Especially when the scuttlebutt is that they're not going to be doing anything more risque than PG-13. It's true that not every good TV show needs constant swearing and gore and T&A to be good, but artists need the freedom to push envelopes. Apple TV+ is likely going to be as bland and generic as a friday night broadcast TV lineup.
In fairness to Facebook (which is a phrase I never thought I'd type) Whatsapp's Signal-derived end-to-end encryption was implemented almost a year after Facebook bought it.
Of course, there's still the flaw of backups to Google Drive being unencrypted. But fortunately that's not the default setting.
Same phenomenon for me in southern Ontario. My ISP (Start.ca) is using Rogers' infrastructure. Evenings equal poor streaming video performance on all sites despite an otherwise-perfect connection. If I connect to a VPN, video performance mysteriously improves instantly.
If I were of a suspicious mind, I'd wonder if Rogers is pulling some backend shenanigans to discourage cord-cutting.
If Apple does adopt RCS, it's likely only as a fallback for iMessage, much like SMS today. And rather than Apple abandoning control over their messaging platform, I'd sooner bet on Apple releasing iMessage and Facetime for Android with a small subscription fee. Probably in the range of US$1-$2/month.
If there's one thing that Apple hates more than lost profits, it's handing over control of anything to carriers. Cheap-subscription iMessage/Facetime for Android would strangle RCS/Duo in the cradle and put a thumb in the eye of the carriers, while bringing in some steady and significant regular revenue. Let's not forget that Apple is already offering a subscription service on Android, Apple Music. They're not averse to the concept.
As a Canadian with a lot of iron rings in the family, it's always so weird to see the phrase "software engineer". It just doesn't feel like it's been earned.
I concur. As much as it pains me to realize I'd lose the comfort of the title if someone pushed it.
As a for instance; I'm a high friction actor in software implementations. I dig into the requirements, question the excessive ones, point out when implementations are starting to approach the macabre, and do my best to pressure companies away from being excessively intrusive in their data gathering or use of dark UX.
I've been asked more than once just who it is I think I'm working for informally, and warned at least once via indirect threat that I'm treading on thin ice.
While I'm not technically an Iron Ringer, I've always done my best to live up to the ideal in my practice. Without a PE for Software Engineering and the regulatory framework that comes with it though, for every one of practitioners like me who push to preserve the public's interest first, there are thousands pushing without a second thought to the consequences of what they are making.
Every risk management data corpus, every shortcut taken around regulations, every expedient hack can only have a protest lodged against it, and a suggestion of an alternate implementation given before the inevitable bouncing up and ignoring of the advisement.
In this type of environment, all one can do is puck their battles carefully until more steingent regulation gives one more leverage to bring to the table.
In my part of Europe I expect software engineers to specifically have a university level engineer diploma ("diploma engineer"), and non-engineering MSc computer science graduates to go with some other title.
Frankly that may be becoming a bit unreasonable expectation considering the international use of the title, that's what I just grew up with.
It hasn't. On the other hand, the gravitas of the "engineer" title has significantly eroded to business titles so much that "real engineers" are rarely seen with a seat at the table where power convenes. I don't know if this is just a local minima over the span of history, or the new normal. I hope it is the former, but I have reasons to suspect it will actually get worse.
The political power haloed around the "engineer" title, and thus the capacity to affect real, lasting change within organizations, is significantly less than the various equivalent-level management titles. It has eroded to the point that it is a notable anomaly when people remark, "the company is run by engineers". In some circles like some (not all) VC, they use that phrase to damn with faint praise.
As a fellow Canadian I avoid the title. What's wrong with software developer? I don't do engineering, from the perspective of a P.Eng. I've only worked with one P.Eng to my knowledge and he couldn't do software engineering either (he wasn't even a particularly good software developer). I've heard of people doing things that sound like real engineering wrt software, but I've never actually met anyone who did it. I don't really travel in those circles.
However, I've worked with a fair number of really good software developers, who I think have earned that title. An iron ring means nothing to me in the work that I do. I don't suppose that you meant to imply that it did, but there is often some weird idea that an engineer is better than a developer. I'm not sure where that idea came from.
True, I didn't mean to imply officially-sanctioned engineers are better than developers in all things, or that one can't be both, or that glacially slow and careful programming is the right approach in all circumstances. I just have issues with developers in companies with "move fast and break things" cultures calling what they do "engineering".
And even if one can afford Apple hardware, I'd bet on there being significant overlap between the "has keen interest in security" and "likes to fix own hardware" crowds. I could easily afford to have an all-Apple household. I don't, because I don't like Apple's attitude towards individuals fixing something rather than buying new.
As someone who dealt professionally with security issues from about 2000 onwards, many involving Flash 0-days, I have about as much fond remembrance of Flash as I do for polio or smallpox. I regard it as an infectious scourge that humanity has finally largely eradicated, and we're healthier for it.
As someone who used browsers in 2000 I have the same fond remembrance of JavaScript. Yet for some reason it still spreads like aids instead of following flash on its way out.
>Needless to say, never using a Google service again.
The only Google services I bother with are search, maps, youtube (in a non-logged-in viewing-only capacity, not a posting-my-own-videos capacity) and the android play store (paying for apps via gift cards). I don't trust google not to cancel new services on a metaphorical moment's notice, and I don't have any faith in reaching a human being if I have a billing problem. So I make sure not to tie my life in any way to my Google account.
It feels strange to say, as an old school Linux fanboy who vividly remembers the Halloween document release, but I tend to point "I want to move my business to the cloud" friends/acquaintances to Office 365 instead. Say what one will about Microsoft's scummy behaviour over the years, but no-one can claim they aren't into Office 365 for the long haul. And while it's not exactly easy to get a human being at Microsoft to fix a problem, it's certainly easier than Google.
>FastMail support is worse than Google and has fewer features.
Actually I use Fastmail, and am a big fan. I've never had an issue reaching support. Of course I've rarely had to, the service is pretty reliable.
As for features, I could flip that around on Gmail. Does Google rigidly adhere to imap/carddav/caldav standards so that standards-compliant clients have no problems whatsoever in connecting, or are there still cheerful little "quirks" when trying to use non-official clients with Gmail?
Agreed. I'm one of those oddball half-GenX/half-millennials, but I spend a lot of time around Gen Z's. (Not in a creepy way, I'm just the eldest cousin in a huge close extended family.) I think the way Gen Z handles tech is awesome. They're quick to apply skepticism, common sense, and a concern for privacy. I think us oldsters could learn a lot from them.
Especially when the scuttlebutt is that they're not going to be doing anything more risque than PG-13. It's true that not every good TV show needs constant swearing and gore and T&A to be good, but artists need the freedom to push envelopes. Apple TV+ is likely going to be as bland and generic as a friday night broadcast TV lineup.