281–290 of 387 posts
If someone from Fitbit is reading this: It is asinine that the data from my wearable has to go to my phone, up to the cloud, and back down to my phone for display.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple has entered the chat. I am sure you’ve heard the argument before: Google is an advertising company. Using your data to sell you products is why they have your data. The more they can get, the higher their profits. Apple is a hardware company. They don’t want your data and store it begrudgingly because to them it’s nothing but liability. Whenever they can, they will encrypt your data in a way they can’t access i…
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-advertising/apple-c... Apple makes 2 billion a year on advertising projected to go up to 11 billion in 5 years. While a fraction of total rev, I don’t think it’s correct to round off 2 billion and say they are somehow not an advertising company as well. (You don’t have to be just 1 type of company)
One thing that confuses me is why this data needs to be stored within the internet at all. Why can't I have an entirely offline driven system? Data stays local, no ability to upload it online at all, and all processing is done without ever needing the internet. That's a key criteria if I ever was thinking of getting a smart wearable, I'm not going to generate even more data that can be profited from and potentially u…
What really disappointed me about the fitbit was that it required it to be tethered to the phone and my account before it would function as a pedometer. It seems broken that I also have to have a phone, app store access to get a device to drive the pixels for data it already has. Every piece of hardware that does this is effectively "app store locked", your phone is now your software dongle for your hardware.
One thing that confuses me is why this data needs to be stored within the internet at all. Why can't I have an entirely offline driven system? Data stays local, no ability to upload it online at all, and all processing is done without ever needing the internet. That's a key criteria if I ever was thinking of getting a smart wearable, I'm not going to generate even more data that can be profited from and potentially u…
Fitbit is very much a social network, where you can challenge your friends etc. It is very much a selling point to the device. So in the case of Fitbit the user data being online is vital.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing at the specific knowledge some of these employees have is valued, and they probably wouldn't take kindly to having to study for a coding test just to keep their job. I'm guessing they automatically hire some, and interview others who are maybe less core to the business. They can always layoff later if it doesn't end up being a fit.
> They can always layoff later if it doesn't end up being a fit. Such a fucked up thing that that's legal in some parts of the world. "Ah I don't know if we should hire these people or not, let's just hire them now and if we don't need them, fire them later. We can tell them a week before or something" just fills the air with smug MBAs not understanding that some people work for a living, not for fun.
Consent is a two-party thing. Both parties must consent to a transaction for the transaction to be consensual.
https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2021/01/google-completes-acquisi...
One thing that confuses me is why this data needs to be stored within the internet at all. Why can't I have an entirely offline driven system? Data stays local, no ability to upload it online at all, and all processing is done without ever needing the internet. That's a key criteria if I ever was thinking of getting a smart wearable, I'm not going to generate even more data that can be profited from and potentially u…