Sigh. I haven’t actually run a non-standard firmware for a while now, but I’m finding the mindset of a lot of these big companies exhausting, the relentless push for them to control every aspect of everything. Particularly when they’re charging huge amounts for the device and to my mind at least can’t claim they’ve somehow subsidised the hardware.

I was forced to bin my original C64, tape deck, disk drive, joysticks, a couple of printers (one was a daisy wheel lol), many many games and apps and my own projects etc. It still saddens me thinking about it.

These stories rub a bit of salt in the wound but it’s pretty cool that there’s still interest in them. They were a fantastic thing - easy to use for the basics, powerful enough that once you moved past those basics (and BASIC itself) it still had plenty to offer. And crucially, in a modern context, it’s not so advanced that it leaves nothing for you to do - you still need to figure things out for yourself, and there’s a lot of satisfaction in figuring out a hack to make it do something. So good.

I’m tempted to get one but that’s a rabbit hole I’m not sure I have the time for these days!

Came across this which I’ve not validated but does seem to make sense at a glance: Comparison of WLTP and CLTC

Based on that the WLTP range would be 828-900km (515-560 miles).

Real world, 6-700km at a guess?

Sadly many won’t care, but for those that do it removes one of the key differentiators. Plus it’s kind of hard to trust a company that has had such a wild change in values - Apple have at least been consistent.

Edit: I didn’t think it needed to be spelled out, but no I’m not suggesting Apple are trustworthy.

Gotcha, and apologies for missing your point.

I agree 100%, the privacy and security tradeoffs are enormous and concerning.

By all means call out if I’ve misunderstood, but the tracking vulnerability isn’t that BLE (by design) makes devices visible to everyone within range, it’s that by binding an unclaimed device to an account you gain the ability to look up that device via Google’s service, rather than needing to be nearby - you can simply ask Google to call on its global network to find “your” device. In other words, there’s nothing stopping me from setting an alert when a given BT device is nearby, that’s spot on, but I can’t fire up Google to look up that device when I’m not nearby, or look up its location history.

And yes needing to have never been connected to an Android device definitely reduces the victim pool, but (and to address the other reply) I’m guessing it’d mean devices that have only ever been connected to iOS, Linux, Windows etc aren’t “claimed” and can still be enrolled by the attacker. It’s not about default creds, only having used devices that don’t enrol with Google is enough, as it leaves the device available to claim.

3.5mm ftw and all that, but I doubt all the parents of teenagers with potentially vulnerable devices will have much luck convincing their kids to switch!

If you want to listen to their mic via bluetooth or whatever, yes. But there’s also this:

Some devices also support Google’s Find Hub network. This enables users to find their lost accessories using crowdsourced location reports from other Android devices. However, if an accessory has never been paired with an Android device, an attacker can add the accessory using their own Google account. This allows the attacker to track the user via the compromised accessory.

I’m guessing that would be if every muscle was being used for propulsion at any given time. You’d need to allow for heart and lungs, as well as face, neck, tail muscles that don’t contribute to power output, plus legs don’t provide continuous power as they need to make a return trip.

If we really wanted to optimise a dog for power:weight there are quite a few systems we could do away with. But it would likely result in a less floofy doggo, so it’s obviously not an option.

I bet Video Chess is pretty shit as an LLM too.

Wish people would stop desperately looking for ways to write buzzword stories

“It crashed!”

“Yes but it did it all by itself!”

Speculators/inside traders betting on (more) favourable rule changes or a fat govt supply contract perhaps

Srinivas believes that Perplexity’s browser users will be fine with such tracking because the ads should be more relevant to them.

Believes it, or is just spinning it that way?

You could show me an ad for exactly what I want in that moment and I’d immediately not want it any more.

Enough already.

It’s spam and probably malware. Just downvote, report, and move on

the pairing restriction would “undermine the security, safety, and privacy of Oregonians by forcing device manufacturers to allow the use of parts of unknown origin in consumer devices.”

If only there were options that would encourage the use of safe, genuine parts.