The point is that it’s a loophole in privacy laws so they don’t have to outright tell people that they collect personal or identifying information. So they can legally mislead people by claiming it’s anonymous telemetry in hopes that users don’t actually look into it or understand the implications.

Ad firm money.

Maybe I’m just cynical, but my first instinct when I see stuff like this is they have a secret contract with an advertiser and are selling this information.

Like if you’re going to use Arch btw, go all the way and use actual Arch.

Those are absolutely ways of covertly identifying your device while technically not counting as “personal information” under privacy laws.

It’s not fucking over Microsoft, it’s prevent Microsoft from fucking us over. Microsoft is not the victim in this.

Trusting your security to Google is literally like trusting a fox to guard your hen house.

This video from a security researcher says that pretty much every software that uses WebP was affected though, and once the issue was discovered, Google made commits in their own codebase to “fix” it. Which suggests it’s an issue with the upstream source code that Google provided to everyone else.

All I’m getting from this picture is that the biggest danger to scooter riders is in fact cars.

Also in this thread: Identifying the need to restructure the current standard before car usage can be realistically reduced by large amounts.

The best way to reduce car use is to create an environment where driving isn’t the default (or only) way to get around. Induced demand works in reverse too.

or do people in reality have cars and need to park them somewher

1. Why not let the business decide how much parking to have then? Surely they know the needs of their customer base better than the city. Even as an anti-capitalist anti-free-market socialist, parking minimums seem like an extreme government overreach. You can still have parking without mandating a parking minimum.

2. Why are you working with the base assumption that people have to drive? If you can’t park somewhere, maybe that place should be set up with good alternatives so people don’t have to drive there in the first place, i.e. good sidewalks, protected bike lanes, frequent public transit. Humans are surprisingly space efficient when they’re not in huge metal cages.

Not everyone who can’t really walk much qualify for handicapped status. The majority don’t. The elderly as just one example.

Additionally, on-street parking gets you even closer to where you want to go. In fact, if more people who can walk did walk, it would make it even easier for people who can’t who won’t have as much competition for good parking spots.

Move to the country if you want to drive everywhere then. Leave cities for people who actually value the density they’re supposed to provide.

And I love how cute it is that you think GM, Ford, Tesla, etc aren’t lobbying for parking minimums.

Also, auto companies have never tried to manipulate a country’s government, no they would never.

And they’re walking in car infrastructure. Some of the most unpleasant, not made for humans places, not to mention dangerous. Compared to walking in what a city should feel like.

Actually you’re right. Didn’t see that at first.

Do you see the people walking in the top left picture?

That’s what access to the public looks like.

Counterpoint: HSR is far more energy efficient than air travel, which would otherwise be the preferred option because regular trains are just not fast enough for country as big as China. Even when the electricity is generated from coal, the simple physics of not needing to literally defy gravity significantly reduces the carbon footprint of the trip.

To paraphrase Alan Fisher, electric cars fail to solve the biggest problem with cars: The fact that they’re still cars.

Can’t wait to have Google’s telemetry injected into my Linux apps

Hot take: Japan invented the bullet train, but China perfected it.