I blame the European regulations that drove the featureset. The problem with the legal department being the primary feature stakeholder is that usability will always be crap.
It seems to basically one-shot off of the top X search results. If you ask it a spec I would expect it to be quite reliable. If you try to use it for anything with nuance it will typically fall on its face.
It has at least improved with the second category recently that it seems to be more right than wrong. But it still tends to work your query into whatever results it got, which makes it downright dangerous for when people are doing searches on health-related information.
I suspect it has depended a bit on whether a new process has lower output or higher defects. High defects, they'll focus on smaller baseline chips to get better yields. Low output, they'll launch pro models first because those are lower volume. Neither problem, they'll roll out updates pretty quickly across multiple product lines.
And that should change going forward with smaller chiplets being integrated in package, vs huge Ultra chips.
The backup would live someplace other than on the broken machine. It would be encrypted some other way (or maybe not at all, depending on threat profile).
No point in encrypting those family photos burned to disc.
I am not familiar with Macs so I might have been wrong from the very start, but if the owner put the key in the secure enclave then the same user should have no problem at putting the same key in the secure enclave of another Mac. If the user can't write into the secure enclave, then the Mac is protecting the data against the very same user that is supposed to own those data. It is protecting against wrench attacks too but what's the most frequent scenario?
The actual key cannot be exfiltrated from the Secure Enclave. All the encryption/decryption is done inside the Secure Enclave. Knowing the owner’s password is just enough to let you pass data through the Secure Enclave to do the appropriate encryption/decryption operations.
So, you can’t copy that key over to a different Secure Enclave. If you could, then it would no longer be a Secure Enclave.
I mean the most frequent scenario is that the person trying to unlock the device is the one who owns it, yet we still have account passwords. You have to protect against the worst case. There is not a trusted enclave in existence (Apple, Intel, etc.) that will let you read its contents. That’s the point!
I suspect it won't help - that option controls how Apple surfaces ads. The ads you are speaking to are most likely surfaced by the news sources themselves as part of the articles.
reply