51·
10 days agoThey’re trashing our rights! Trashing!
- 0 Posts
- 55 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: July 14th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
Headline makes it sound like the senators previously urged the FTC but were ignored.
Two things:
1: The “urging” mentioned took place today.
2:
In March, the F.T.C., which is responsible for policing unfair and deceptive business practices, solicited reports from consumers about the issue, but an agency spokeswoman said she couldn’t comment on whether the agency is investigating.
I appreciate the notion, but I fear it would probably just result in management saying “just NERD HARDER”. The flip side of being more careful and focused is being less flexible. Not gonna replace that ancient foundational framework that was deprecated in 2015 if it risks legal liability.
Having been in this position, I’m sure having two apps is hell for them and increasingly complicated the more the features and back-end services overlap. And there would probably have been drastically more overlap between v2 and v3 than v1 and v2.
Ultimately, you just wanna be on one codebase.
I’m not saying this is a good or okay move by Sonos as a company to their consumers. But the die was cast when the product roadmap was established, and the short-sighted technical solutions people are throwing out in the comments are far worse options for the company (and consumers, in the long run) than just accepting the current problem and moving on.
(Photo of IoT dev living in your proposed world, colorized 2024)
It’s not that simple. They sold new hardware that claimed app support, and the app support was only in the new codebase.
This is what happens when a digital rewrite is on the critical path of a physical product.
Physical product development is a behemoth. Manufacturing, certification, marketing, shipping, warehousing, contracts with retailers, etc. all add up to mean that, past a certain point in the project, the product is gonna launch whether the digital side is ready or not.
If the C-level/VP-level folks aren’t willing to tailor the product roadmap to allow for a safe rewrite effort, you’re pretty much guaranteed this outcome.
(Options are either keep the new product on the back burner until after the rewrite settles, or launch the product without IoT support at first. But you gotta plan for these up-front so you don’t mess up your product’s legal claims.)
Yeah, for sure that’s the primary allusion. But the fact that there’s a secondary meaning which is explicitly religious and moral is… more than a little awkward.
Nimbus
Wow, really? Making saintly allusions towards any government is fraught, but especially this one.
Tech companies are committed to turning satire into reality.
Well, I gotta ask then… How do you feel about HP’s printer business model? The fact that you can only use it with HP-approved ink, in HP-approved ways. Do you think that’s a fair business model which will stand or fall on its own merits, or an abusive one that prevents consumers from using their own stuff the way they want to? Should it be legal?
By the way, not calling you out specifically. Just seems to be a common theme in the comments, and a regularly-occurring sentiment.
I’m not down with the perpetual victim-blaming against X/Twitter users here on Lemmy.
Sources like campaigns, news outlets, authors, studios, engineers, actors, comedians, etc. post on there because they basically have to – if they want to get the word out, that is.
Consumers go there to read from the sources because they basically have to. While each source may have their own separate blog or whatever, X/Twitter is pretty much the only place that unifies those feeds. (I know, I miss the heyday of RSS too.)
Expecting people to just “take the hit” and go dark on their communications so we can build up alternatives to X/Twitter is not an acceptable recommendation.
What we need to do is:
- Make it illegal to block third-party clients from interoperating with services
- Compel providers of a certain size to expose a first-party API
- Make it legal to reverse-engineer APIs so they can’t just make the first-party API suck and call it a day
- Then we integrate X/Twitter into the fediverse, so you can start using something else and still keep your X/Twitter stuff
And the EFF has a primer on Section 230, and several opinion pieces about why nerfing 230 would be a terrible idea:
Generative AI is good at low-stakes, fault-tolerant use cases. Unfortunately, those don’t pay very well. So the companies have to pretend it does well at everything else, too, and that any “mistakes” will be quickly cleaned up and will become a thing of the past very very soon.
31·23 days agoI suddenly realized that for eight years I’d been ignoring this potentially amazing new process, 4,000 metres down on the ocean floor
Makes you wonder what strange things are happening right in front of us, if only we looked with the right tools.
24·24 days agoPerfecting his argument.
50·28 days agoMicrosoft sues the Library of Babel
They did issue a fix: “Buy a new CPU please!”
That’s why they don’t mind the reputation hit. If 1 person swears allegiance to Intel as a result but 2 people buy new AMD chips, they’re still ahead. And people will forget eventually. But AMD won’t forget the Q3 2024 sales figures.