2019 honda accord review the driving enthusiast suffix 2019 honda accord review the driving enthusiastic meaning 2019 honda accord review the driving enthusiast crossword 2019 honda accord review the driving enthusiastic definition 2019 honda accord review the driving enthusiast apparel 2019 honda accord review the driving force 2019 honda accord review the lincoln 2019 honda odyssey for sale 2019 honda accord sport

2019 Honda Accord review: The driving enthusiast's family sedan

2019 Honda Accord review: The driving enthusiast's family sedan

It's a bit of a surprise to see a brand-new midsize sedan arrive with three pedals and a six-speed manual transmission, and even more so when those pieces are attached to a 2.0-liter turbocharged engine with a not-insignificant 252 horsepower. But this unusual and unusually sporting version of the 2019 Honda Accord is an absolute delight to drive, one that'll satisfy your need for speed even if your life circumstances have moved you away from sport compacts and into midsize sedans.

Powertrain aside, the 2019 Honda Accord is a wonderful car in which to spend time. It nails the mission brief of a midsize sedan, delivering easy everyday livability that makes this car our top pick in its class.

About that engine

Of course, with "2.0T" right in the name, there's no way to avoid discussing the brisk acceleration enabled by that engine. A cousin to the 2.0-liter in the Civic Type R, the turbo mill endows the Accord with 252 horsepower and 273 pound-feet of torque, the latter offered all the way from 1,500 through 4,000 rpm. That's quite a bit more verve than the 1.5-liter turbo engine in other Accords, which serves up a perfectly adequate 192 hp and 192 lb-ft and mates either to a manual or a continuously variable transmission.

On boost, the engine whips the Goodyear Eagle Touring tires into a frenzy and pulls swiftly through the manual transmission's lower gears. It's quite exciting for what is, ultimately, an ordinary family sedan.

Fortunately the engine is not all about big boost, and operates smoothly and quietly in more quotidian driving situations. There's ample torque right off idle for spurting through city traffic and enough midrange punch you don't even need to worry if you forget to downshift before merging.

The optional 2.0-liter turbo engine is a real powerhouse.

Jake Holmes/Roadshow

Big credit also must go to the car's six-speed manual, which has to be among the loveliest gearshifts you can find in a new car today. Light enough to use with two fingers, direct enough that you never mistake one gate for another and paired with a just-right clutch pedal, it's the sort of stick-shift arrangement that takes no effort at all to drive -- even in stop-and-go city traffic. But I wouldn't fault anyone for buying this car with the optional 10-speed automatic transmission instead.

Daily driver extraordinaire

There's quite a lot of joy in the way the 2019 Honda Accord handles all aspects of driving, actually. With a great, commanding driving position and panopticon visibility in every direction, busy city streets are no chore at all. The Accord's steering is light but not without some sense of what the front tires are doing, the brake pedal reassuringly firm but not overly so. It's a car that feels like it was engineered by people who enjoy driving, and as a result, it's a car that is enjoyable to drive.

On the freeway, the Accord keeps wind and road noise remarkably hushed, while displaying well-mannered damping that keeps head-bobbing over dips and bumps to a minimum. However, those 19-inch wheels and low-profile (235/40 aspect ratio) tires struggle with cracked and brittle pavement. Impacts are both felt and heard in the cabin; other Accords ride more softly on 17-inch wheels with more tire sidewall, and that would be my preferred setup for daily-driving duty.

The Accord's interior is functional and well laid out.

Jake Holmes/Roadshow

This Accord Sport model does benefit in terms of handling from a quicker steering ratio, upgraded anti-roll bars and wider tires than, say, the more common EX trim. But experience in other models suggests all Accords are equally as satisfying to drive as this sporty-ish model.

Business casual design

There's a lot to look about the stylish, modern design of the 2019 Honda Accord, which manages to be a whole lot less bland than the last-generation model. With a low nose and a curving roofline, the sedan has quite a sporty profile. I could do without the big chrome strip along the top of the windowline, but otherwise the Accord's jewelry, specifically the LED head- and taillights, nicely breaks up its big surfaces. Large 19-inch wheels, chromed dual exhausts and a trunklid spoiler are appreciated touches on this Sport model.

Functional interior

The cabin is equally pleasing to the eye, finished with high-quality materials that, despite the black-on-black color scheme, do not look in the least bit dour. Everything you touch, from plastics to switches to the teensy shift knob, feels nice, too. The two center cupholders are set deep into the console, so you can use taller coffee mugs or water bottles. The center console cubby itself is not enormous, though offers a USB and 12-volt power outlet to power gadgets. A cubby ahead of the shifter is home to another pair of outlets and can conceal a charging phone or iPod.

Honda's infotainment system works well and supports both Apple CarPlay and Android Auto.

Jake Holmes/Roadshow

In true Honda fashion, the interior is extremely functional, with big knobs for the climate control, easy-to-find flaps covering the USB ports, big switches on the steering wheel and a superlegible, semidigital instrument cluster. While the right-hand side of the cluster is an old-school analog speedometer, the left-hand side can serve as a virtual tachometer or a trip computer, or can offer up any number of data pages for things like vehicle status, safety-system operation, music and phone calling info and even service schedules.

