Phones encrypt the data by default, your password or pin is also needed to authorise the connection with a computer.

However, many people do insecure things like storing passwords etc in Notes applications, or having simple PINs that are easy to guess, don’t update their devices, or even turning off security features (if they can) because they won’t take a small amount of time to understand them.

The point is that calling the computer storage less is what’s wrong.

I can see two issues here:

It’s not really a storageless computer. It’s using EFI as storage to build the ramdisk.

What happens if you need to change things because of a change of cloud account, change of cloud API etc etc

Yes, that’s exactly the point. Combining data is something that must be considered. (And in some jurisdictions like the EU you even need to consider if it could be combined in future with other data)

Not sure I agree entirely. The actions I take are definitely data about me.

Also, in many jurisdictions data that could be combined (even in the future) with other data to identify you or something about you, is considered personal data.

For example, Device ID is AstridWipenaugh’s device and they use the app in the morning.

I think you’ve missed the point. It’s not the data they are collecting but the fact they say they don’t collect data.

This story has been popping up every few months for about the last decade. Usually prompted by someone with something to promote (a dumb phone, a book about downtime, some course )

I’m not sure why you’ve been downvoted. You are completely correct. There is a trail of partially finished projects. Pixelfed itself is in beta after years and years (and competitors seizing the opportunity with more polished products) , there’s SUP, Loops and that fedi directory to name three more.

That’s not right Matrix was never going to become Element.

Be careful with this as monitors are usually a different aspect ratio to a TV so a you may get a distorted/cropped picture or black bars (depending what you connect to it) which will be noticeable at larger sizes.

I don’t remember the last time I used a phone book. There have been better ways to get a number for a long time.

Think it must be at least 30years ago.

Don’t mean this rudely, struggling to find a way that doesn’t sound condescending because I know things can be different in different regions. Didn’t realise that still happened.

In my experience all of this has been done wirelessly for several years.

The risk of malware means you aren’t allowed to plug in sticks. For business use you share a document or wirelessly connect to a display.

In fact our local library didn’t USB sticks eight years ago when I was researching our family tree.

An interesting point not touched upon is that the types of people using USB sticks has changed. Because the use of technology filters down from tech savvy, to general population, to people late to the scene or can’t change.

We are in that last stage now. They are buying by price and so easier to take advantage of.

But the UI hasn’t been finalised yet?

I’m uncertain about this. It doesn’t seem much different than things like Inoreader and seems to lack as comprehensive a search.

Remember fuel cells? One tiny drop would power your phone for a week.

I think the problem with every survey I’ve seen is that it does something like

<20 20-30 30-45 45+

Its strength was in running the same operation on large sets of data rather than general purpose computing. So specialist hardware would need to be developed for real time input and a graphical display (which would need to be able to draw the screen from the data the Cray produced. )

I think a better comparison would be a modern GPU.

A Cray 1 could do approx 160,000,000 floating point operations per second. A modern GPU can do 1,600,000,000,000 per second.

That makes no sense. It’s been repeatedly tried and failed for very obvious reasons.

Technically it’s very very hard unless you spend so much it’s uneconomic and takes too long to develop.

Secondly, its investors who were scammed. Yes they could have done better due diligence but they were still scammed.