Every advancement in "security" has assumed the service needs to more strictly identify the customer, without caring about the customer's trust for the service, or experience with performing the identification ritual.

So when your bank asks you for a code or your mom's maiden name, they never offer anything to verify they are who they say they are. whenever I ask they say "of course we're from chase, we just called you", without realizing how absurd that is.

Now Passkeys suffer an even worse dilemma. Now the customer has 4 dimensions of tools to record & use in order to log in. Did I use email, google, facebook, apple ID to log in? Did I save this code via phone, text, authenticator app (which one, there are multiple incompatible ones)? Did I use a passkey ? where is that passkey located? my phone, my browser storage, my authentication extension.

We started with a single dimension of email + password to log in. Now it's an entire decision tree that has to be recorded. How do you even record this?

  disqus :  credential = email, password = "see bitwarden", 2fa = microsoft authenticator, passkey = "on iphone in icloud"

  viator: credential = google sso, password = same, 2fa = symantec, passkey = "edge on windows 11 laptop in office" 

I thought engineers were tested for scaling during the interview process. This protocol doesn't even scale to a single site.

They could have done a better job color coding the connectors like resistors, so you could know the protocols supported by the cables and devices.

I have to label my own cables according to data support, PD, max power, etc. And many of my “usb c” devices only work with usb-A to usb-C cables.

The connector design targeted the industry and not consumers. Hopefully they will improve that.

Let's face it, this really is about Tesla, vs the rest of the major players (ford, kia, VW etc)

Rather than hamstring all software by requiring DOT testing before firmware updates are published, follow Tesla's model which has been very reliable within the industry

Losing control over the UI for the car, to support media playback isn't even a good engineering approach, let alone being a good user experience.

Group projects with tangible artifacts, including finished prototypes that meet objectives. More emphasis on group projects. If AI accelerates productive development like with software, move the objectives up the ladder in complexity, or expectations.

Peer assessments and performance reviews like employment . This also helps prepare students for adult life.

If the subject matter is merchandisable, have the students operate an enterprise. My local high school has the students operate a food cart for example, and it opens to the public one weekend a month, otherwise open to students. Students are responsible for inventory, marketing, accounting, maintenance , customer service etc.

More verbal challenges . These can be operated by AI with human supervision while being recorded, with spot checks from supervisors.

Every diagnostic has a precision / recall curve and some fall through the cracks. But you have to shift your approach when old testing no longer becomes viable. Better that than to revert to the stone age of informatics.

I’m probably the only person who would notice that. Sort of how Steve Jobs explained that a good carpenter cares about the backside of the dresser as much as the front, even if no customer will ever notice.

Assignments and tests were always lossy, and over time more cheating crept in.

Instruction should shift to benchmarking productive output, strategic thinking and group collaboration. Similar to labs where you are tested on completing an experiment or a project with artifacts. Or an MBA program with quarterly group objectives. A major part of the group effort is dealing with collaboration and overcoming obstacles like laggards.

Hopefully people will realize how poor testing is for preparing students for the real world. the ultimate goal is preparing the students for a productive life, most commonly in commercial enterprise, but even academic pursuits require collaboration, productivity and other characteristics that were not well assessed by traditional testing and homework.

The cars primary UI is the screen. Car Clay defers the cars experience to Apple .

Customers have been demanding CarPlay because most car UIs are poor. But if done properly, they can exceed CarPlay while being consistent and well integrated