A big range of adjustment for the front seats and steering wheel makes finding a comfortable driving position a cinch, and there's head- and legroom to spare for average-size adults. The same is true of the second row, where you won't believe how much space passengers have. Even with the roof's sloping profile, back-seat headroom is generous.

Nor will you believe how much stuff you can fit in the trunk, which has a low liftover height, a wide opening and the ability to swallow a class-leading 16.7 cubic feet of your belongings. The back seats fold down easily, too, for transporting larger items if necessary.

The trunk is enormous, storage 16.7 cubic feet of luggage.

Jake Holmes/Roadshow

Plentiful technology

All Accords save the base LX and the Hybrid use an 8-inch touchscreen infotainment that supports Bluetooth, satellite radio, HD Radio, Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. Built-in navigation, a Wi-Fi hotspot and wireless phone charging are available on some models. It would be nice to have some USB ports in the back to keep the kids' tablets charged, too, though.

The touchscreen crams a lot of information onto its display, but its menu structure is simple to navigate and responses to inputs are near-instant. Redundant physical buttons surround the screen, making it easier to jump between options or to adjust settings by feel while driving.

Safety technology is in abundance and, best of all, most of it comes standard across all trim levels -- something that can't be said of all rivals. Standard equipment includes forward-collision warning automatic emergency braking, lane-departure warning and lane-keep assist, traffic-sign recognition, automatic headlights and adaptive cruise control. That ACC is offered even on a manual-transmission car is a rarity. Blind-spot monitoring is also offered on most trim levels.

These wheels look great but don't do ride quality any favors.

Jake Holmes/Roadshow

Economy and pricing

One downside to electing the 2.0-liter engine is that fuel economy falls to 22 miles per gallon city and 32 mpg highway in this Sport model. While that's comparable to other high-powered midsize sedans -- the Toyota Camry XSE V6 also scores 22/32 mpg, for instance -- it's not too impressive by the standards of the class. Most shoppers will be more compelled by Accords equipped with the car's 1.5-liter turbo engine, which return up to 30/38 mpg in EPA testing. The Accord Hybrid, meanwhile, is rated for 47/47 mpg.

In terms of pricing, however, this Sport 2.0T falls right in the middle of the 2019 Accord range, at $31,630 as tested. The sedan's pricing structure largely mirrors its competition, with models powered by the base 1.5-liter engine running from $24,640 for an LX up to $31,040 for an EX-L. Opt for the 2.0-liter mill and you'll pay between $31,630 and $36,870.

This Accord Sport 2.0T is definitely the driving enthusiast's choice, what with its power and six-speed manual transmission. Yet spending a week behind the wheel of the Accord really just underlines how well-sorted the entire car is for whatever type of driving you like: City, suburb, or highway, the Accord handles it well. Plus, it's affordable, efficient, incredibly spacious and filled with technology that just plain works. With all that in mind, there's no midsize car we'd recommend more readily than the Honda Accord.

---

Source

https://nichols.my.id/how-to-fix-valorant-error-code-57.html

.

Signal whatsapp and telegram here s which secure messaging my healthevet signal whatsapp and telegram here s which secured signal whatsapp and telegram here s my number call me maybe signal whatsapp and telegram here she comes signal whatsapp and telegram here s lucy tv series signal whatsapp and telegram here s your perfect chords signal and power integrity simplified forex signal whatsapp group

Signal, WhatsApp and Telegram: Here's which secure messaging app you should use

Signal, WhatsApp and Telegram: Here's which secure messaging app you should use

If your choice of encrypted messaging app is a toss-up between Signal, Telegram and WhatsApp, do not waste your time with anything but Signal. This isn't about which one has cuter features, more bells and whistles or is the most convenient to use: It's purely about privacy. And if privacy's what you're after, nothing beats Signal.

You probably already know what happened. In a tweet heard 'round the world last January, tech mogul Elon Musk continued his feud with Facebook by advocating people drop its WhatsApp messenger and use Signal instead. Twitter's then-CEO Jack Dorsey retweeted Musk's call. Around the same time, right-wing social network Parler went dark following the Capitol attacks, while political boycotters fled Facebook and Twitter. It was the perfect storm -- the number of new users flocking to Signal and Telegram surged by tens of millions. 

Read more: Everything to know about Signal

The jolt also reignited security and privacy scrutiny over messaging apps more widely. Among the top players currently dominating download numbers, there are some commonalities. All are mobile apps available in the Google Play store and App Store that support cross-platform messaging, have group chat features, offer multifactor authentication and can be used to share files and multimedia. They all also provide encryption for texting, voice and video calls.

Signal, Telegram and WhatsApp use end-to-end encryption in some portion of their app, meaning that if an outside party intercepts your texts, they should be scrambled and unreadable. It also means that the exact content of your messages supposedly can't be viewed by employees of those companies when you are communicating with another private user. This prevents law enforcement, your mobile carrier and other snooping entities from being able to read your messages even when they intercept them (which happens more often than you might think). 

