willsinclair

> Normally, this would be super dangerous, but WebAssembly is designed to run safely on remote computers, so it can be securely sandboxed without losing performance.

This seems a like a pretty strong claim. I hope that it's true, but I'm not going to be running WASM modules in ring 0 any time soon.

I'm just imagining the case where someone has gotten very used to using the smart lock in a way where they lock it remotely. I guess that could be blamed on the user, but it's definitely not going to encourage them to buy any more Nest products.

I don't really see the appeal of smart locks. It doesn't add any convenience, since you could always just lock the door on your way out.

That being said, I think regular passcode locks without internet connectivity do add a convenience since you don't have to carry a key.

Yikes. I would definitely be re-thinking my home security if I normally use my locks remotely and I was suddenly unable to.

A house burglar could effectively use these tweets as push notifications telling them to go rob some smart™ homes in their local rich neighborhoods.

I think the site is supposed to be more of a PSA for non-savvy investors rather than a fraud deterrent.

How is this question different from chewzerita's question?

From the article:

> The bachelor's degree in AI will focus more on how complex inputs — such as vision, language and huge databases — are used to make decisions or enhance human capabilities

My understanding is that AI is more about applying ML concepts to mimic human intelligence.

Later in the thread, he mentions that the consent they ask for doesn't really comply with the GDPR principles.

> This appears to breach several important principles of the #GDPR, including the principle of purpose limitation, freely given, non-conditional consent, and of transparency. In other words, if Facebook attempts to collect consent in this manner, that consent will be unlawful.

Interesting. It seems like after the senate hearings, Facebook is trying to communicate to its users that sending them your data is a necessary part of using their services.

I experienced the same thing. I wonder if this qualifies as "explicitly blocking EU residents", since someone taking privacy measures (like using uMatrix) wouldn't even receive the message.

If this is the case, then perhaps javascript is not the best place to put the EU blocking functionality.