I think the chances of the kind of person who steals your wallet also being able to leverage pilfered two-factor authentication codes to hijack your accounts is almost zero.
It removes the bank from the equation. The point here being that you keep some of your funds in Bitcoin so that, in the event you have to deal with something like this, you can still find a means to get people paid.
Long-term, if everyone does larger transactions in Bitcoin (e.g., payroll, invoice payments, etc), then problems like this never occur.
A less charitable way to look at it is that they weren't taking things seriously before the incident, and they're still not taking things seriously now.
What the most appropriate way to view it is, I don't know. I think I'd need to know way more than I do about Crowdstrike leadership.
This wasn't their first serious blunder this year even, just the most damaging and visible. The nature of their mistakes seem to be exceedingly preventable too, with them failing at textbook SRE practices. Their CEO has now been at the helm of two different companies that have had similar problems under his leadership. The evidence keeps piling up and people want to keep making excuses for negligent behaviors. Why should we excuse facts for hypotheticals?
One of the things that's stopped me from doing something like this so far is that the benefits are intangible, difficult or impossible to measure, but the costs are obvious and often measured in dollars.
The reduction of the number of personally targeted ads that you see can be a tangible benefit, and it is something you can measure. Sure it is subjective if that matters to you in seeing fewer personally (over-)targeted ads and if it is a quality of life improvement that you wish to have. But if you already feel that every ad targeted too specifically to yourself is a bit of a papercut, a reduction in papercuts is certainly measurable and obvious.
Google has the worst customer service. If you have to use big vendors, find something else. I will use any services where I don't need to have an account with them. I have lost 15 years old gmail account, all digital services associated with it.
Was that a normal free account or paid? If it’s a free one, then I imagine all-bets-are-off and google can do whatever it wants?
I’m definitely not a huge fan from the privacy point of view and should degoogle at some point, but I’ve been using the google version with my own domain for ~13 years now (when it was free) and since a year ago have to pay for the Workplace edition, something like $10-15 a month.
What I understand is that at least if I’m paying for it, there’s a contractual agreement to not yolo-delete my account like in your example, and presumably there would be a way to reach some human in case of problems (unlike with free account).
Most open-source programs recommended as alternatives don't offer any customer support either. For non tech people the chance that they mess something up is pretty high, which a lot of people seem to forget. For them something like iCloud would be a way better alternative than "Immich".
iCloud is great. I ended up switching to iCloud. I could contact a person when there is an issue, and there are some common senses in Apple to solve problems, solutions are more well thought from customer's point of view. Google reminds me the time when all softwares display error code on screen, and menus were designed by programmers.
> If people are willing to spend more, then nothing really changed. If anything, goods and services were mispriced beforehand. If they raise the prices too high, nobody can afford the vet services and they will go out of business.
I don't agree with this theory or pricing when the purchase decisions are often made under duress, and the market is opaque. The last time I called around for quotes for getting my cat's teeth cleaned, nobody would give numbers over the phone, they all wanted me to come in for an exam first, and the next exam opening wasn't that week, it was in like 2 or 3 weeks. If a person is at the vet for something relatively urgent, they don't have much of a choice.
Are you sure you're washing the clothing sufficiently, and that the detergent is working? I dry all my clothes on an indoor drying rack that gets zero direct sunlight, including 100% cotton items. I don't have any problems with washed items still smelling. Is the water chlorinated? Admittedly it's usually not tropical-level humidity here most of the time.
In high humidity environments you need the sunlight to help dry the clothing quickly enough so that bacteria doesn't start to form in the cotton weave. Because even if it gets dry, the minute you begin to sweat wearing that item, it'll stink.
In low humidity your cotton clothing will dry quickly enough that this doesn't happen.
Some of my stuff can take quite a while to dry still though. Particularly if the drying rack is very full and it's cold in the apartment. For everything to fully dry sometimes takes 24 hours.
For the most part, this is on the passengers. Everybody wants to bring the largest hard sided rolling luggage that could possibly be a carry-on these days. Those things take up space in the overhead bins very inefficiently, and the planes weren't made with that amount of carry-on capacity per passenger.
But something I thought of the other day is that when they start gate checking bags, it means they sold too many tickets that include a full size carry-on, right? Counterpoint would be that the later boarding groups implicitly may have to gate check their bags, and that's why they're cheaper.
I'm pretty adamant that most people should use soft travel backpacks or duffel bags. The proliferation of hard sided rolling luggage as a carry-on is a scourge.
> Everybody wants to bring the largest hard sided rolling luggage that could possibly be a carry-on these days.
This was far, far less common before they started charging for checked bags. Once they made that an upsell opportunity, people started behaving in exactly the way airline policies encouraged.
The other big reason is the airlines choosing to ignore baggage theft. I had a bag stolen out of SFO and they tried to first disclaim responsibility and then offered to reimburse it at like $2/pound, which again means that they’re giving customers a financial incentive to carry everything into the cabin.
I don’t think this is on the passengers. If checking luggage in wasn’t an extra fee (often), didn’t carry a material risk to have your luggage lost, damaged, late, stolen, and didn’t mean spending an extra 30–60 minutes waiting to collect it then I’d bet a lot more people would check luggage in.
Part of the switch to gas mopeds was due to the fact that most of them were being ridden around completely illegally; without license, insurance, or plates. The barrier to entry there was artificially low because the NYPD didn't prioritize taking them off the street. I think they're starting to crack down now so maybe we'll see fewer mopeds.
I think your theory is people like to do whatever is most illegal, but that doesn't seem right. Mopeds must be preferred over e-bikes for some reason; e-bikes don't require a license, insurance, or plates. (I laugh because this theory appeals to me somewhat; e-bikes were super popular when they were illegal, then they were legalized, and now everyone's riding unregistered mopeds instead. But I think it's a change unrelated to the law; another comment mentions the transition from per-restaurant delivery crews to the apps requiring a larger radius, that seems most logical to me.)
I do hope that peak moped was some time in the past. I can look the other way about maybe not obeying every traffic control device when you're not burning any fossil fuels, but if you're just going to burn gas less efficiently than a car, I can't get too excited.
I think you misread or misinterpreted what I wrote. They don't have any specific attraction to committing crimes, but rather an aversion to spending time and effort to do things legally. Getting licensed and insured is expensive. It's much easier if you can ride without those things.
E-bikes were already in very wide use well into the food delivery app era. The explosion of mopeds in NYC was in the past 2 years.
I believe the reasons were three fold: they are more capable than e-bikes in range and speed, the bargain basement Chinese models are almost as cheap as e-bikes, and the police were not sufficiently enforcing any laws regarding them.