The privacy and security differences between Signal, Telegram and WhatsApp couldn't be bigger, though. Here's what you need to know about each of them. 

Getty/SOPA Images

• Does not collect data, only your phone number
• Free, no ads, funded by nonprofit Signal Foundation 
• Fully open-source
• Encryption: Signal Protocol

Signal is a typical one-tap install app that can be found in your normal marketplaces like Google Play and Apple's App Store and works just like the usual text-messaging app. It's an open-source development provided free of charge by the nonprofit Signal Foundation and has been famously used for years by high-profile privacy icons like Edward Snowden.

Signal's main function is that it can send -- to either an individual or a group -- fully encrypted text, video, audio and picture messages, after verifying your phone number and letting you independently verify other Signal users' identity. For a deeper dive into the potential pitfalls and limitations of encrypted messaging apps, CNET's Laura Hautala's explainer is a life-saver. 

When it comes to privacy, it's hard to beat Signal's offer. It doesn't store your user data. And beyond its encryption prowess, it gives you extended, onscreen privacy options, including app-specific locks, blank notification pop-ups, face-blurring antisurveillance tools and disappearing messages. 

Occasional bugs have proven that the tech is far from bulletproof, of course, but the overall arc of Signal's reputation and results have kept it at the top of every privacy-savvy person's list of identity protection tools. The Guardian, The Washington Post, The New York Times (which also recommends WhatsApp) and The Wall Street Journal all recommend using Signal to contact their reporters safely. 

For years, the core privacy challenge for Signal lay not in its technology but in its wider adoption. Sending an encrypted Signal message is great, but if your recipient isn't using Signal, then your privacy may be nil. Think of it like the herd immunity created by vaccines, but for your messaging privacy. 

Now that Musk's and Dorsey's endorsements have sent a surge of users to get a privacy booster shot, however, that challenge may be a thing of the past. 

Getty/NurPhoto

• Data linked to you: Name, phone number, contacts, user ID
• Free, forthcoming Ad Platform and premium features, funded mainly by founder
• Only partially open-source
• Encryption: MTProto

Telegram falls somewhere in the middle of the privacy scale, and it stands apart from other messenger apps because of its efforts to create a social network-style environment. While it doesn't collect as much data as WhatsApp, it also doesn't offer encrypted group calls like WhatsApp, nor as much user data privacy and company transparency as Signal. Data collected by Telegram that could be linked to you includes your name, phone number, contact list and user ID. 

Telegram also collects your IP address, something else Signal doesn't do. And unlike Signal and WhatsApp, Telegram's one-to-one messages aren't encrypted by default. Rather, you have to turn them on in the app's settings. Telegram group messages also aren't encrypted. Researchers found that while some of Telegram's MTProto encryption scheme was open-source, some portions were not, so it's not completely clear what happens to your texts once they're in Telegram's servers. 

Telegram has seen several breaches. Some 42 million Telegram user IDs and phone numbers were exposed in March of 2020, thought to be the work of Iranian government officials. It would be the second massive breach linked to Iran, after 15 million Iranian users were exposed in 2016. A Telegram bug was exploited by Chinese authorities in 2019 during the Hong Kong protests. Then there was the deep-fake bot on Telegram that has been allowed to create forged nudes of women from regular pictures. Most recently, its GPS-enabled feature allowing you to find others near you has created obvious problems for privacy. 

I reached out to Telegram to find out whether there were any major security plans in the works for the app, and what its security priorities were after this latest user surge. I'll update this story when I hear back.

Angela Lang/CNET

• Data linked to you: Too much to list (see below)
• Free; business versions available for free, funded by Facebook
• Not open-source, except for encryption
• Encryption: Signal Protocol 

Let's be clear: There's a difference between security and privacy. Security is about safeguarding your data against unauthorized access, and privacy is about safeguarding your identity regardless of who has access to that data. 

On the security front, WhatsApp's encryption is the same as Signal's, and that encryption is secure. But that encryption protocol is one of the few open-source parts of WhatsApp, so we're being asked to trust WhatsApp more than we are Signal. WhatsApp's actual app and other infrastructure have also faced hacks, just as Telegram has. 

Jeff Bezos' phone was famously hacked in January of 2020 through a WhatsApp video message. In December of the same year, Texas' attorney general alleged -- though has not proven -- that Facebook and Google struck a back-room deal to reveal WhatsApp message content. A spyware vendor targeted a WhatsApp vulnerability with its software to hack 1,400 devices, resulting in a lawsuit from Facebook. WhatsApp's unencrypted cloud-based backup feature has long been considered a security risk by privacy experts and was one way the FBI got evidence on notorious political fixer Paul Manafort. To top it off, WhatsApp has also become known as a haven for scam artists and malware purveyors over the years (just as Telegram has attracted its own share of platform abuse, detailed above). 

Despite the hacks, it's not the security aspect that concerns me about WhatsApp as much as the privacy. I'm not eager for Facebook to have yet another piece of software installed on my phone from which it can cull still more behavioral data via an easy-to-use app with a pretty interface and more security than your regular messenger. 

