People are only now concerned because they see the control that was always there, Now being exerted over their government work issued phones.

People are concerned because they know that Donald Trump is an aspiring dictator. He doesn't want to install this app because he thinks it will serve some useful purpose, he wants to install it because he thinks the country and everyone in it is his property.

If he's allowed to get away with this, at some point before he's overthrown, he's going to force you, personally, to install this app. When you object that this is crazy, his remaining true believers will make up some nonsense reason why we shouldn't be worried.

It's a work phone, I don't see the issue.

> I don't see the issue.

What is your goal in telling us this? Are you proud of sticking your head in the sand, or something?

It's not sticking your head in the sand to state that the entity which owns a device is free to install the software they want. The person operating that device does not own it and thus does not have the right to decide what software it runs.

Ignoring the long-standing norm of company-owned and provided devices using preinstalled software that the user has no control over for some sort of "gubmint bad" sentiment is really juvenile. This is how work-owned devices are and have been for decades.

Whether the white house app itself is good or bad, or the administration is good or bad is an entirely disjoint argument. Businesses which own the device and provide them to employees have the right to manage the software on the device they own. Do you really want to argue that the person who owns a device does not have the right to manage its software? Because I don't think that's the argument you want to make here.

> It's not sticking your head in the sand to state that the entity which owns a device is free to install the software they want

Actually, yes it is when you're hanging your hat on that one simplistic point to the exclusion of all others. That's called ignorance.

> company-owned ... businesses ... the person who owns a device

These are not company-owned or business-owned devices, rather they are government-owned devices. You are playing extremely fast and loose with the major distinctions between government, companies, businesses, and people.

> for some sort of "gubmint bad" sentiment is really juvenile

I'd say it's quite juvenile to categorize discussions of Constitutional rights and the autocratization of our government as some strawman of "gubmint bad".

I don't agree with the premise that Donald Trump is the owner of all government employee phones. We, the citizens of the United States, own those phones. Trump is just a guy we've temporarily hired to direct the activities of the government, and his mistaken impression that the US President owns the government is exactly my concern.

Is it a work phone because Trump has a principled belief that only work phones should have to install this app? Or is it a work phone because Trump hasn't yet subverted the required executives to get Apple to agree to roll it out on everyone's phone?

"get them to agree" is one way to put it. If they want this our government can just show up with guns and force it to happen. The government already collects data from corporations (including apple according to snowden's leaks), sometimes taking over parts of a company's offices, installing hardware on the company's network, and filling those rooms with government employees in order to do it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A

Sure, it's a work phone. And that job is with the US government, famously "of and for the people", meaning that citizens are owners of thar workplace. As an owner, I am not okay with this, and I will make my voice heard

To be clear, it's not having a government controlled app, it's the fact that this app exists to perpetuate the cult of Donald Trump. It's a tool for spreading fascism.

Is it just some kind of confirmation bias or something, or are there actually a lot of plane crashes in the past few weeks.

It has definitely seemed that way. People have been commenting about it on r/aviation.

I'm surprised there was no mention of Fernico or Dumet metal. they were designed for this application.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernico

I didn't realize all code before LLM was hole proof.

This might shock you, but there are more precise numbers than "none" and "some". In fact, some of the ones that aren't "none" are even larger than others!

"Thing is worse after change."

"I didn't realize thing was perfect before change!"

It wasn't. But it had fewer holes than what the LLMs make.

unless your union involves being the law, then they can do literally anything.

The only guard rail ive hit recently was when i was trying to get it to rename files ripped from dvd to episode names. I told it to try again and it did it. It wasn't even really a refusal it was just working on it and then stopped for content violation or what ever.

Are these the same people that were renting airbnbs and wrecking them using them to train their robots?

Ive never used Miracast. Does it not monopolize your WiFi card? Which would be fine if you want to show a keynote or something, but if you want to stream a video or anything requiring network access...

There's no technical reason it should. When I've used it on my phone, it's indicated that it's still connected to the WiFi network, but I've never specifically tested to verify that it was.

Am I the only one that hates that programmers now have to also be lawyers?

What do you mean now? The peak of debating the merits of varied FOSS licenses must have been 20 years ago.