I can't decide if this is an educational blog post or veiled legal threat.

Kind of seems like the later.

Edit 2: According to the child comment this was just a TIL blog post. Thanks for the clarity.

Original comment:

I was prepared for a story time about a legal issue Ente is facing, and since they don’t mention one I now have more questions than I started with.

Are they the recipient of an estoppel order? In the process of issuing them? Are there implications we should hear about but don’t? Or is this all just for fun, like “it was lunch and learn legalese day” at HQ?

I’m not familiar with this company, but seeing as how they provide E2E encrypted photo backups at a time where law enforcement is globally maneuvering to end such things has me wondering if maybe something more happening. Which saddens me since I’m now interested in the product…

Edit 1: rereading this comment I feel like it’s a bit cynical, so i removed some speculative remarks. Strange topic to get your product mentioned on the HN front page, but I suppose it worked!

I'm probably extrapolating a lot from very little, but here's my take:

> It was legal day today at ente

I took this to mean that they regularly meet with their legal team, not for a specific purpose, but just to touch base and catch up on anything that may useful to have council's eyes review (read: informal meeting with legal team). Estoppel could have come up any number of ways, talking about contracts and their enforcement, someone asked a question that naturally veered into that territory, etc.

It sounds like they're involved in something legal that concerns estoppel.

Someone promised or mentioned something that someone acted upon, and now it has changed.

Nothing like that! This is just a genuine TIL post :)

Author here. We were reviewing our legal docs today. It was just a word that I found interesting. I wrote about it. That was all.

If I'm shopping for a new car I expect it to have lane-keeping and adaptive-cruise-control and a host of other safety features which require sensors.

That said, I'd still drive an old beater. It's just that when I shell out for a new thing, it's because I want the new features.

When I shell out for the new thing, it's because my current one died. If I wanted the new features, I wouldn't be driving a 16-year-old car.

I want airbags, anti-lock brakes, adaptive suspension, intermittent wipers, and a back-up camera. I don't need the rest. I even fear some of the rest. (Remote hackability is not a feature!)

Same but even more for a washing machine. I don't need advanced sensors. I don't need my washing machine to hang out on the internet. It's not a celebrity with its own blog, it's just there to wash my clothes.

GM has been making hackable cars since 1996

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OnStar

I always wanted to make a spoof of the GM ads that promoted OnStar for "safety". That is, a white collar criminal is heading for the hydrofoil with suitcases crammed with cash and the FBI calls up OnStar to track the vehicle and turn off the ignition.

A more likely scenario: you’re heading out to attend a million man protest. The government disagrees and disables your car.

https://hothardware.com/news/bidens-infrastructure-bill-mand...

I’m gonna need a more reliable source for that information than the white power hour over at the Daily Caller.

"The sun warms my back this morning" -> "This morning, the sun will shine on my house again."

"Back" somehow became shelter?