When WhatsApp says it can't view the content of the encrypted messages you send to another WhatsApp user, what is doesn't say is that there's a laundry list of other data that it collects that could be linked to your identity: Your unique device ID, usage and advertising data, purchase history and financial information, physical location, phone number, your contact information and that of your list of contacts, what products you've interacted with, how often you use the app, and how it performs when you do. The list goes on. This is way more than Signal or Telegram. 

When I asked the company why users should settle for less data privacy, a WhatsApp spokesperson pointed out that it limits what it does with this user data, and that the data collection only applies to some users. For instance, financial transaction data collection would be relevant only to those WhatsApp users in Brazil, where the service is available. 

"We do not share your contacts with Facebook, and we cannot see your shared location," the WhatsApp spokesperson told CNET. 

"While most people use WhatsApp just to chat with friends and family, we've also begun to offer the ability for people to chat with businesses to get help or make a purchase, with health authorities to get information about COVID, with domestic violence support agencies, and with fact checkers to provide people with the ability to get accurate information," the spokesperson said. "As we've expanded our services, we continue to protect people's messages and limit the information we collect." 

Is WhatsApp more convenient than Signal and Telegram? Yes. Is it prettier? Sure. Is it just as secure? We won't know unless we see more of its source code. But is it more private? Not when it comes to how much data it collects comparatively. For real privacy, I'm sticking with Signal and I recommend you do the same. 

---

Source

https://pemudij.pops.my.id/

.

TikTok Parents Are Taking Advantage of Their Kids. It Needs to Stop

TikTok Parents Are Taking Advantage of Their Kids. It Needs to Stop

Rachel Barkman's son started accurately identifying different species of mushroom at the age of 2. Together they'd go out into the mossy woods near her home in Vancouver and forage. When it came to occasionally sharing in her TikTok videos her son's enthusiasm and skill for picking mushrooms, she didn't think twice about it -- they captured a few cute moments, and many of her 350,000-plus followers seemed to like it.

That was until last winter, when a female stranger approached them in the forest, bent down and addressed her son, then 3, by name and asked if he could show her some mushrooms. 

"I immediately went cold at the realization that I had equipped complete strangers with knowledge of my son that puts him at risk," Barkman said in an interview this past June. 

This incident, combined with research into the dangers of sharing too much, made her reevaluate her son's presence online. Starting at the beginning of this year, she vowed not to feature his face in future content. 

"My decision was fueled by a desire to protect my son, but also to protect and respect his identity and privacy, because he has a right to choose the way he is shown to the world," she said.

These kinds of dangers have cropped up alongside the rise in child influencers, such as 10-year-old Ryan Kaji of Ryan's World, who has almost 33 million subscribers, with various estimates putting his net worth in the multiple tens of millions of dollars. Increasingly, brands are looking to use smaller, more niche, micro- and nano-influencers, developing popular accounts on Instagram, TikTok and YouTube to reach their audiences. And amid this influencer gold rush there's a strong incentive for parents, many of whom are sharing photos and videos of their kids online anyway, to get in on the action. 

The increase in the number of parents who manage accounts for their kids -- child influencers' parents are often referred to as "sharents" -- opens the door to exploitation or other dangers. With almost no industry guardrails in place, these parents find themselves in an unregulated wild west. They're the only arbiters of how much exposure their children get, how much work their kids do, and what happens to money earned through any content they feature in.

"Once public engagement happens, it is very hard, if not impossible, to really put meaningful boundaries around it."

Leah Plunkett, author, Sharenthood

Instagram didn't respond to multiple requests for comment about whether it takes any steps to safeguard child influencers. A representative for TikTok said the company has a zero-tolerance approach to sexual exploitation and pointed to policies to protect accounts of users under the age of 16. But these policies don't apply to parents posting with or on behalf of their children. YouTube didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

"When parents share about their children online, they act as both the gatekeeper -- the one tasked with protecting a child's personal information -- and as the gate opener," said Stacey Steinberg, a professor of law at the University of Florida and author of the book Growing Up Shared. As the gate opener, "they benefit, gaining both social and possibly financial capital by their online disclosures."

The reality is that some parents neglect the gatekeeping and leave the gate wide open for any internet stranger to walk through unchecked. And walk through they do.

Meet the sharents

Mollie is an aspiring dancer and model with an Instagram following of 122,000 people. Her age is ambiguous but she could be anywhere from 11-13, meaning it's unlikely she's old enough to meet the social media platform's minimum age requirement. Her account is managed by her father, Chris, whose own account is linked in her bio, bringing things in line with Instagram's policy. (Chris didn't respond to a request for comment.)

You don't have to travel far on Instagram to discover accounts such as Mollie's, where grown men openly leer at preteen girls. Public-facing, parent-run accounts dedicated to dancers and gymnasts -- who are under the age of 13 and too young to have accounts of their own -- number in the thousands. (To protect privacy, we've chosen not to identify Mollie, which isn't her real name, or any other minors who haven't already appeared in the media.)

