If Amazon had a "Prime Plus" or something that would allow me to find and order non-third-party-seller, accurately described, quality products with a robust no bullshit "whatever the cost, will go above and beyond fixing any problems in the rare event they occur" attitude, I'd be very interested.
I also wouldn't mind a marketplace that is well known to be hit or miss. When I place an order on alibaba or bangood, I know exactly the risks I'm taking. That risk, weirdly, almost makes it entertaining. "Is it going to be the ball bearings I ordered, or a pair of Crocs shoe knockoffs, or a beef jerky? Place your bets!"
If Amazon had a "Prime Plus" or something that would allow me to find and order non-third-party-seller, accurately described, quality products with a robust no bullshit "whatever the cost, will go above and beyond fixing any problems in the rare event they occur" attitude, I'd be very interested.
I have to assume that such an option exists. There is no way in hell that Amazon execs are limited to the same search options and overall UX as ordinary users. We just don't have access to the VIP entrance.
Making such a subscription publicly available is a blatant admittance that the platform has gone to such shit that one needs to pay for a filter so you don't break out in to colorful hives.
Yes this one is comically bad. The description is even worse: "Your body knows best. Avoid unnecessary passive treatments and medical investigations and let nature play its role."
So really this is preaching anti-education. Do not seek out information about your injury.
They certainly worded it poorly, but what they meant was "voodoo doesn't work". As in, educate your patient about their wacky home remedies, and try to get them to engage with realistic recovery outcomes.
From the paper:
> E for educate
> Therapists should educate patients on the benefits of an active approach to recovery. Passive modalities, such as electrotherapy, manual therapy or acupuncture, early after injury have insignificant effects on pain and function compared with an active approach, and may even be counterproductive in the long term. Indeed, nurturing an external locus of control or the ‘need to be fixed’ can lead to therapy- dependent behaviour. Better education on the condition and load management will help avoid overtreatment. This in turn reduces the likelihood of unnecessary injections or surgery, and supports a reduction in the cost of healthcare (eg, due to disability compensation associated with low back pain). In an era of hi- tech therapeutic options, we strongly advocate for setting realistic expectations with patients about recovery times instead of chasing the ‘magic cure’ approach.
It seems like a lot of folks have responded to conspiracy idiocy by going all-out anti-learning in favor of blind deferral to experts. Even if I thought that was wise, telling people not to research their injuries is like telling the tide not to come in. Better to focus on identifying trustworthy information.
Seriously. It's a trend I've noticed with a lot of anti-misinformation people, including with my friends and family, where they skip the learning and critical thinking part and just buy straight into whatever is said by someone who calls themselves an expert.
> an Uber driver working at a loss, if you count the car depreciation
I hate to nitpick but I see this sentiment word-for-word on HN way too much. Uber drivers don't actually operate at a loss unless they only Uber for a short amount of time and they total their car during that stint. They just tend to earn less profit (often way less) than they think they are earning due to the car depreciation and other factors. But a working class person cannot afford to operate "at a loss" without noticing immediately, and a $25,000 car cannot depreciate infinitely.
You're absolutely in the minority here. Perhaps you have extremely above average peripheral vision.
I grew up in a rural area and still visit quite often. Deer jump out in front of cars all the time. It is physically impossible for me, any of my family members, or anyone I've ever known in this town to be able to see the deer off the side of the wooded areas without high beams on. High beams are not going away.
> It's all about what's knowing what's best for you.
They were implying that separating home from work is what is best for them. Some people like to work from the office - you do not need to keep pushing WFH on everyone.
This implies that the MP3 market was already sufficiently large or saturated by the time the iPod came on the scene, which is false. The MP3 market at the time was mostly an intersection of tech-savvy individuals and musicians. Everyone else was still using portable CD players or walkmans.
At the time, portable CD/MD players and walkmans were competing products to the iPod. mp3 players weren't a separate market. There were even portable CD players that could read mp3s off a CD.
On the flip side of that "minors have no rights" coin you're holding up is the fact that laptop is the parent's property since they bought the laptop for the child to use. They did a factory reset and the problem software still remains. What if the parent did a factory reset to use the laptop for themselves? There is no reason for the spyware to remain in that case. It needs to be removable.
