You'd think so... GM has stated that they're doing away with CarPlay and Android auto in favour of their own thing, which will most likely suck on large ways.

Ford, on the other hand, came out and said that they lost that battle 10 years ago and are going to keep them.

Which rules out GM for me as an option for my next vehicle. Maybe they can make up the lost sales by data mining the rest of their customers.

I’m pretty sure when you hand in the paperwork for creating a car company, there’s a little pledge you have to take: I will make the crappiest possible OS to include in my car.

It is really bizarre that they insist on continuing to try. Just give us AUX in (stereo or usb). Cellphones can do it all now anyway. The car’s entertainment system should be about as complex as a pair of headphones.

Their own thing is Android Auto(motive) developed by Google.

GM is hardly a car brand that knows what consumers give a shit about, this is just enshitification to squeeze their remaining customers.

Their trucks still sell massively and the Blackwing Cadillacs are both on many 10-best lists.

Ok? That doesn't contradict anything I said.

> GM is hardly a car brand that knows what consumers give a shit about

> Their trucks still sell massively

If they didn't know what people wanted, they probably wouldn't be able to sell a massive amount of them.

Technically, yes you can. But do you really have the time to sit down to understand a piece of software enough to know if it's doing anything nefarious?

It only takes one obfuscated line of code buried somewhere deep where you wouldn't expect it.

True. But I think they have the means to do that on a lot of (non-russia-associated) repositories. They even probably wouldn't pick this one because it's under too much scrutiny.

The email thing is probably a privacy requirement. Email isn't encrypted meaning your email provider (and the EMR's) can fully read the contents of said email.

I think people want to waive that privacy concern. My email provider has access to tons of my private data including lots of health data. Given the option, I suspect many would prefer to just get an email.

In the US, that's a HIPAA violation, which opens the provider up to massive fines.

No, it's absolutely is not a HIPAA violation if the patient requests email communication. But it's a common myth.

A patient can consent to receive protected health information over email or other unsecured channels as long as they are informed of the risks and consent anyways. Patients are allowed to communicate about their own health to whoever they want to in whatever manner they want.

For example - the American Academy of Family Physicians has the following to say about it - https://www.aafp.org/pubs/fpm/blogs/inpractice/entry/hipaa_m...

Myth 3: HIPAA prohibits email communication with patients about clinical matters.

Fact: You can send protected health information by email, but you must implement safeguards under the security rule to ensure the information is secure, accessed only by authorized individuals, and not altered, edited, or deleted. The best way to do this is to encrypt your emails; however, patients have the right to request access to their own information via unencrypted email. You may send patient information by unencrypted email if you have advised the patient of the risks and the patient still prefers unencrypted email.

It's definitely not. As a patient, I can do whatever I want with my medical records. I can copy them right out of MyChart and put it on my blog if I want to. I feel like I should have the right to sign a form saying they can email me.

This agrees with you:

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/faq/570/does-hip...

Agreed, I often email results to my spouse so they can review as well. I don't think many health care systems permit spousal access to results (although I can see my young kids' data).

My comment was implied aspirationally. US legal issues may (or may not, see sibling comments) prevent a provider from sending health info via email. If it was/is allowed, I think many would like to opt in (but never the default).

As I understand HIPAA (I'm not a lawyer), the patient can send info to the provider via email. In fact, since my last comment I emailed a test result of mine to my doctor (in the US).

Outside the US, email is sometimes used. I've had a couple non-US doctors send me my health data via email. I don't know which foreign laws applied, but I assume they were permitted to do so.

Yes but it should be the consumer’s right to simply say they don’t care about the risks, and prefer the convenience.

As another father of a plane loving toddler, one of her favourite questions is "where's it going?". I'm wondering if some flight information is available and could be shown by selecting the plane.

As an adult who often wonders this, RadarBox's AR mode (available on the iPhone app) is perfect. You just point it in the general direction of the plane, tap on the flight number, and it will show you all the details.

Alternatively you can just look at the web version and guess which one you're seeing. https://www.radarbox.com/

It's faster for me than looking down to figure out where the numbers are on the top row

If you used the top row more often, you wouldn't need to look down...

This is why I bought a PHEV. Only one car, 90% of the time we're on electric, and I still have the gas engine for when I want to go far.

To be fair to your last paragraph, you're less annoyed at EVs than at new cars in general. All new cars are trending towards this, with a few stragglers for the models that haven't been refreshed in a while.

This is so true. Even an ICE car has those problems.

Apple doesn't patch every security hole in older iOS versions. I don't know what the criteria is, but my guess is if it's a major security hole, or an easily backported one, they'll do it, but if it's super minor or not backportable, they won't.

If I had to guess, I think it’s when they see a report that it’s been actively exploited.

It's all well and good to say "oh you can just install a custom ROM". But you (and many here) can do that. Because you're technically inclined. But the vast majority have users have no idea what the hell you're talking about. They barely know what a security update is or what version of Android they're using, let alone being able to find, choose, and install a ROM.

Can we just choose to stop suggesting it as a legitimate solution cause outside of this bubble, it absolutely is not.

people don't know how to install Windows either. In theory they could go to a shop to update their phone like their are doing with Windows but the reality is that nobody cares about updating their phone.

They're not charging you, the user that 30%. They're charging the developer. Yes that does trickle down to you in the developer's pricing, but, in this instance, a phone no longer receiving security updates is not an inferior product from the point of view of the transaction in question.