Parents use these accounts, which can have tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of followers, to raise their daughters' profiles by posting photos of them posing and demonstrating their flexibility in bikinis and leotards. The comment sections are often flooded with sexualized remarks. A single, ugly word appeared under one group shot of several young girls in bikinis: "orgy."

Some parents try to contain the damage by limiting comments on posts that attract too much attention. The parent running one dancer account took a break from regular scheduling to post a pastel-hued graphic reminding other parents to review their followers regularly. "After seeing multiple stories and posts from dance photographers we admire about cleaning up followers, I decided to spend time cleaning," read the caption. "I was shocked at how many creeps got through as followers."

But "cleaning up" means engaging in a never-ending game of whack-a-mole to keep unwanted followers at bay, and it ignores the fact that you don't need to be following a public account to view the posts. Photos of children are regularly reposted on fan or aggregator accounts, over which parents have no control, and they can also be served up through hashtags or through Instagram's discovery algorithms.

The simple truth is that publicly posted content is anyone's for the taking. "Once public engagement happens, it is very hard, if not impossible, to really put meaningful boundaries around it," said Leah Plunkett, author of the book Sharenthood and a member of the faculty at Harvard Law School.

This concern is at the heart of the current drama concerning the TikTok account @wren.eleanor. Wren is an adorable blonde 3-year-old girl, and the account, which has 17.3 million followers, is managed by her mother, Jacquelyn, who posts videos almost exclusively of her child. 

"As kids get older, they naturally want to define themselves on their own terms, and if parents have overshared about them in public spaces, that can be difficult."

Stacey Steinberg, author, Growing Up Shared

Concerned onlookers have pointed Jacquelyn toward comments that appear to be predatory, and have warned her that videos in which Wren is in a bathing suit, pretending to insert a tampon, or eating various foodstuffs have more watches, likes and saves than other content. They claim her reluctance to stop posting in spite of their warnings demonstrates she's prioritizing the income from her account over Wren's safety. Jacquelyn didn't respond to several requests for comment.

Last year, the FBI ran a campaign in which it estimated that there were 500,000 predators online every day -- and that's just in the US. Right now, across social platforms, we're seeing the growth of digital marketplaces that hinge on child exploitation, said Plunkett. She doesn't want to tell other parents what to do, she added, but she wants them to be aware that there's "a very real, very pressing threat that even innocent content that they put up about their children is very likely to be repurposed and find its way into those marketplaces."

Naivete vs. exploitation

When parent influencers started out in the world of blogging over a decade ago, the industry wasn't exploitative in the same way it is today, said Crystal Abidin, an academic from Curtin University who specializes in internet cultures. When you trace the child influencer industry back to its roots, what you find is parents, usually mothers, reaching out to one another to connect. "It first came from a place of care among these parent influencers," she said.

Over time, the industry shifted, centering on children more and more as advertising dollars flowed in and new marketplaces formed. 

Education about the risks hasn't caught up, which is why people like Sarah Adams, a Vancouver mom who runs the TikTok account @mom.uncharted, have taken it upon themselves to raise the flag on those risks. "My ultimate goal is just have parents pause and reflect on the state of sharenting right now," she said. 

But as Mom Uncharted, Adams is also part of a wider unofficial and informal watchdog group of internet moms and child safety experts shedding light on the often disturbing way in which some parents are, sometimes knowingly, exploiting their children online.

The troubling behavior uncovered by Adams and others suggests there's more than naivete at play -- specifically when parents sign up for and advertise services that let people buy "exclusive" or "VIP" access to content featuring their children.

Some parent-run social media accounts that Adams has found linked out to a site called SelectSets, which lets the parents sell photo sets of their children. One account offered sets with titles such as "2 little princesses." SelectSets has described the service as "a classy and professional" option for influencers to monetize content, allowing them to "avoid the stigma often associated with other platforms."

Over the last few weeks, SelectSets has gone offline and no owner could be traced for comment.

In addition to selling photos, many parent-run dancer accounts, Mollie's included, allow strangers to send the dancers swimwear and underwear from the dancers' Amazon wish lists, or money to "sponsor" them to "realize their dream" or support them on their "journeys."

While there's nothing technically illegal about anything these parents are doing, they're placing their children in a gray area that's not explicitly sexual but that many people would consider to be sexualized. The business model of using an Amazon wish list is one commonly embraced by online sugar babies who accept money and gifts from older men.

"Our Conditions of Use and Sale make clear that users of Amazon Services must be 18 or older or accompanied by a parent or guardian," said an Amazon spokesperson in a statement. "In rare cases where we are made aware that an account has been opened by a minor without permission, we close the account."

Adams says it's unlikely to be other 11-year-olds sending their pocket money to these girls so they attend their next bikini modeling shoot. "Who the fuck do you think is tipping these kids?" she said. "It's predators who are liking the way you exploit your child and giving them all the content they need."

Turning points

Plunkett distinguishes between parents who are casually sharing content that features their kids and parents who are sharing for profit, an activity she describes as "commercial sharenting." 

"You are taking your child, or in some cases, your broader family's private or intimate moments, and sharing them digitally, in the hope of having some kind of current or future financial benefit," she said.

