So.... this is weird... but in their video demo it has the address as "2772 State St" but the video was actually taken 100 State Street.... almost 16 blocks away.
Not only that but the augmented reality images have their "location" on the wrong corner.
I can understand not wanting to use a real restaurant (i guess?) but if you are faking literally everything then what is even the point of the demo? I sort of assumed it would be an overlay of video taken from the glasses along with the re-created output... but this just seems like they created the visuals after the fact to match the recorded glasses footage.
So I guess the solution is just to begin to allow accounts to always register multiple emails? Although I guess the issue of multiple accounts is still going to exist if the users don't know the initial (private) email that they signed up with though unless there is a different unique ID that everyone will be able to remember.
I'm curious (and not trolling by asking) what a solution might be since email has been used as a unique account identifier for so long it is hard for my brain to think of another option at the moment.
Use a platform like Authentik where the immutable characteristic of your user is a UUID.
Allow them to sign in with OpenID, etc., to put one (or more) e-mail addresses on (obviously those e-mails end up unique to that account), in my case, I always force-link e-mail addresses from Google's OpenID (mostly to prevent people accidentally creating multiple accounts). Allow phone numbers too!
Also allow usernames (and just automatically generate them); the user can change their username if they really want to.
Every other dependent system should only be using the UUID. If you have some dumb legacy system that insists on e-mails for a primary key, have an internal only domain and hang the UUID off of that.
There is a specific use case when two people want to have their own accounts but share an e-mail or a phone number for logging in. In that case you want to just let the user pick a "primary" email address and "primary" phone number (which is the only one they can log in with as a user ID) and the secondaries are just for verification. This is kind of common with people who want their spouse's phone to be able to get into their account for example (a pretty common use case for one of our apps, although they're technically supposed to make their own accounts, we allow this simple form of sharing).
I feel like email overtook usernames because it was more likely to be unique/memorable. I hate when websites ask me to remember a username (even though I'm using a password manager so I should really just calm down.)
Usernames are no less likely to be unique and memorable than an email. You presumably chose something memorable for your email, so just enter that without the @foo.com bit. There, memorable and probably unique.
If you do require an email as an ID then yes, you absolutely should allow multiple emails per address if only so that the person can recover if they lose one of their mailboxes (similarly if you support hardware keys you should allow more than one).
This isn't fully "Hidden" but I've always wondered if Ai scraping is the reason why short form videos on Youtube/TikTok/Instagram featuring film/tv clips will sometimes have 2 audio tracks... one with the actual audio from the clip a little louder and one audio track with a computer generated narrator providing running commentary of what is happening and why. As a human I'm able to tune it out but it is very weird/jarring.
In case anyone hasn't had the displeasure of viewing these I'll link some in a comment below once I scroll through my feed and find one.
I'm failing to understand GP's logic here. Why would someone who's posting some TV show's content in complete disregard of their intellectual property rights be bothered about AI scraping?
Keeps their videos from being taken down automatically by platform content filters. It’s an additive audio track - a running summary of the clip most of the time, and so I imagine this is some fair-usey anti takedown protection. It’s everywhere on short form sites.
I thought it was done to keep the video from getting taken down due to copyright (with automatic scanners). I also noticed sometimes videos will have a horizontal line that runs through it -- I've assumed that it wouldn't get flagged for copyright violation.
I wish... it is much more generic and touches on the plot which the audio description track wouldn't do. I'll see if I can find one. They are extremely annoying.
One of our vendors started charging a 10% tariff fee for parts ordered from Switzerland... we passed that fee directly on to our customers as a line item. I can't imagine the headache when (not if) they come to us expecting a refund for that.
Normally we would expect no subscription means no video uploaded, but it doesn't HAVE to mean that. IF you distill it, it really only means the Ring doorbell owner doesn't get access to any video or features without paying.
There's no reason they, however, won't still derive value from it without a subscription by recording and reselling that data somehow. That's probably how they got this footage. All the subscription does it help subsidize their surveillance network and let you use it a little bit.
Even if it isn't uploading, the hardware must have local storage. It may be small and persistently overwritten, but if the power was severed, then the last data on that drive would be the last thing written before the power was cut.
free tier saves 3 hrs of event history, then deletes. so it appears that this request came in later than limited ‘save’ window offered on the free tier.
Or... yet another full-on spying device. Like all phones, like all modern TVs, smart speakers/home systems, cars, anything electronic capable of recording its environment is doing it, for the sole purpose of uploading it to be stored and analyzed.
There are some limits of course but they are mostly technological, but this ain't some notification trickle but full pictures when you expect zero, zilch, nothing.
I'd never install such device at home, added value is dubious at best for my family life and this is exactly the type of shit I would expect to be happening in it, regardless of brand or country of origin. If it connects it sends. Its sad state of things in 2026 but thats reality right now.
The commenter above is saying that your suggestion that there is some contradiction here indicates a mathematical error. The post claims 60% have read a book; you claim 20% can't read at all; both can be true.
Yeah… I didn’t say they both weren’t true due to a mathematical error… I was insinuating that the survey is probably flawed because if 20% of Americans can’t read… they likely aren’t even taking this survey.
It is also my uneducated guess that the actual percentage of Americans who haven’t read a single book in the past year is MUCH higher than 40%. Maybe a survey of HN commentators but not of the general population.
I wish they would give a real-world cost estimate of what this would look like. They have a section of it "in action" [1] and I wish they would be like, "with this setup, the invoice is going to look like this, include these products, and with similar daily usage be about $XXX.00 per month."
Not only that but the augmented reality images have their "location" on the wrong corner.
I can understand not wanting to use a real restaurant (i guess?) but if you are faking literally everything then what is even the point of the demo? I sort of assumed it would be an overlay of video taken from the glasses along with the re-created output... but this just seems like they created the visuals after the fact to match the recorded glasses footage.
Here is a link to their screenshot from the video: https://images.ctfassets.net/o1znirz7lzo4/4CwEXSX8icqDQAtDrD...
(Note: I would like to thank my years of delivering pizzas in Santa Barbara during college for the knowledge to debunk this video.)