They did a factory reset and reconnected the Chromebook to the school account, which configures the device according to the schools requirements. If they wanted to use it themselves, they would reset it, do not connect the school account and all is well. GPs argument seems to support that the school doesn't have to allow to use a school account without the device being put under the schools control.
(at least as I understand it. if the MDM enrollment is actually tied to the device somehow, then they could reasonably demand it to be released if they planned to use it themselves)
That doesn't really make sense to me. User accounts, whether managed remotely or locally, should be subordinate to administrator accounts. That administrator-level privileges are insufficient to undo a change made with user-level privileges breaks this relationship.
OP didn't mention that the child's account is a secondary account. AFAIK if you log-in with an account the first time on a fresh(ly reset) chromebook, it becomes the "administrator" account - and at the same time if its in an organization (i.e. the school) the orgs policies are applied. No clue how that interacts if you do attempt to login such account as a second account, it's possible the org can require an account to be in control of the device. Chromebooks are deeply designed for exactly this centrally managed scenario after all, that's (partly) why they are so popular with schools and companies.
Based on this support thread [0], which was linked to by awinter-py's comment [1] elsewhere in the comments, it doesn't really matter which is first. Remote policies supersede any local controls, and can promote themselves to have Owner privileges. That this is the intended behavior, for any remote management to take precedence over any local management, is a terrifying security hole.
>That this is the intended behavior, for any remote management to take precedence over any local management, is a terrifying security hole.
You've actually got it backwards. In an enterprise domain like this, allowing local management to take precedence over remote management and policies is a massive security hole for the domain as a whole not to mention required by regulatory bodies dictating information security for educational institutions. A locally managed node is effectively a rogue node on the network. There are use cases for it but they're specialized. OP most likely signed a consent form as part of the online learning stuff at some point and this is the consequence of not reading the things you sign. This whole thing is so massively overblown like no one here has worked anywhere with a BYOD policy and MDM.
The device belongs to the owner and the owner should be able to override anything.
If an organization wants to set policies that can’t be overridden, it should pay for the devices. (And even then, the user still has a right to privacy and a certain level of control).
If they set a MDM policy on a device I own, I’ll mail the organization the device and a bill for buying a new one that very same day.
No, it's a terrifying security hole, full stop. If I leave my non-managed Chromebook unattended (logged out!) for 30 seconds, someone can sign into it with their managed account and install spyware without me knowing?
I think it works similarly on Android phones. Google policy for the Android Corp devices requires you to set it up using corp account, then add secondary personal accounts(if needed).
They are, but there has always been a contention between local admin vs domain admin (managed accounts) and usually the case has been that the domain admin overrules the local but the local admin can un-join the domain.
This is not that different. The moment you join the remote domain, you no longer have top privileges. You can still unjoin at any point but as soon as you join, you're placed under a different hierarchy.
You were never the owner of the chromebook in the first place so Google the actual owner just transferred control to the school. They never needed your permission to do this in the first place because you just paid full fare for an unlimited rental of someone else's property.
That's the conclusion I tend to reach, and I believe Google to have fraudulently described a rental as a purchase. Whoever is the source of authority to run software on a device is the owner of that device. Since enabling remote management does not require administrator privilege, the right to do so doesn't come from the administrator. Since disabling remote management cannot be done by a local administrator, the granted authority is even greater than the nominal authority granted to the buyer. Each of these implies that Google remained the source of authority, and therefore didn't transfer ownership over the device.
The most pragmatic thing to do is probably acquire another school only Chromebook. Either have one issued from the school or buy another one. This is probably a worthwhile lesson for how to treat personal and employer assets separately anyway.
The work to try to get the school to make the software removable is a laudable stand for citizens, parent, and student rights - but would come at some cost of time, money (more than buying a second chromebook anyway), and maybe strained relationships with school officials.
Regular alarms are typically triggered at the point of entry / forced entry, to discourage the intruders from entering the building.
Silent alarms are triggered during a hostage situation. e.g. when a cashier / bank teller / etc. is in danger because they are being threatened with a weapon. At this stage, it is not advisable to startle the robber because it may cause them to harm the hostage.