No matter the parent's hopes or intentions, any time children appear in public-facing social media content, that content has the potential to go viral, and when it does, parents have a choice to either lean in and monetize it or try to rein it in.

During Abidin's research -- in which she follows the changing activities of the same influencers over time -- she's found that many influencer parents reach a turning point. It can be triggered by something as simple as other children at school being aware of their child's celebrity or their child not enjoying it anymore, or as serious as being involved in a car chase while trying to escape fans (an occurrence recounted to Abidin by one of her research subjects). 

"Frankly, this is all just a large social experiment."

Sarah Adams, who runs the TikTok account @mom.uncharted

One influencer, Katy Rose Pritchard, who has almost 92,000 Instagram followers, decided to stop showing her children's faces on social media this year after she discovered they were being used to create role-playing accounts. People had taken photos of her children that she'd posted and used them to create fictional profiles of children for personal gratification, which she said in a post made her feel "violated."

All these examples highlight the different kinds of threats sharents are exposing their children to. Plunkett describes three "buckets" of risk tied to publicly sharing content online. The first and perhaps most obvious are risks involving criminal and/or dangerous behavior, posing a direct threat to the child. 

The second are indirect risks, where content posted featuring children can be taken, reused, analyzed or repurposed by people with nefarious motives. Consequences include anything from bullying to harming future job prospects to millions of people having access to children's medical information -- a common trope on YouTube is a video with a melodramatic title and thumbnail involving a child's trip to the hospital, in which influencer parents with sick kids will document their health journeys in blow-by-blow detail.

The third set of risks are probably the least talked about, but they involve potential harm to a child's sense of self. If you're a child influencer, how you see yourself as a person and your ability to develop into an adult is "going to be shaped and in some instances impeded by the fact that your parents are creating this public performance persona for you," said Plunkett.

Often children won't be aware of what this public persona looks like to the audience and how it's being interpreted. They may not even be aware it exists. But at some point, as happened with Barkman, the private world in which content is created and the public world in which it's consumed will inevitably collide. At that point, the child will be thrust into the position of confronting the persona that's been created for them.

"As kids get older, they naturally want to define themselves on their own terms, and if parents have overshared about them in public spaces, that can be difficult, as many will already have notions about who that child is or what that child may like," said Steinberg. "These notions, of course, may be incorrect. And some children may value privacy and wish their life stories were theirs -- not their parents -- to tell."

Savannah and Cole LaBrant have documented nearly everything about their children's lives.

Jim Spellman/WireImage

This aspect of having their real-life stories made public is a key factor distinguishing children working in social media from children working in the professional entertainment industry, who usually play fictional roles. Many children who will become teens and adults in the next couple of decades will have to reckon with the fact that their parents put their most vulnerable moments on the internet for the world to see -- their meltdowns, their humiliation, their most personal moments. 

One influencer family, the LaBrants, were forced to issue a public apology in 2019 after they played an April Fools' Day Joke on their 6-year-old daughter Everleigh. The family pretended they were giving her dog away, eliciting tears throughout the video. As a result, many viewers felt that her parents, Sav and Cole, had inflicted unnecessary distress on her.

In the past few months, parents who film their children during meltdowns to demonstrate how to calm them down have found themselves the subject of ire on parenting Subreddits. Their critics argue that it's unfair to post content of children when they're at their most vulnerable, as it shows a lack of respect for a child's right to privacy.

Privacy-centric parenting

Even the staunchest advocates of child privacy know and understand the parental instinct of wanting to share their children's cuteness and talent with the world. "Our kids are the things usually we're the most proud of, the most excited about," said Adams. "It is normal to want to show them off and be proud of them."

When Adams started her account two years ago, she said her views were seen as more polarizing. But increasingly people seem to relate and share her concerns. Most of these are "average parents," naive to the risks they're exposing their kids to, but some are "commercial sharents" too.

Even though they don't always see eye to eye, the private conversations she's had with parents of children (she doesn't publicly call out anyone) with massive social media presences have been civil and productive. "I hope it opens more parents' eyes to the reality of the situation, because frankly this is all just a large social experiment," she said. "And it's being done on our kids. And that just doesn't seem like a good idea."

For Barkman, it's been "surprisingly easy, and hugely beneficial" to stop sharing content about her son. She's more present, and focuses only on capturing memories she wants to keep for herself.

"When motherhood is all consuming, it sometimes feels like that's all you have to offer, so I completely understand how we have slid into oversharing our children," she said. "It's a huge chunk of our identity and our hearts."

But Barkman recognizes the reality of the situation, which is that she doesn't know who's viewing her content and that she can't rely on tech platforms to protect her son. "We are raising a generation of children who have their entire lives broadcast online, and the newness of social media means we don't have much data on the impacts of that reality on children," she said. "I feel better acting with caution and letting my son have his privacy so that he can decide how he wants to be perceived by the world when he's ready and able."

