Prior to 911, hijacked planes were not an unknown thing. I don’t know numbers, but remember periodic events in the news of x plane that was hijacked landing at y airport with local officials needing to meet hijacker demands for it to return to its flight.
Was weird when it happened, but we also didn’t have the hour of processing through security we do now.
I know people who work within their industry (health care) in a specific place that tends to be low paying. They could very easily switch (because people have tried recruiting them to do so because they worked with them previously and they know they're good) to a higher paying job with a lighter workload without moving but servicing a different group. But part of the appeal of the job is that they are working in support of this specific class of patients.
Dunno, I could see aspects other than money being a driver in someone sticking with something when a better opportunity or situation seems to be present with little effort.
Looks like the aim is that you’d use Bluetooth for those. I know that isn’t what everyone wants and there is that option for corded, but the mindset seems to be for wireless.
I’m not sure how many ports are needed, though I’m sure more couldn’t hurt. This seems less about expansion externally than doing so internally. My MBP with 4 USB-C ports has one that is power + hub (HengeDock Stone) with one of the USB-A ports on it chaining to a USB-A (powered) hub. One other port is used for eGPU and the other two are untouched. Works for me, but I can completely see where this Mac Pro could end up needing a hub attachment for a lot of people.
Not saying you guys are wrong, just saying where it seems you get blowback for what another vendor doing more or less the same thing wouldn’t even register as a talking point. Not saying it’s fair, but it seems people hold you to something of a righteous/ideological expectation that Google et al can’t meet so they don’t even complain of it there.
In my mind, considering the push you’re making, you’d validate that vanilla chromium meets the requirements to achieve said push. If it didn’t, it’d be a non-starter and you’d have went a different route (leveraging aspects of Firefox’s stack maybe if, again, it met requirements).
Not OP, but I'd imagine that it is Brave seems to be a browser that advocates for the user (and presumably in the future, publishers too with the pay thing). As such, the ideals seem more aligned with Firefox than Chrome (and by extension, Chromium).
Basically, you guys are in a weird space where your decisions aren't looked at purely from a technical lens, but also an ideological one.
I didn't take that as he wanted legislative representatives and the like to solve it, so much as to make it a matter of focus to enlist the kinds of people you're recommending to provide a solution like this.
Personally, I really feel we need a private/public-key kind of system in place for certain things like Social Security Numbers (SSNs) in the US. Such that if a leak also includes an SSN (essentially a public key), it could then be regenerated and some apparatus to manage filtering it to the parties it was assigned to prevent needing to redistribute it manually as a consumer/user (like using your Google, Facebook, or whatever OpenID as credentials for another site and it is stored in the account showing that it is being used as such). If they could automatically detect said public keys being exposed and automate the resetting and distribution process, even better (users should still be able to manually do it if they feel it is compromised though).
Prior to 911, hijacked planes were not an unknown thing. I don’t know numbers, but remember periodic events in the news of x plane that was hijacked landing at y airport with local officials needing to meet hijacker demands for it to return to its flight.
Was weird when it happened, but we also didn’t have the hour of processing through security we do now.