We went a lot to the US in my teenage years. I have been to the Grand Canyon two or three times (you start losing counts at some point).
One time we were there with our family and my aunt/uncle + kids. We hiked down the canyon because my dad was sort of the group leader and he goes on such adventures without necessarily thinking it through.
So we went down with a small amount of water and food. I heard sometime years after that you have to pay to go down the Grand Canyon, but this was in the nineties and it was a quiet part of the Grand Canyon, not much to do. We hiked down, stayed inside the canyon for a bit to eat and drink and then we went up again.
And that's where the differences started. My dad was still undeterred and went up in high speed like it was nothing. We were young, fit teenagers and for us the climb was more than usual, but pretty doable. The rest of the adults... not so much. At least one family member was crying, others were swearing (without swearing, polite people) about the predicament my dad put us in.
I am not sure why I am telling this, I guess... go in prepared?
The Grand Canyon was nice, but I never loved it. I think my expectations were pretty big because it's so well-known, so it was a bit anti-climatic. I really liked Monument Valley, there was virtually no other tourist when we were there and it was stunning, even better than in the Lucky Luke comics [1] that we read as a kid. As I teenager I also loved White Sands. In contrast to the author I did really like Petrified Forest.
The NPS has large signs posted at the Bright Angel and Kaibab trailheads on the south rim warning visitors about the dangers of the trail, the heat, the steepness, the lack of shade. It is made abundantly clear that even a modest hike requires conditioning, water, appropriate shoes, and protection from the sun. They even have rangers patrolling the trails assessing hikers they pass and questioning those they believe are going to have trouble. Unfortunately, they can only recommend, not enforce. With all that, people run into difficultly and have to be hauled out. Sometimes, they die. As Ron White has said, you can't fix stupid.
The only time I saw the Grand Canyon was when we briefly stopped while I was helping a friend get her car across the country. It was January, no one was around, and patches of snow dotted the rim. Quite a beautiful sight. But we noticed a poster on a bulletin board detailing how a medical student who had run the Boston marathon had somehow gotten lost on a hike and died after running out of water. It was particularly shocking because my friend had known the woman who died since high school in New England, but had not heard the story until we were reading it on that poster.
I also did one of the hikes to the CO river in the 90s with 3 friends when we were in college. We got off to a late start so jogged down a good deal of the way (dumb). We carried a 1 gallon water jug each (not even close to enough). We had no extra clothing (dumb). Two of us (me being one) made it out that day. The other two didn't. A group of smart hikers with water filters and iodine tablets found them belly up on the path in the direct sunlight. I'm certain they would have died if the hikers didn't give them tablets, water and emergency blankets. Man we were dumb.
If you are fit, you can absolutely do this. In fact, you can go all the way to the other rim and back (rim-to-rim-to-rim). The current record is sub 6 hrs by Ultrarunner Jim Walmsley. [0]
Canyons can be a challenge. To maybe paraphrase some signage along the way. Down is optional. Up is not.
Going down to the river makes for a very long day. I've boated (part raft, part other) down the canyon but I've only hiked down to a spot part of the way and then back.
The system also feels to me like it would be busywork for most people. I just make notes in a very unorganized way and do some cross-linking. I rely on search for actually finding things, though I feel like I can improve search by using sentence/text embeddings and some vector search.
It's ironic that a company that pretends to be for privacy is using the same think of the children argument as those pushing Chat Control, age verification, etc. Of course, their privacy is mostly a farce, since they have also been caught uploading data to OpenAI for text-to-speechi
I hope that more European governments will start supporting GrapheneOS, since it can compete with Apple on security and is better than Apple and GMS Android when it comes to privacy.
I think one of the main issues is that end-to-end message encryption is a sham as long as backups are not encrypted. I could have good device security, but if the person I'm talking to does not use ADP, iMessage and WhatsApp messages get backed up with only at-rest encryption (I think Signal opts out of standard iOS backups) and possibly the same for backups of the iPhone notification database (which the article suggests as a possibility).
Similarly on Android, WhatsApp suggests unencrypted backups to Google Drive by default.
Putting on my tinfoil hat, I am pretty sure that Google/Apple/Meta have some deal (successor to PRISM) where end-to-end encrypted messaging is tolerated as long as they have defaults that make it possible to access chats anyway. Apple not enabling ADP by default and WhatsApp doing Google Drive backups that are not end-to-end encrypted is the implementation. Since most people just use the defaults, it undermines security of people who care.
It's a 'win-win', the tech companies can wash their hands in innocence, the agencies get access to data, and phone users believe that they are chatting in a secure/private manner.
"end-to-end message encryption is a sham as long as" -- I agree with that but would add even more caveats. If someone can't list those caveats off the top of their head they shouldn't be pretending they aren't able to communicate securely.
Just look at Salt Typhoon, every single person should be way more paranoid than they are, including government & agency officials. The attach surface and potential damage - financial and reputation - will only get worse with AI automation and impersonation, and that's for people who are doing nothing interesting and are law abiding citizens.
Given the shoddy state of network security at large, especially on infrastructure projects (power plants, hospitals, dams, etc.) I always feel like major governments sit on so destructive potential to disrupt communications and anything connected to the Internet of its adversaries to have mutual assured destruction potential of a nuclear bomb.
No one’s crazy enough to push that button, because once you do there is no turning back.
I have often wondered about this exact situation. Like there are many instances of companies who depend on keeping their network secure and are actively taking preventative measures to keep their network safe that end up getting hacked.
So surely there has to have been infiltration to some of the critical infrastructure keeping cities running. Why don't we hear more about it?
I mean the Hungarian minister of Foreign Affairs briefed Lavrov on internal EU matters and there are recordings of one or more calls. It seems that opsec is bad at pretty much every level.