---

Source

Tags:

• About Tiktok For Parents
• Tiktok Guide For Parents
• Positive Impact Of Tiktok On Youth
• The Effect Of Tiktok On Students Pdf
• What Parents Need To Know About Tiktok
• Reasons Why Tiktok Is Good For Kids
• About Tiktok For Parents
• Parent Reviews For Tiktok
• Tiktok Dad And Daughter
• Divorced Parents Tiktok

Apple Watch: It's been 5 years since my original review, and it holds up

Apple Watch: It's been 5 years since my original review, and it holds up

I'd love to say that when I first put on the Apple Watch, I'd never seen anything like it before. But of course, that's not true. By late 2014 I'd been surrounded by smartwatches for a few years. So when Apple announced it was making its own watch, my thought (as so often with Apple) was: finally.

The first smartwatch I reviewed at CNET was the Martian Passport, an analog watch that could make phone calls. It sounds so primitive now, but it was cool in early 2013. The Pebble Watch followed, and the Steel version became my favorite: It was like a Casio watch turned into a useful little pager-assistant. It was simple and had long battery life, and it was great.

There were others, too: Samsung's first smartwatches were ambitious (a camera?). Google's first Android Wear watches arrived in 2014. Meanwhile, there were Fitbits and Jawbone trackers galore.

I say this to lay the groundwork for the Apple Watch and what its impact was. Like the iPhone wasn't the first smartphone, the Apple Watch wasn't the first smartwatch... but it made the biggest footprint. It was another step validating that a world of wearables was here to stay. 

I was able to wear the Apple Watch a month before it went on sale. I spent a ton of time with it, getting used to both how it handled phone calls, and the activity tracking rings. I looked at my heart rate measurements. I accidentally ordered an Xbox One with an early Amazon app.

The Watch was, much like the first iPhone, sometimes feature-limited. But it also had some features that already stood out.

My original review was updated a year later, which you can read here. Some parts have changed, clearly, and Apple has updated the OS. But I'll comment on what I wrote then, and how I felt, and how that's evolved. Quotes from the original review are in italics.

The gold Apple Watch, way back when.

James Martin/CNET

An excellent design, with luxury overtones

Apple wants you to think of the Apple Watch as fine jewelry. Maybe that's a stretch, but in terms of craftsmanship, there isn't a more elegantly made piece of wearable tech. Look at the Apple Watch from a distance, and it might appear unremarkable in its rectangular simplicity compared with bolder, circular Android Wear watches. It's clearly a revamped sort of iPod Nano. But get closer, and you can see the seamless, excellent construction.

The first Apple Watch came in aluminum, steel and ramped all the way up to a gold model costing more than $10,000. Compared to other smartwatches, it screamed luxury.

Certain touches felt luxurious, too: the fine-feeling Digital Crown, which spun ever so smoothly like a real watch part, for instance. The OLED display, which was a first for an Apple product, looked crisp and bright.

The most amazing part, maybe, were the watch bands. Apple created a really nice series of specially designed straps, from a steel link to a clever magnetic Milanese mesh that were extremely expensive and impressively engineered. 

Its watch face designs were great, too, and they integrated some information from the iPhone that aimed to add at-a-glance ease of use. There was a Mickey Mouse watch face that danced! The Solar face showing sunrise and sunset, and the astronomy face that showed planetary alignments and moon phases, felt like magic. I wanted more, but Apple's assortment of watch faces was limited, and it didn't allow for third-party watch face design. That's still the case now.

A lot of the Apple Watch reminded me of the strides Apple began with the iPod Nano, which also had watch mode... and a Mickey Mouse watch face.

Sarah Tew

New technologies at first: fantastic haptics, a force-sensitive display

All Apple Watches have a new S1 processor made by Apple, that "taptic" haptic engine and a force-sensitive and very bright OLED display, which is differently sized on the 38mm and 42mm models. The watch has its own accelerometer, gyrometer and heart-rate monitor, but no onboard GPS. It uses Bluetooth 4.0 and 802.11b/g/n 2.4GHz Wi-Fi to connect to your phone or your home network. There's a built-in speaker and microphone, but no headphone jack.

As I wore the watch on the first day, I felt a rippling buzz and a metallic ping: one of my credit card payments showed up as a message. Apple's "Taptic Engine" and a built-in speaker convey both a range of advanced taps and vibrations, plus sounds. Unlike the buzz in a phone or most wearables, these haptics feel sharper: a single tap, or a ripple of them, or thumps.

Sometimes the feelings are too subtle: I don't know if I felt them or imagined them. My wrists might be numbed from too many smart devices. I set my alerts to "prominent" and got sharper nudges on my wrist.

The first watch introduced some ideas that eventually made their way to other iPhones. A "taptic engine" delivered on some amazingly refined vibration effects, ranging from a purr to a ping to a gentle tap. These were way ahead of what anybody else was doing -- and they weren't just a gimmick. The notification types associated with unique vibrations felt distinct. Sometimes, the vibrating taps on the first Watch weren't as powerful as I wanted. But with later updates, the haptics made parts of the interface seem real: virtual wheels, clicking as if moving with invisible gears.

