The fact you think high tech silicon manufacturing, so complex to do that only few companies around the world can do it, is a high slave labor sector tell you everything you need to know about your thinking process.

Your definition of “scam” is not what other human being use. Causes unnecessary back and forth.

Green hydrogen is water electrolysis with solar power, not scam, it works, it is just a question of making it economically viable. Hyperloop is just stupid, but within the realm of possible. Cold fusion is the only scam here.

Cold fusion is a scam, not a bad idea. There is no scientific basis for that. Is as bad as “infinite energy engine”.

Ok, I am the hacker from France that compromise the golf in Florida. Now what? Do I start the engine to pre-condition the car from across the ocean? You know you cannot even drive with the app, just start the engine… There is no reason at all for going all the way and doing this. None.

So you have hackers mass compromising rooted android os around the world hoping for an overlap with Volkswagen users with the app, so that they can hack the app to unlock a car hopefully located near them instead of just opening the first car you find with a suction cup on the glass.

Ok, got it

So? What is the problem? It is not unsafe to start a car. Could you blame VW if the car started because of unsafe software on your phone? Is there really a risk of malicious actors targeting car apps to start random cars?

Why does my car needs to verify the integrity of my phone OS? Why does my car cares? It is not like my car is using my phone to make money transfer between banks or managing third party medical information no? Why do you need a safe OS to start the AC on my car?

You are just moving the goalpost. What I have said remain true, and I have never ever said you should choose a browser because of animation support (WebGPU is definitely not a small one, Multicol missing would break the entire website).

If there is any technical aspect (not moral, just technical) I am ignoring please feel free to share with the rest.

fixed that for you

CSS scroll drive animation (standard), Cross document view transitions (standard), CSS corner shape, Multicol Level 2 (standard), some of the Filesystem Access API, WebGPU on linux, PWA manifest install (standard), took 3 years to ship documentPictureInPicture.

Facts are facts. Web standard are implemented first in chromium, then in firefox after years.

what?

Chromium based browser have strict multiprocess isolation. This is not true for firefox. If a tab crashes chrome it does not crash the entire browser. This is only partially true for firefox

yes it is a known fact that google sites including youtube are engineered to be slower on firefox.

Yes, and if you check browser performance on a neutral benchmark like speedometer 3.1 chrome is still faster. Also this is a fact.

Chromium is an objectively slightly better browser on paper than Firefox. Firefox is a much better browser for your privacy, for open source development and the health of the web in general.

There are only chrome, Firefox and safari. All other browsers are derivative of the one above. Chrome is objectively the best from the technical prospective: better support for web technologies, more stable, and better performance. This is not the same as IE that was actually a bad browser.

You either choose a derivative of chrome with better interface and privacy default (vivaldi?), a derivative of Firefox if you care about open web (librewolf?) or a derivative of safari if you have macOS (orion?). But it is still one of those 3, and if google kill manifest v2 then manifest v2 is killed for all derivatives.

I know what I am talking about, but I cannot dissect the entire document in a comment. And even so it is worthless as it is not a technical document but something completely vague. Most of the stuff there is industry standard elevated (code signing, secure boot, memory safe languages, pointer authentication, encryption, stateless processing).

The document totally ignore the elephant in the room: the trust root is circular -> iphone verify attestation correctly. So Apple controls client, keys, logs and servers. This is only as safe as much as I trust Apple. Transparency log is run by Apple only, and nothing guarantee that my device log will be the same as the researchers (and with 90 days delay).

They actually admit to unmitigated memory remanence issues with the all “the address spaces are periodically recycled to limit the impact of any data that may have been unexpectedly retained in memory”

How does Apple does moderation if the claim of stateless processing is true?

There is more stuff for sure, but I got bored very fast looking at that document.

So Apple is saying: I will give Siri AI unrestricted access to user data and app because I trust my AI is good enough that it does not need a safety framework (permissions, visibility, accountability) to protect user data. But while Siri AI is safe (trust me bro), other AI provider are not so we will block them because the same unrestricted access we give Siri AI would cause issues. You see how delusional that sounds?

Reality, step by step, is:

1. Siri is trash
2. Please Google, give me an AI model that is good enough
3. Creating a safe environment for the model is hard, takes a lot of time, and the experience is bad for the user as security add too many blockers to the features
4. I can bypass all this complexity by just telling the AI not to do unsafe stuff
5. I cannot give third party access in this state, and I do not want to do it anyway as I like to keep total control like I do with App store. EU sucks

Just so you know, AdGuard Home exists, that is more or less the same as PiHole but uses less resources. I run it on my router (and I use the router firewall directly to force the DNS to AdGuard) with SSL certificates automatic renewal with certbot so that encryption is supported. I think you can ask an AI for help on your specific setup.

Correct, pihole alone cannot fix it. You can fix the issue of hardcoded DNS with a firewall translating requests to DNS into another DNS, but that also has issue with DNS over https. The only reliable way I saw for YouTube Ad block is either custom apps or browser level Adblock like Brave Shield (which Firefox is also integrating as it is open source)

I just see a wall of text with vague specifications. If giving third party the same access level Apple has make your data insecure that means by definition that Apple implementation is insecure. The rest is just marketing.

Siri AI has privileged access to all your private data and apps. The EU force Apple to give the same access Siri AI has to third party. Current Siri AI access is unsafe, therefore third party will be unsafe. Apple just need to design a safe environment for both Siri AI and third party. Apple is the politician saying: we do not need body cams, the government hired the policemen, and the policemen are on the side of the law.

This statement tells more about Apple than about EU. What DMA says is that third party API access must be on the same level as first party API access.

Apple would have to give any virtual assistant direct access to users’ private data — and the ability to directly control other installed applications

This simply means that Siri AI has direct access to users private data and the ability to directly control other installed applications.

the DMA requires Apple to give any AI system nearly unlimited access to a user’s device, as well as the ability to act on that access autonomously without a user’s ongoing visibility and control. That includes the ability to read and send messages, make purchases, access files, and execute actions across any app.

This is what Siri AI is doing.

The EU rejected Apple decision to not follow the law by giving Siri AI privileged access to users private data and apps while preventing others to do the same.

User that grant access to their private data to third party would blame Apple? Why? I blame Apple because they think they are better at deciding what to do with my data than me. Why is Apple AI more trustworthy with my data then Mistral AI? This is just anti-consumer monopoly enforcement disguised as care for the users. They do not care about the users, they care about controlling their ecosystem.

It is not a fork of Edge, it is just using the system webview, that for windows is actually the same as Edge.