smart glasses with built in cameras, and for the same reason teslas

ok but then you can’t do Rust, so this does not apply.

but if you did… !

ok, I most often type with 2 hands, but I have issues holding my tablet sized laptop for a longer time, so it’s hard to even just keep reading on it. and it does not even have an HDD inside. I have no such problems with my phone, I could hold it probably for hours.

Didn’t know it only applied to UWP apps on Windows. That does seem like a pretty big problem then.

it is mostly for compatibility reasons. no win32 programs are equipped to handle such granular permissions and sandboxing, they are all made with the assumption that they have access to whatever they need (other than other users’ resources and things that require elevation). if Microsoft would have made that limitation to every kind of software, that Windows version would have probably been a failure in popularity because lots of software would have broken. I think S editions of windows is how they tried to go in that direction, with a more drastic way of simply just dropping support for 3rd party win32 programs.

I don’t still have a Mac readily available to test with but afaik it is any application that uses Apple’s packaging format.

ok, so if you run linux or windows utils in a compatibility layer, they still have less of a limited access? by which I mean graphical utilities. just tried with firefox, for macos it wanted to give me an .iso file (???)

if so, it seems apple is doing roughly the same as microsoft with uwp and the appx format, and linux with flatpak: it’s a choice for the user

How do you know that? If you live in a neighborhood signals bleed all over the place and undoubtably they have information on you.

I think OPs body does not emit radio signals

all the infos on nearby devices have already been collected over and over by your neighbours and people walking around outside.

aaand now that is also attached to their name.

be sure to ask if they have swiped on the locking thing too

or certain keys on the keyboard

so, no. good catch OP!

I was thinking the same thing. who would write typescript if they could just do Rust?

I don’t understand how can all your smartphones keep working after it repeatedly hitting the ground.

Drop your phone?

I’m careful with my phone, and for the last 15 years I did not have such problems. except when I had, but then the battery flying out was a very small problem compared to others

and also introducing hardware backdoors, courtesy of Going Dark

how do you use it with one hand?

imo that’s the only benefit of having a smartphone. any other computer can do internet calls too

It literally requires every connected wallet to process the same transactions as everyone else.

wat?

wallets don’t process any transactions other than yours. and even then, wallets do the easy work.

it is by design for a lot of them.

their point is unambiguous to me. it is that it is more complex to check if something was done according to a regulation, compared to checking if it was done at all.

This is gibberish.

I don’t know what this means. you could have just said “fuck you”, plainly, and it wouldn’t have made less sense.

App-specific file-acess permissions are on MacOS out of the box as a configurable setting for all applications (in the system settings menu), and I’m pretty sure Windows 10/11 has something similar in its settings menu as well.

I don’t know about macos, but I doubt that it applies to software that was obtained outside of their app store.

on windows however, those settings only apply to UWP apps. not .exe and .bat and .msi and .ps programs, but .appx packages that you can install from the Microsoft Store. and installing something from the Microsoft Store does not mean that it’ll be sandboxed, lots of regular .exe programs are also distributed there.

Also, if we’re being pedantic, this is also a setting on both Android and iOS, with Android displaying the option to change access pretty much every time you pick out a file.

those are mobile operating systems, they have been designed with this in mind from the beginning. General purpose desktop computers are very different though, for better or worse. and, as I know, desktop computer users are still not a small minority

Most operating systems at least have filesystem permissions,

which limits access between files of different users, but does not prevent the zoom app to read your documents, or the cracked game you torrented to read the passwords from your web browser.

and on a lot of Linux distros you additionally get AppArmor or PolKit to further restrict what files a program can read/write

on lot of linux distributions where apparmor is active, most processes are unconfined, or at best still have broad access, because the distribution does not ship apparmor profiles for each executable that a user may run.

same with polkit, except that it’s use case is not about defining additional limitations, but about defining what is allowed, to build upon other security systems. so to define whe n to prompt the user permission, whether to ask for a password or just a yes-no question, or whether to just allow something that would otherwise be disallowed if polkit was not in place.

Additionally, on a lot of linux distributions, umask is set by default so that new files are world readable, and so users can read most of each others files.

this is also at least the 3rd instance I ask this week, but are we really assuming that the common internet user is using linux? what is the case with other operating systems, like windows? yeah users can’t read each others profile directory by default, but nothing prevents program A from reading something written by program B when both are running with the privileges of your user account

so, sorry but to me it seems that

• on linux it is possible, but in lots of common cases access is not limited
• on windows it is not possible, without involving probably enterprise level software