We still have eMail in place. If they don't want to spend money on an SMS they can send an eMail.
If browser notification permissions would have a TTL, I'd might considering it. But until this happens I won't allow anyone to send me browser notifications. And even then I'd be very picky.
Emails have essentially become notifications anyway. All my emails are things like "your booking has been confirmed", "your package has been shipped", "your invoice is ready for download", "a login from a new device happened", "your flight is delayed", etc.
> I would prefer to know about a delayed flight before I get to the airport.
Generally, the recommendation is that you get to the airport at least two hours before your flight departs. Ideally, you shouldn't be rushing to try to get your plane.
Granted, the world has changed since that was first a recommendation, but even in today's connected world, it's still a good idea to get there two hours before departure, in my experience.
> Generally, the recommendation is that you get to the airport at least two hours before your flight departs.
A lot of delays are known much earlier than that. For example if a flight gets seriously delayed taking off and the plane is going to turn round and return, then the return flight will be delayed.
In any case, once at the airport delays will be announced and shown on screens. Once you get there you do not need phone notifications.
What do you mean nothing else is universal? I can't book a flight without a phone number and an email address, and they usually send emails. My phone is set to do notifications when I get one of those. Why is this solution bad? Any network situation that causes both SMS and email to fail certainly isn't going to magically deliver a push notification from a browser.
Hopefully this doesn't mean the system can't report a non-OEM part being installed at all. Buying a used product that's been hacked apart would be frustrating.
There is no such restriction in the law. The relevant section reads like this, section 3:
> an original manufacturer may not use parts pairing to: ... Cause a digital electronic product to display misleading alerts or warnings about unidentified parts, which the owner cannot immediately dismiss.
So of course there can still be a notice, it just has to be dismissable. But Apple (the main company using part pairing against customers right now) has to stop making their products unusable when non-OEM parts are used for a repair.
Side note: Be aware that baseless concerns like this echo propaganda against Right to Repair. You might have been infected by some Apple follower talking points there.
> Side note: Be aware that baseless concerns like this echo propaganda against Right to Repair
Yup. When somebody insists you need "genuine OEM parts" insist in response that they specify what exactly it is you're getting. Most often "genuine" means the Chinese factory put these in a box that the OEM sold to you for $40 whereas the "not genuine" ones were from the same factory but they were $20, that's just worse value, not a superior product.
Once they tell you what the actual difference is - if there even is one - you can judge whether it's worth it. Your cable is 800Mbps and the cheap one is only 40Mbps? I want a charging cable, I don't move data over it, don't care. Your part is guaranteed for 3 years and the cheap one isn't? Now I'm interested, I never had one last more than 2 years so either you're buying me a replacement when that happens again or yours lasts longer, both are good outcomes.
The problem with non-genuine parts is that you don't know what they are.
Maybe it's literally the same cable from the same factory, but without the logo. Maybe it's the same cable from the same factory, but the Chinese company decided to skimp on materials and quality control on the off-brand ones, and it's going to burn your house down after a year. Maybe it's a competing factory trying to reverse-engineer the design, who figured out how to "optimize" it by removing an "unnecessary" part, which was actually engineered in as a crucial safety precaution. You never know.
You may even buy the same non-genuine part you've been buying for years, from the same seller, and suddenly go from an exact copy to the "competing factory" case.
That's what trademarks are for - pick a part from a manufacturer you trust. Of course the legal uncertainty around replacement parts has made it so no well-known brand makes them for anything but their own products, and the anti-consumer-rights propagandists use this to argue it is an intrinsic property of "non-genuine" parts, and we must be protected from making our own choices.
If what you're buying is specified you get significantly improved visibility on the concerns you described. When it's not specified you're in the same place as before - the factory making them for the Genuine OEM is also trying to shrink the BOM by removing unnecessary parts.
Also be aware that the in the case of a TPM and fingerprint sensor there are some very important security guarantees that a part must make in order to preserve the security of the system. So it is not in fact scare mongering to try to get this right in the law and commenting about the difficulty of getting this right is not being infected by Apple follower talking points.
The replacement parts have to work, otherwise they are not replacement parts. Neither fingerprint sensors nor TPM chips are magic. There is no difficulty here.
I think this is already covered by a different area of law: false or misleading advertising prevention.
If you buy a TPM that won’t codesign your MacBook’s bootloader (or that uses a compromised signing key) and it was advertised as an equivalent replacement to the OEM’s TPM, that advertising was false. This isn’t much different from buying a smaller hard drive for a computer: just because it works in the machine doesn’t mean it’s as big as the old one, and if it was advertised as 1TB and only stores 500GB, then the advertising is false.
