I’d want non-isolating earbuds if I were listening to music biking or running.
But, I never listen to music doing either of these things.
Technically it’s illegal to bike with more than one earbud in regardless of isolation. I think it shouldn’t be legal to have any, of course with exceptions for people with hearing disabilities or other reasons.
Running I don’t do, so. whatev.
If it’s illegal to have non-isolating earbuds on biking, why isn’t it illegal to listen to the radio with high volume driving a car?
Honestly, I don’t own any truly isolating headphones. I just don’t have a use-case for them. My earbuds(which I’ve spoken about before) do a good enough job for me when it comes to day to day walking around type stuff, and the times where I really want isolating headphones, it really edges more towards ear protection than merely isolating - like my old but fancy earmuffs with the microphones and a direct line-in, which unfortunately broke recently.
At the moment, I’m wearing earbuds(tucked through my shirt) with some decent quality earmuffs over the top when I need isolation.
It is. There is a specific decibel limit. It’s just rarely enforced.
Of course, that decibel limit is mostly to punish car drivers, (mostly non-white people), for blasting music too loud and disturbing old white people with their sick beats. It is not at all about making drivers more aware by making sure they can hear.
Also, part of it is that driving a car you can’t hear what’s going on outside anyway because your enclosed steel box, with no windows open, blocks out external noises anyway. You can only really hear honking or loud engine noises anyway. Normal people aren’t blasting music loud enough to drown out a car horn.
Those are fair points. Last time I checked, Siri needs an internet connection to work though.
Sure. But it’s all about what Siri is connecting to. In the case of Apple, compared to Google and Amazon’s privacy record, I’ve not got any problems.
This is just pure shade throwing and I hesitate to do it lest I come off as hostile.
But how do we know it’s not sent off to apple’s servers?
They may be the giant tech company with the best reputation on these matters, but I feel like the giant tech company part is the most significant part of this sentence.
I’m pretty sure apple has never open sourced anything ever so we can’t know that way. Have some security researchers done some shenanigans to prove this isn’t getting saved in some Apple DC somewhere? Or are we just taking them at their word? That’s not a deal breaker, it’d probably just be nice to know that’s what we’re doing.
I rely on incentives and business models as much as what these companies say. Facebook can say time and time again they are doing a certain thing, but time and time again they apologize for doing the opposite. The biggest privacy issues Apple has had is more to do with “hackers” guess celebrities’ iCloud passwords.
This makes me want to wireshark my google home into Splunk…
Because I’m pretty sure they all do the same thing, local hot word detection, cloud actual detection for real speech.
They do, AFAIK. Apple has some expanded hot word detection and minimal functionality offline, but as much as possible, it shuffles everything off to the cloud. They did file a patent for offline recognition - truly moving the majority of work to the device - in November of last year, but as of right now, they don’t actually have it in their OS.
I started doing my searches in Kibana, since I already have that set up, I was able to get my router logging netflow into it… JESUS these things like to vomit mDNS
1 Like
Blech I hate elasticsearch. I find it so inelegant on the backend.
1 Like
I agree it’s a dumpster fire. But it’s the best free dumpster fire. So it wins.
1 Like
Pretty much, I set it up at work so people would stop asking me for logs. And for a while I was just so annoyed, but once I finished I passed my misery onto my coworkers who now couldn’t ask me about it.
1 Like
Well, you know what they say, Misery shared is not your fucking problem any more.
2 Likes
Leaving this here because it’s the thread where singular they was last discussed. Definitely worth reading the article on OED.
1 Like
Oh I actually have a question about singular they.
If you’re referring to someone as a singular they, is it ‘they are’ or ‘they is’? I can make the case for either. Is there a generally accepted convention?
I was actually tripped up by this in conversation recently and I think I went with are but I just wanna do whatever everyone else is doing.
“They are” most likely.
“They is” still parses as wrong for most people, and probably will for a long long time.
3 Likes