I tried a similar scenario: The phone has a nfc reader built in, so I put the tag on the charger and tried letting the phone read it, but quickly discovered that android can’t/wont read nfc tags unless the phone is unlocked, which defeated the elegance of the solution. I hadn’t considered buying a standalone reader and attaching the tag to the phones, that sounds a lot more complicated.

Using an Automation APP like Tasker to turn off a Home Assistant-controlled smart plug when the battery exceeds a reprogramming threshold, might be a more reliable method & works for any device.

This is the method I have been using for years and it works great. I use Home Assistant to manage the automation, the Home Assistant client app for Android (you could use tasker for this) to collect the device telemetry to send to Home Assistant (how it knows when the battery hits 85% or drops below 70%).

I do want to point out there is one small downside to this method: your device charger (and I’m using an Anker wireless phone charging stand as my charger) only works for one device. Example, say my personal phone is charged up to 85%, so I take it off the charger, but my work-issued phone needs to be charged, but when I put my work phone on the charger nothing happens and it doesn’t charge because the charger is connected to a smart plug that’s turned off because my personal phone is charged up.

As much as I would LOVE to see them waste their money on this, we know they are all talk and no action and won’t actually contribute anything.

Not only did they NOT do a recall, they also did NOT execute any kind of customer outreach program to advise about the very real possibility of data loss. And then to just shit all over everyone, they put all the affected products on sale with deep discounts - presumably to sell them as fast as possible before the bad bress became more widely heard.

Are you just talking about dynamic DNS services for one or a few home servers?

There’s always DynDNS, but that’s a paid service. I actually discovered that dynamic IP address service was provided free by Google when using Google Domains as the registrar, so I moved a few of my private domains over to Google several years ago to save myself $55 a year.

Unfortunately, Google Domains is shutting down and all registrar services and existing customer domains are getting moved to squarespace and I’ve not yet been able to determine if squarespace is going to be offering the free dynamic DNS service or not.

Yeah, this was predicted by everyone, long in advance. The surprising thing here is how long they’ve managed to cling to life. I expected them to be deceased by now. I didn’t think they’d last another three years, let alone five.

In the US, copyright is implicit. All work is instantly protected by copyright the moment it is created. Registering with copyright office is optional/voluntary. I think the judge’s comments that you are referring to was probably referring to the works where copyright protections were waived by the artists for works placed into public domain (which, on Deviant Art, covers a vast amount).

My system significantly exceeds all the performance requirements for Win11, but it doesn’t have the Trusted Platform Module 2.0…and therefore cannot run Windows 11. It’s disappointing that my system can run circles around a lot of newer devices but can’t upgrade because it’s running on an older motherboard. It’s dumb that Microsoft made TPM 2.0 a deal-breaking requirement for Win11.

76 down, ten thousand more to go.

I have a designated-remote job, but I’m also in a role that’s periodically customer-facing. For accounting purposes, the time I spend working from home in my home office is considered ‘remote’ and my time on-site at customer premises is considered an off-site event. Not sure how they do it at Dropbox, but that gives you an idea of how the time categorization goes.

This article desperately needs video.

Here’s the official video from Adobe. Bump to 45s into the vid to see the dress in action:

https://youtu.be/EvGquKkSFMM?si=_yo33O7N6VhFxYQO

That’s the part of the point of the comment you are replying to. The fines are neither a deterrent nor an inconvenience to those wealthy enough to cover the cost. They use their money, power, and influence to continue to violate law without any other consequences other than pulling out their checkbook. The fines are meaningless to people that wealthy.

Anonymous tips are less than worthless.

The first problem is that anyone who is anonymously tipped on is just going to deny it. And now its the word of a named person vs an anonymous tip. That isn’t going to fly.

The next problem is that people will quickly learn to weaponize the anonymous tip process to persecute the people they dislike - regardless of whether the target was even involved in the vandalism.

Policies like these are dumb. They don’t discourage the bad behavior (the opposite, actually, perpetrators know that the damage they do will impact far more people, which is the entire point of doing it in the first place, so this policy actually works as an incentive to do more vandalism).

I think the entire message of my comment escaped you. Especially the beginning part, the middle part, and the end part. If you re-read what I wrote, the gist is that I’ve only ever seen one system in the US that does what people are wanting but I don’t think that’s what they had in mind…and then I follow up with a request for someone to point to a working model for how they are expecting it to work.

Your comment…is just an attack on my personal experience that I cited as a reference. It’s offensive. Your comment comes across as unnecessarily hostile. I am not sure if it’s because you didn’t understand what I was getting at, or if you just wanted to be intentionally argumentative.

No, you’re not paranoid. I’d call it diligent.

The premise of the statement you quoted is faulty to the core. A device internal to your home network knows a lot about the design of your home network and it knows a lot about the other devices on your network, and it can be used to facilitate/relay malicious access to your other devices if it becomes compromised.

Wyze has always struggled with security problems…and I’ll admit that I do have several wyze cameras…but long ago decided their security was not trustworthy and created an entirely new virtual lan to run just my IOT stuff from. That, at least, reduces the exposure for some of their security issues. I certainly would never have interior cameras built by wyze - that’s too risky even with robust network security on my side of it.

Let me install my own third party apps w/o the App store (I know altstore exists, but needing to renew apps every few days is super janky). If I spend my money on a device, I should be allowed to put whatever I want on it, however I want. Let me, the consumer accept the risks of doing so.

This is THE reason I switched from Apple to Android in 2017 and never looked back.

It would also affect already sold units. They are giving apple 2 weeks to come up with a software fix to remediate already sold units and if apple fails to comply, they will force apple to recall all the iPhone 12s still in use.

The article says:

The French agency that regulates radio frequencies, the ANFR, has notified Apple of its decision to ban iPhone 12 sales after tests showed the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) was above the allowed limit.

Followed by this quote:

The ANFR said it would verify that the iPhone 12 models were no longer being offered for sale in France starting today.

That sounds a lot like “banned” to me. Considering those two quotes, I don’t think the article title is misleading. It sounds like they are banning sales effective immediately, and will force apple to conduct a recall if they can’t retroactively fix the already sold units.

From the article:

The agency noted that tests measuring radiation absorption rates at a distance of 5cms (1.98 inches) showed that the iPhone 12 was in compliance with the limit of 2.0 watts per kilogram.

But it also says that:

The ANFR said accredited labs had measured absorption of electromagnetic energy by the body at 5.74 watts per kilogram during tests simulating when the phone was being held in the hand or kept in a pocket, writes France 24. That’s higher than the European standard absorption rate of 4.0 watts per kilogram.

That sounds like different test methodology was used for the test it is currently failing? There is a difference between “from 5 cm” vs “held in hand” or “kept in a pocket”.

It makes it sound like the iPhone 12 was in compliance earlier, but is not in compliance now with different test methodology.

It’s not per kilogram of the device. It’s a measure of absorption per kilogram of body mass of the person using the device.

A good way to think about it is: throw a small piece of meat into the microwave and let it absorb some microwaves. It gets warm. Now imagine a much larger piece of meat. It can absorb a lot more microwaves before it starts getting warm. The smaller the ‘body mass’, the less radiation it can absorb and dissipate before becoming damaged. So when it comes to mobile device radiation levels, they focus on the watts of radiation absorbed per kilogram of body mass.