Yeah, and as densities have increased, fewer passes have been needed to even do that

With an HDD, your operating system can (mostly) directly access bits on the magnetic disks, so you can wipe them by just writing 0 to it over and over (historically, there was a paper saying 7 times would make any bits unrecoverable - this changed as density got higher)

With SSDs, your operating system has very little control over what bits a write is touching, a lot more was moved into the firmware on the flash memory itself

So SSDs need a special command “Secure Erase” to wipe them

If it increases in pressure every time, I’m now curious how many times you need to close the trunk to cut a finger off

The quote of “removing RISC-V from generic kernel images” makes a lot of sense

It only kind of works on arm64 right now, trying to add a whole new ISA seems rushed

If they make exceptions for customized kernels for other architectures for now, that seems fine

It’s been known for a long time that they cheat on benchmarks

https://www.anandtech.com/show/7384/state-of-cheating-in-android-benchmarks

They specifically detect benchmarking tools and run at a frequency they can’t maintain for the length of the benchmark

You are pointing out specific biases that we already know about. The article you posted seems to posit using the data to find the unknown biases we have as well

Maybe it’s a crude interpretation, but over controlling for all the the cause of a change, and removing outliers in your data that is training these AI models seem like similar issues when trying to actually understand the data

after you’ve controlled for all the things that cause the gender pay gap

Isn’t that a continuation of “why the outlier was culled”?

More emphasis on how the data set is selected (while hard) is very useful

I understand this is partially because I have the mindset of the programmer they’re referring to, but this sounds really interesting

Rather than looking to big data for solutions to hegemonically defined problems, what if we used it to find the catalysts of inequality themselves

…

What are the conditions in which the outlier is culled? What if we used AI to identify the pruning mechanism and dismantle it?

Using more in depth analysis of what gets pruned to understand why it’s being pruned is a very interesting concept to find marginalized groups

I don’t know how to fix those underlying problems, but identifying them and showing that data to leaders seems like a really good endeavor

I really don’t know how to feel about it

The people it’s intended to protect will just click “yes” to anything in my experience

I don’t have a statistical analysis of results over a normal distribution of the world population, though

Huh. That’s a weird restriction that definitely gives credence to their case

Are accessibility services only part of Google Play and not AOSP…?

Edit: FalseMyrmidon pointed out an article about the restriction below

https://www.androidpolice.com/android-13-blocks-accessibility-services-sideloaded-apps/

Which states it’s only for side loaded applications, not for applications downloaded through a separate app store, so this wouldn’t affect Epic

It’s also important to note that Google is only restricting sideloaded apps. If you use an alternative app distribution platform like F-Droid or the Amazon app store, you won’t run into the accessibility services restrictions

I must have had an extension at the time, but it sounds like F-Droid does automatic updates for anything Android 12+ now?

https://f-droid.org/de/2024/02/01/twif.html

I guess the nag screen can be scary, though. Good point

Any idea how this demand is different from the current state of Android?

Under Epic’s terms, any app downloaded from anywhere would operate identically to apps downloaded from Google Play, without Google imposing any unnecessary distribution fees.

Last time I used it, I downloaded all my apps through F-Droid, and I didn’t think they were paying Google anything?

And they’re allowed to start doing it again in 5 years

block third-party cookies within Incognito mode for five years

deleted by creator

Section 1, 1, 3, g, C says “This section does not: Apply to: A vehicle…”

So, probably not