Personally, I dont think Apple is doing anything with photos it stores in the cloud.
Like the first article says, technically they could, because they store the encryption key for user-convenience. Turning on Advanced Data Protection should take away their ability to decrypt photos. But there are a whole bunch of caveats if you're talking about all cloud their data and that has changed over the years.