That doesn’t seem to be true in practice.

People on the secondhand market seem to be (wrongly, IMO) more drawn to other “premium” brands and to features that are less important for a smartphone than security (e.g. camera zoom).

Most places I’ve looked, secondhand Pixels are priced similarly to or lower than other brands’ secondhand “flagship” phones of similar age - even though Pixels have a killer feature the others lack, i.e. the security hardware to run GrapheneOS.

I guess @Salvo might have been referring to the possibility of subverting “trusted” platform modules into treacherous ones.

I don’t judge but I do get annoyed…

Getting annoyed is a form of judgement.

… at US defaultism

Yes, U.S. defaultism is problematic.

Still, as long as companies, especially US-based ones like Google, are exporting their US-centric products & practices, people outside the US will be exposed to products & practices shaped by US law.

Because enforcement is rarely watertight, the above holds true even if the importing country’s laws forbid those products & practices.

Therefore, unless you wish to live in ignorance, it’s worth being aware of the laws that most strongly shape the technologies that in turn shape your society - even laws from jurisdictions outside your own.

Exactly how does it have implications in a country it’s not a law of?

Because it had, and continues to have, a significant bearing on the development of technologies that are used internationally, many of which shape the society you live in.

Not gonna dispute that.

However, someone like that not only probably wouldn’t want to submit residency evidence to Google, they probably wouldn’t have utility bills or land registry documents etc that could prove residency. Therefore, they’d be outside the scope of this post.

They might not know it.

But they would, if anyone with your name & address ever:

• Stored it on a Google server. (Maybe a business you once placed an order with uses GSuite?)
• Made a Google/GMail Contacts/Address-book entry with that info. (Maybe you invited a friend or colleague for dinner?)
• Made those details public (land registry, company officer registry, etc).
• Etc.

The clankers in the OP are from mainland China, so are ultimately under CCP control.

The CCP has indicated for decades it plans to invade Taiwan (CCP refers to this as “reunification”).

People should be concerned. Robots like these may be deployed against Taiwan in the next few years.

Is the word “Donut” kryptonite to Flock?

Why wouldn’t you be concerned about VM or container escapes?

Somewhat relevant: https://thebrainbin.org/m/[email protected]/t/1858588

It would probably be a better use of time for those people to vote and lobby their legislatures for decent privacy protections in law.

Yet another example of why US citizens would benefit from GDPR-equivalent privacy laws.

Where will you post updates?

“The iOS 26.6.1 update fixes three flaws in the iPhone Kernel and nearly 20 in WebKit.”

Sorry, I’m not sure how to bypass that. Maybe disable JavaScript or try Reading Mode?

It’s a good article. However, it has at least one massive oversight: the NYT should have included Trump’s promise to end the Russian invasion of #Ukraine “on day one”.

A chart showing the cumulative loss of life since then would be sobering indeed.

I wasn’t referring to their legal department, I was thinking of Greyball.

And things like this.

Because “they” (the alfalfa growers & livestock corps) care about short-term financial profit, not long-term environmental sustainability.

As a Keynesian, I’m in favour of gas pump attendants, while gas stations exist.

As an environmentalist, I’m in favour of phasing out fossil fuel.

As a human, I’m opposed to companies that engage in union-busting, labour casualisation, and surge pricing. AFAICT, all the robotaxi companies engage in those practices.