It should be allowed for a system to warn about using a part that has not been certified to work in this type of situation. There is a middle ground where third party parts are allowed but they have to demonstrate that they meet a certain level of safety to not have a warning pop up.
> Side note: Be aware that baseless concerns like this echo propaganda against Right to Repair. You might have been infected by some Apple follower talking points there.
"How dare you be anything less than blindly enthusiastic about this obviously good thing, you've clearly been tricked by someone evil."
I mean … fair point, but Apple and other companies very much did spend immense amounts of money lobbying and scaremongering against right-to-repair legislation, so that’s worth drawing attention to.
> an original manufacturer may not use parts pairing to ... Reduce the functionality or performance of a digital electronic product
Dismissable would have to be defined, but when being annoying about it it should be possible to show that it reduces the functionality. It would be clearly against the spirit of the law, but sure, Apple already risked management jail time by ignoring court orders so they might try stuff here as well.
Sorry, I can't parse the multiple negatives of "hopefully this doesn't mean they can't.." followed by "there's no such restriction".
I legitimately share the parent's concern. In a related matter, insurance companies are allowed to force me to accept non-OEM parts when my car is repaired. It sucks that someone can crash into me, and force me into taking sub-standard parts.
If someone damages your property, they must pay for damages.
That doesn’t mean you’ll wind up with the same car you had before. The parts might be unobtainable. Or the car’s value may have depreciated enough to be less than the cost of repair.
It’s sucky that you are “forced” to acquire new parts or car, but that’s life. They will pay you the fair amount for damages, not necessarily restore exactly to the previous state.
Hm. There is no restriction in the law about showing the OEM status of parts in general was how I wanted my sentence to be understood. A permanent notice and limiting functionality is explicitly forbidden, but it follows that a dismissable notice (or something like a popup notice triggered in a settings menu) is allowed.
Yeah, this still seems problematic in the case of a device being sold and represented as original. Though I suppose this is always a risk we take buying used.
Not personally, no, though I am surprised to learn in this thread that it's apparently an issue.
I do know with cars, replacement parts sometimes have fitment issues that cause body shops hassles, driving up labor costs, and having replacement parts devalues a desirable car. (on the other hand, so does ANY bodywork, even with OE parts).
Yes. Insurance companies being able to force you to take a generic when you and your doctor know you need the name brand is frustrating. If you change insurance, you and your doctor must go toe-to-toe with the insurance to prove you need the name brand. And then you're forced to "trial" the generic again. Yes, there are legitimate cases of generics not working right for the person.
Old TV series should have closed captions available (which are apparently different from subtitles), however the question of where to obtain aside from VHS copies them might be difficult.
Many DVDs of old movies and TV shows may contain the closed captions, but they are not visible through HDMI. You have to connect your DVD player to your TV via the composite video analogue outputs.
Yes they need to be "burned in" to the picture to work with HDMI (he shows a couple of bluray players towards the end that do this. there's also some models mentioned in the comments)
Watching a movie and "recording it" with my brain is legal, and remembering scenes + dialogue is legal, but recording it with a camcorder and watching it whenever isn't.
When the artist gave you the work, it was under the pretense that you wouldn't train a robot to recreate those images. Humans are divine beings. Deal with it.
I can't help but notice that it doesn't matter what DeepCent does because OpenBrain will reach self awareness 6 months before them no matter what. Who needs a profitability plan when you're speedrunning the singularity.
If google maps told you a main road was closed, would your first instinct be to suspect that google maps is lying to you for the first time since you started using it? I'd sooner suspect a meteor landed on the road.
Especially as Thursday (the day this happened) is a public holiday in Germany, where bigger projects that require a complete closing of the highway (e.g. demolition of an old bridge) are often done to impact traffic as little as possible.
i don't use Google Maps for guidance. Google Maps was never built to do this. It was added as a "feature", but still does not work well, for the data it collects.
That was the solution employed in the ActionLabs video linked in another comment, but you'll note that their first attempt failed with that approach.
It's difficult to prevent any container that heavy from breaking open when hitting concrete at terminal velocity. I'd bet that the styrofoam block could be dropped from any height and survive landing on any surface, no matter how unyielding.
you're forgetting the corn maltodextrin in doritos, which is a kind of predigested food-derivative that this article is warning about. Your body turns it into glucose much more efficiently than just corn, and overdosing over a long period of time probably leads to health issues.
reply