Your ID card is on your phone. Go ahead, guarantee you’re not using a duplicate of someone else’s ID card, that no one could duplicate your card, with a mainstream widely available consumer phone.

> I can also guarantee a secure boot chain with my patched bootloader.

Go ahead, show how your grandma automatically guarantees to interested parties that I or whoever else didn’t patch her bootloader to run a backdoored OS, while using a mainstream widely available consumer phone.

> Neither of these things require apps to verify the environment they run in.

Demonstrate a mainstream, widely available consumer phone that does these things without requiring apps to verify the environment they run it.

We can continue this infinitely, but if you keep making sweeping contrarian statements without contributing the proof required then it’s just not worth it.

False analogy. You can’t have your kitchen knife exploited by a hacker team in North Korea, who shotgun attacks half of the public Internet infrastructure and uses the proceeds to fund the national nuclear program, can you? (I somewhat exaggerate, but you get the idea.)

> Systems can be secure and trusted by the user without having to cede control

In an ideal world where users have infinite information and infinite capability to process and internalize it to become an infosec expert, sure. I don’t know about you, but most of us don’t live in that world.

I agree it’s not perfect. Having to use liquid glass and being unable to install custom watch faces is ridiculous. There’s probably an opportunity for a hardened OS which can be trusted by interested parties to not be maliciously altered, and also not force so many constraints onto users like current walled gardens do. But a fully open OS, plus an ordinary user who has no time or willingness to casually become a tptacek on the side, in addition to completely unrelated full-time job that’s getting more competitive due to LLMs and whatnot, seems more like a disaster than utopia.

Actually, that is not what’s happening. Based on further research, the use of eIDAS is required to be left up to citizen’s decision.

Requiring citizens to have (buy) some device to simply prove they are who they are seems hostile and dystopian to me. Some say it’s the future; I’m not convinced.

However, if you were to allow me to use my pocket computer (and nothing else) to prove I am who I say I am, you would want to trust that I am not pretending to be somebody else after extracting private keys from their phone or whatnot. I.e., you would want to require some sort of trusted computing.

Currently, that seems to only be provided by closed ecosystem phones.

Even still, I think it’s a mistake to be rolling out eIDAS as a mobile app first. The specification allows for this to be a dedicated hardware key (maybe even something YubiKey-like, and the EU already requires all phone manufacturers to have USB-C), so why not start with that.

Both products in US on the site of respective manufacturer. Maybe you bought the older model (which by the way has higher impedance, so dedicated amplifier is a must, take it into account when you calculate the price).

> no one is sitting with AirPods Max in their studios for work

People absolutely use them for serious work. They are much more of a personal product though, and there are other factors that would make an average studio disinclined to invest in them, like fragility and cost of repair and a whole bunch of unnecessary for a studio features.

Of course, when the studio already has all the rest of the hardware, soundproofed room, etc., it could actually be cheaper to buy cans that do not in fact include ANC, DAC, Dolby, amplifier, etc., and maybe even enjoy a bump in audio quality while at that. For someone who does not have that, it is often simply not a practical choice.

Yet, with that taken into account, today the latest DT 1770 Pro still cost over 20% more than the latest AirPods Max.

Considering Apple markets Max for audio work, they compete on the same turf. This makes Apple’s offer unusually cost effective, not the other way around. I think this can be attributed to their fragility and inferior sound quality relative to DT 1770 Pro (at the end of a decent signal chain).

Why can’t they squeeze in that codec, considering Pros have it for years and are a lot smaller?

Edit: apparently I was confusing AirPods Pros with Sony WH models, which have LDAC. I guess there is no chance Apple adopts LDAC, even in their large heavy cans.

Does anyone have experience with obtaining a flatter frequency response from any AirPods, though? While maintaining the full power of noise cancellation.

My experience with Pros has always been that they exaggerate the bass. EQ settings available in Music are coarse, and I don’t know of any other way to control frequency response independently of the app that plays the sound.

I know they are not really best for critical audio work, but they are damn convenient.

That’s an issue with tuning instruments in general, and why pianos are generally slightly out of tune as a compromise.

As you get used to a particular guitar and strings, as you train your ear, you can also learn to work around the imperfections by adjusting how you hold down the strings (even with a fretted guitar, you can slightly repitch a string by holding it differently).

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47136131

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

It’s not only that a lot of good music is not on streaming: music also get removed. I have a smart playlist that gets automatically populated with songs in my library that are not available (evidently pulled from Apple Music), and it is growing with tunes that I like and that are sometimes impossible to find elsewhere. If I had the foresight to get actual copies, I could still listen to them.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47050809

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47037212

Points: 2

# Comments: 0