"Usually"

Sure.

But there are custoner managed keys which do exactly what I think it does.

In Canada (Quebec) you go to the government weed store which feels like an apple store, ask an expert and they recommend the weed based on the need you want to have and personal preferences. Like a sommelier for weed.

They had big screens with the catalogs and specialty items.

And yes. It is run by the government with high quality control.

And we here in Canada still ashamed of residential schools. You'd think other countries would have learned.

Haven't they seen enought proof of the militarization of the police in the US plus the current actions of the Trump government to create a military run country?

Si une piste cyclable semble dangerous, on doit l'améliorer pas retirer.

De quelque façon les cyclistes vont utiliser la même route, avec ou sans la piste cyclable.

Retirer la piste rendre la situation plus dangereux pour les cyclistes.

Wow. I used to be a lead Enterprise architect for a large corporation. We had some clients who explicitly required, by contract, that the data should be hosted in Canada and only accessed by people in Canada. This included the department of National defense.

Microsoft complied by hosting instances in Canada and we went through hoops to ensure data remained in Canada.

This seems to uppend the game. However, all this information should already be encrypted. Whenever it isn't, I'm sure corporations are scrambling to fully encrypt (or de-host) data.

I mean, data (at rest and in transit) encryption has been available for other risk vectors. This seems to be no different. If Microsoft/Amazon/Oracle, etc had a backdoor to unencrypt the data, it would create a higher backslash.

For individual users, I don't think 99% of them care where their data is hosted.

Really? I guess everyone was 15 at some point and hadn't heard that distro wars are useless 🤣

There is no best. Period.

I haven't done tracking on a day today, but every now and then I've checked the calories in the food I eat and the calories burnt in the exercise I do. For example, I exercises in the morning for 20 mins (200 cal) had protein shake (250 cal) went for lunch at a friend's house: she served Chinese pork noodles (400 Cal) and apple crumb (400 cal). We swam for an hour. I biked 11 km each way (600 cal). I went to the rock climbing gym for two hours (400-600 cal). I ate 1/2 cup of nuts (350 Cal) and a celery stalk (6 cal) 1 hour before bed.

So, if we consider my BMR of 1,483 cal/day plus the exercise (say 1,000 cal) I needed to eat 2,483 cal to break even.

But I ate no more than 1,500 cal. Even if I underestimated, I didn't eat more than 1,500 cal.

That means a 1,000 cals calory deficit.

That's an example of a day where I ate more than usual because of the visit but exercised as usual.

Am I counting correctly?

I don't think it's just you. Like it wasn't just one person thinking computers would make us dumb or the automobile making us lazy. I'm betting that someone somewhere thought that cooking food on the fire would make us weaker.

Technology has that ability to generate opposition from status quo.

And as with any technology, there are good uses, bad uses and frivolous uses.

Remember the awful nonsense web pages of the early 90's?

I think AI will make the life's of some of us easier. But I also think it will continue widening the digital divide.

The biggest concern is that, by nature, AI needs massive amounts of power which can only be paid by people with big resources and those people are training it. AI has the trainer's bias.

However, end consumer AI is the tip of the iceberg. AI will succeed when we don't even realize it's there.