gU9x3u8XmQNG

There's another huge constraint that the article and a lot of responses do not seem to mention:

- Compliance and,

- Regulation.

In Australia, for example; we have very strict requirements for manufacturers - and it seems mostly out of regulatory incompetence that vendors like Tesla are able to deploy and bypass in the way they do.

I've been told, by stakeholders in industry, that the systems that facilitate the software of vehicles to align with such requirements historically were strictly controlled.

(The same applied to the hardware)

Whilst it's also over simplifying it;

- I am not excited at the prospect that `developer-a` can `git commit` functional changes to my vehicle.

I'm not sure you should be, either!

How are you achieving this? I’d like to know more. Thanks in advance.

In my experience, in Australia; you don’t get to select the item that was wrong, and simply get a refund on the cheapest item.

Seems the vendors are catching on, with orders often dramatically wrong without any consequence. This is pure speculation, however.

I also found vendors would often substitute items out of stock with those of a lesser value, but write a semi-cute message on it. Nothing like buying some fancy cola, only to get a can of coke and a love letter..

Endless chatbot and help option loops; I gave up, and refuse to use their services - though use was rare anyway.

This made me laugh.. then cry..

Thanks for the memories!

I’m definitely not qualified to answer this.

I would like to say, from my perspective, that it seems to not matter how “good”, even “exceptional”, business listed on the stock market do; the outcome is hostile and negative to the customer/consumer. Costs have only gone up, dramatically so. In my case; entirely disproportionate to, if any, income increase coming in.

Market does good. Market does exceptional. The experience has generally been negative?

Market does bad? I expect a lot of us can connect the dots, and will no doubt be impacted again.

Maybe the market, in my perspective; is not a beneficial experience.

I never said they want to.

But as many responses to your comments; there’s a portion of the population who are not invested in the markets this way.

There’s clearly a very different perspective for some, and as per my original reply; it seems many more are worried (rightfully so) about assets others cannot even begin to comprehend - let alone invest day to day, or “spare”, money into.

100% agree with this perspective. It’s surprising how few others seem to note this.

Thanks for posting it.

It seems to be a controversial stance, but; I have no issue with this capability in the right hands.

I would immediately surrender such information either way, in the interests of the community - say for a missing child?

These capabilities should have well defined intent/objectives and transparent controls to protect the privacy of individuals to which are out scope.

With all the above said; it’s been proven time and time again that even with clear intent - the purpose of these systems mutates (ie between governments). Said governments then wonder why public trust is lacking?

(Example; see Australian Government customer ISP DNS requirements)

Last I tried to use Azure; it did not even offer domain registration. This was many years after launch - and not too long ago.

Not sure if this was an Australia/Oceania limitation - or just an ongoing product limitation.

My requirements weren’t complex. I needed to manage my domains (not AD), spin up virtual machines, and associate the two.

I also found the UI, overall; tedious. Finding the right offering under their ambiguously named services was difficult. And this comes from an AWS user.

I wanted to like Azure, but for very least reasons above; it’s not the product for me.

Are these fixes, or workarounds?

Not sure I agree with this entirely, especially the points on media. And I don’t think it’s been beneficial at all.

I’d argue the problem here is more so quality, and can really only be solved with regulation. I want to read news, not a blog and opinion.

There should be clear and concise standards media outlets need to adhere to, but as per my suggestion in regards to social media; will not self regulate.

Additionally; there is no accountability and responsibility.

I would argue that the only benefit that has been made is making this more apparent and obvious.. and hopefully for the better.

Thanks for your reply.

On a similar note; a family member was being exposed to intense and violent content over Facebook. There was no block, ignore, or report feature on the content exposed. The only option we could find, after researching it; was a “show less of this content” setting buried deep in the Facebook web app (not even available on the standalone app).

Honestly; if the account owner has little option to manage the content they are exposed to.. ugh!

Thanks for your reply.

I think you have valid points, but as noted; the industry has no interest in any form of regulation or responsibility.

I don’t see any alternative.