> the tech companies can wash their hands in innocence
Hostile defaults, not just in tech, is how Western liberal soft power often works. They can always claim "hey, you have the choice", but they know very well most people won't even know they have the choice, or is it so cumbersome or costly to move away from the hostile defaults - and stay that way - that in practice, the effect is the same as if you lived in a totalitarian regime. The difference is that you can keep believing in the deception of "freedom" in a Western liberal society; in a totalitarian regime, you are much more likely to know you've got a jackboot on your throat, because there is one.
What is needed isn't radical liberal atomistic individualism which rationalizes the antisocial war of all against all that rewards raw might. You won't find freedom there. You need a culture of respect of and sense of duty toward the authentic common good, backed by moral authority, where authority is power + justice.
How is that going to work? Apple will still be under the CLOUD Act, so Europe would still be vulnerable. The only solution would be for Apple to fork into two completely separate companies, which is unlikely to happen.
Most likely there will initially just be a lot of chaos, because nobody is prepared for this scenario. There will be huge supply issues, COVID will look like nothing (both in terms of groceries, etc. and getting replacement hardware). Then Europe will on the short term rebase to Chinese/Korean/Taiwanese hardware, with probably an AOSP fork on the mobile side and Linux on the desktop/server side.
But it will be terribly messy. Nobody seems to prepare, because everyone thinks this scenario is unthinkable or they just don't want to put in the effort. Even all the people that I know that are talking about digital sovereignty are still using their iPhones, MacBooks, or GMS Android phones.
I am trying to tell tech people that the time to start switching is to alternatives is now, since tech people are usually early adopters and can help other people. But most switch from GMail to Proton Mail and proclaim victory. January 2026 (remember the good ol' days when the US wanted to take Greenland with force if necessary?) was already forgotten after 4 weeks or so.
If Apple can't work out a legal structure that works, it will be forced to refund for the devices then so the consumer can use the money to buy compliant devices probably from Korea or China. EU can work out special deal with the Asian manufacturers as there will be hundreds of millions of people with cash in hand looking to buy a high end smartphone.
Being messy isn't a worse outcome than US invasion. Europeans aren't rooting to live like Americans or go to wars for America and the tech thingy will be a nuisance at most.
EU freezes/takes over all Apple assets in EU, users with Apple devices get the money in cash upon delivering their devices. If the money isn't enough for the refunds, a finance mechanism can be created that will be settle after the war.
The returned devices may be sold to 3rd party markets if Apple isn't cooperating.
Most value/assets are in the US, I don't see how Apple in the EU would have enough interesting assets to refund. If 30% of the 450M inhabitants in the EU have an iPhone and the purchase price was 1000 Euro on average, that would be 135B Euro. I would be surprised if they have a fraction of that in the EU as assets. The primary useful asset I could think of is if the iOS source code was also stored somewhere in the EU. I guess in war it would be fair game to fork it. Wouldn't help with the existing iPhones, since the EU doesn't have the signing keys, but you could bootstrap a new phone ecosystem (and even revert Liquid Glass :p).
If the money isn't enough for the refunds, a finance mechanism can be created that will be settle after the war.
There are huge assumptions in this, like the EU wins the war, the war doesn't end in a sort-of cold war, Apple cannot get away from liability because it was not their decision, etc.
The returned devices may be sold to 3rd party markets if Apple isn't cooperating.
Flooding a 3rd-party market with over 100M second hand iPhones would drive down the prices by an extreme amount.
Well how convenient that Apple has about $135B in European accounts(that peaked at 200B)! To avoid taxes US companies tend to keep a lot of money in the markets they sell their products.
You don’t go to war with the association of losing it, obviously the risk will ve priced and I don’t think that the risk will be that big considering that US hasn’t won any wars since WW2. Even if doesn’t cover all the costs, national security and independence doesn’t have to come for free.
Why not? GrapheneOS and others show that it is possible to make viable operating systems on top of AOSP, which also have their own useful extensions.
It seems like a waste not to use an existing, well-developed, hardened, open source base, that at the same time provides great compatibility with most existing apps.
Since it is open source, it would always be possible to fork if AOSP goes off the rails.
I think the primary issue is that it is currently hard to get embargoed security patches, unless you have some partnership with an OEM.
Aside from bad pricing and us wanting to move our data to servers owned by a European company, the thing that that bothered me the most as a (former) paying customer was the constant upsell pushes. Every time I’d log in to the web interface they would show ads in the web interface (including pop up dialogs) to try to move me to another plan.
I’m already paying 20 Euro per month. Leave me alone.
One time we were there with our family and my aunt/uncle + kids. We hiked down the canyon because my dad was sort of the group leader and he goes on such adventures without necessarily thinking it through.
So we went down with a small amount of water and food. I heard sometime years after that you have to pay to go down the Grand Canyon, but this was in the nineties and it was a quiet part of the Grand Canyon, not much to do. We hiked down, stayed inside the canyon for a bit to eat and drink and then we went up again.
And that's where the differences started. My dad was still undeterred and went up in high speed like it was nothing. We were young, fit teenagers and for us the climb was more than usual, but pretty doable. The rest of the adults... not so much. At least one family member was crying, others were swearing (without swearing, polite people) about the predicament my dad put us in.
I am not sure why I am telling this, I guess... go in prepared?
The Grand Canyon was nice, but I never loved it. I think my expectations were pretty big because it's so well-known, so it was a bit anti-climatic. I really liked Monument Valley, there was virtually no other tourist when we were there and it was stunning, even better than in the Lucky Luke comics [1] that we read as a kid. As I teenager I also loved White Sands. In contrast to the author I did really like Petrified Forest.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_Luke
reply