"Ryanair’s tactics included rolling out facial recognition procedures for people who bought tickets via a third party, claiming that was necessary for security. It then “totally or intermittently blocked booking attempts by travel agencies”, including by blocking payment methods and mass-deleting accounts.
The airline then “imposed partnership agreements” on agencies which banned sales of Ryanair flights in combinations with other carriers, and blocked bookings to force them to sign up. Only in April this year did it allow agencies’ websites to link up with its own services, allowing effective competition.
The competition authority said Ryanair’s actions had “blocked, hindered or made such purchases more difficult and/or economically or technically burdensome when combined with flights operated by other carriers and/or other tourism and insurance services”.
I'm expecting that later ones will contain methods to get out however they can, whether that's connecting to xfinity free wifi, connecting to a satellite, or having a cheap cell connection that is always on. They want your data and will do their damnedest to get it with/without your permission. Geolocation will be found. I'd expect they'll scan your local wifi SSIDs and send those too and ethernet MAC address to figure out who you are. There must be methods of using this info to wrangle your identity for marketing purposes.
There are still annoyances. Our TV finds every opportunity to send you to its home screen of apps, requiring me to reset the input to the PS5 that we use for Netflix etc. And regardless, I don't want to pay for a lousy customised Android with a bunch of crappy apps preinstalled.
I was just extrapolating. Why wouldn't a "smart" device connect to any wifi it has credentials for, and why wouldn't the implementation consider "has credentials" to include "it doesn't need any"?
But now I wonder why your aggressivity sounds so defensive.
Why wouldn't a "smart" device connect to any wifi it has credentials for, and why wouldn't the implementation consider "has credentials" to include "it doesn't need any"?
Practically because lots of "open" wifi networks have captive portals that don't actually get you Internet access without further action, and legally because using random networks without user confirmation is rather dodgy.
But now I wonder why your aggressivity sounds so defensive.
It's an urban legend that people keep repeating, and nobody can ever point to a specific case of it happening. It would be extremely easy to demonstrate: set up an open network, take a new or factory-reset TV, and wait.
Some brands are better than others. I bought a Sony Bravia TV less than a year ago. The nags are infrequent (maybe every fifth time I turn it on) and unobtrusive (a toast notification pops up in the upper right corner of the screen for a few seconds; it's gone by the time the Fire Stick UI comes up).
Getting rid of ads on the streaming stick and various streaming services is an interesting challenge though...
I’ve had plenty of RokuTVs and my previous home had wired gig e Internet in every room. I plugged the TV to the Ethernet to get software updates, unplugged it, set the TV to always switch to the HDMI port with my AppleTV connected and never thought about the Roku again.
The AppleTV supports CEC and controls the power and the volume.
This must be a very new or not universal feature. I have an Element E4AA70R 70" 4K UHD HDR10 Roku TV I picked up in mid-2023 for well below $1000. It has never once been connected to the internet, and it doesn't nag me.
Might still be possible to jailbreak LG TVs. Not sure what the quality of the homebrew TV firmware situation is like though. Maybe not stable enough for family use.
However, if you do connect, then Samsung pushes so many updates (more ads) than anyone else. My ancient samsung tv in the garage was getting weekly updates for some reason.
The video argues that Windows 11 quietly uses TPM 2.0 as more than just a “security requirement”—it enables automatic device attestation that authenticates your hardware to Microsoft and third-party services in ways most users are unaware of.
Key points:
• TPM 2.0 isn’t just a key vault. It includes remote attestation capabilities. A TPM can cryptographically prove the identity and state of the hardware to an external party.
• Windows 11 ties system identity to the TPM. When you sign in with a Microsoft Account (the default), the OS automatically uses attestation APIs behind the scenes.
• Developers can verify your hardware identity using Microsoft’s Device Health Attestation and related services—even if you never explicitly grant permission.
• This provides a persistent, hardware-rooted tracking vector. Unlike cookies or IP-based identifiers, TPM-based attestation survives reinstallations, resets, and network changes.
• Enterprise features have quietly migrated into consumer Windows. Tools originally meant for corporate compliance (BitLocker integrity checks, Secure Boot measurements, etc.) are now always-on in Windows 11.
• User control is minimal. The transcript describes how attestation occurs automatically when using standard Windows APIs, with little transparency and no clear “opt-out” path.
• The concern isn’t “spyware” but architectural direction. The critique is that Windows 11 normalizes a hardware-anchored identity layer, giving OS vendors and cloud services more leverage to:
• enforce DRM and application controls,
• block unapproved software,
• and build persistent user profiles tied to device hardware.
• The TPM requirement for Windows 11 was not only about security hardening, but about enabling this identity infrastructure at scale.
Can I download the app, add the boarding pass to Apple Wallet and remove/disable the app? Or just take a screenshot of the boarding pass and then uninstall it?
I suspect that when you install the app, it will require all the juicy permissions like contacts, and hoover up lots of data before you even begin to use it. So the damage will have been done, even though you uninstall it soon.
The videos being taken down here are about how to avoid: Windows requiring a Microsoft account to install, and Windows only being installable on compatable hardware.
AFAIK an apple account isn't strictly required, but a lot of MacOS won't be functional without one.
How is a Macbook better than Windows in these senses?
You can use mac, ipad and iphone without apple account at all.
You can use app store without logging to icloud.
You can install apps without app store.
There is no nagging to use icloud after initial setup.
There is no spyware and adware integrated into standard apps or OS itself.
Apple does not sell user data.
"In this case, the federal government prohibited us from sharing any information," the company said in a statement. "Now that this method has become public we are updating our transparency reporting to detail these kinds of requests."
At the very least, there is a little bit of spyware integrated into the OS.
The later Intel Macs with T1/T2 chip also come with a number of caveats on Linux. Don't expect those to work out of the box with standard Linux distros.
I would rather be subjected to fingernail torture than deal with the productivity implosion that is using macOS. It isn't meant for users who do more than stare at webpages. And the workaround apps to give it more productivity such as actually useful taskbars are buggy as hell fighting Apple's trash.
Humanity will get to the next level when we leave all organised religions behind. Faith is something that is only between you and the entity you believe in. Organised religions are just another face of politics.
"Ryanair’s tactics included rolling out facial recognition procedures for people who bought tickets via a third party, claiming that was necessary for security. It then “totally or intermittently blocked booking attempts by travel agencies”, including by blocking payment methods and mass-deleting accounts. The airline then “imposed partnership agreements” on agencies which banned sales of Ryanair flights in combinations with other carriers, and blocked bookings to force them to sign up. Only in April this year did it allow agencies’ websites to link up with its own services, allowing effective competition. The competition authority said Ryanair’s actions had “blocked, hindered or made such purchases more difficult and/or economically or technically burdensome when combined with flights operated by other carriers and/or other tourism and insurance services”.
reply