The more advanced haptics made their way to the iPhone next, making us used to them now. Other phones, game consoles like the Nintendo Switch, and VR accessories, have evolved haptics since, but the Apple Watch was the first mainstream device that upped the haptics game.

Force Touch was another wild idea: Apple made its watch display force-sensitive, meaning a deeper press could work like pushing a button. Though this idea was refined further into 3D Touch on the iPhone 6S, 3D Touch was a technology that never became as necessary as expected, and current iPhone models have dropped the pressure-sensitive display tech completely.

The Apple Watch still has Force Touch, though, and I think it always will.

Digital Touch: I never used it much after that.

Sarah Tew

Lots of features. Too many features?

As you can see, this is a lot of stuff. Did I have fun using the watch? Yes, mostly, but there are so many features that I felt a little lost at times. There are so many ways to interact: swiping, touching, pressing harder into the display, a button and a clickable digital crown-wheel. Plus, there's Siri. Do I swipe, or click, or force touch or speak? Sometimes I didn't know where an app menu was. Or, I'd find getting back to an app I just had open would require an annoying series of crown clicks, swiping through apps, then opening the app again.

There's a reason I used the word "complicated" to describe my feelings using that first Apple Watch. Setting up bits of information, called complications, was slow and not always intuitive. Apps took a while to load, and were sometimes so slow that it was easier to check my phone instead. Quick glances and notifications, and phone calls, were fine. Apple Pay on the watch was clever, but would I use it? I wished the watch had more battery life.

I didn't like the overcomplicated feel. The design of the OS, and the card-like swappable mini-view apps that used to be on the Watch like a dock, changed over time. It's gotten better since.

Storing music on the watch, while it took a while to sync, was easier than attempts on Samsung Gear or Android Wear. Of course, I had to hunt for a good pair of Bluetooth headphones to connect with the watch.

Today I still forget to dive into and make the most of the apps on the watch. I just dusted off Walkie Talkie: it's cool. There's noise monitoring. One app lets me remote control my iPhone camera, which has been a huge help for my stay-at-home self-shot videos. The Remote app helps me when I lose the Apple TV remote every other day. 

Third-party apps, and the grid of options? It turns out I don't use them much at all. I don't dig down deep into the layers of functions. I prefer what's on the surface: watch faces, and their readouts. But I've come to appreciate the watch's surprising number of options and settings. It's better than not having them at all.

The rings were the beginning.

Sarah Tew/CNET

Fitness: The ring idea was just the beginning

The Apple Watch doesn't work any fitness miracles that the rest of the wearable world hasn't already invented, and it doesn't ship with any new magical sensors that change the game. But the Apple-made integrated fitness apps, Activity and Workout, are far and away the best fitness apps on any existing smartwatch that isn't a dedicated "fitness watch" (Samsung Gear, Android Wear, Pebble and the like). A clever three-ring method of tracking daily activity, which simultaneously measures and rewards daily calorie burn, active exercise and standing up, feels like a fusion of rewards and metrics seen on the Nike FuelBand, Jawbone Up, Fitbit and others. 

I appreciated Apple's complete-the-ring motivational activity tracker, which felt inspired by wearables like the Nike FuelBand (not surprising, since Apple's head of fitness, Jay Blahnik, arrived from Nike). For the red ring's daily goals, it's great. It felt too easy to complete the blue Stand ring, and it still does.

There are tons of fitness advancements Apple has made on the Watch in the last five years: GPS, resting heart rate, workout controls, social sharing, third-party app integration, swimming, modes for accessibility, activity trends -- and I haven't even discussed Apple's massive health aspirations like adding ECG, checking for falls, monitoring elevated or irregular heart rate or women's health tracking. There is some form of coaching and motivation, too. But I'd still love to see more of that. I hit a wall when trying to be fit, and there's only so much watches seem to help.

The first Apple Watch was more of a Fitbit. Now, it's more of a health companion. Those two worlds still feel like they need to dovetail and grow. There are missing features, too, like sleep tracking, which feels like the inevitable next step.

You still need an iPhone, just like in 2015.

Sarah Tew

It was, and still is, an iPhone accessory

Much like most other smartwatches, the Apple Watch isn't a standalone device -- it's a phone accessory. Android Wear, Samsung Gear, Pebble and others work the same way. But here, you must own an iPhone 5 or later to use the Watch. A few Apple Watch functions work away from the phone, but the watch primarily works alongside the phone as an extension, a second screen and basically another part of your iOS experience. It's a symbiote.

One thing I noted back then was that you needed an iPhone to use the Apple Watch. Unlike other wearables that can pair with Android or iOS, or even sync with a computer, the Apple Watch was always designed to live symbiotically with the iPhone.

That's still the case now. Even with independent cellular options, and an on-watch App Store, you can't use the Watch without pairing to an iPhone. And it still won't work with Android. It's a shame, because a fully standalone watch could be a really helpful tool for many people who don't have iPhones, and it could even be a phone alternative (for kids, maybe).

Apple's AirPods created a gadget trinity where the Watch, the iPhone and AirPods can all work seamlessly together. But that trinity is an expensive one. The entry price of the Apple Watch has dropped, at least. But it feels like an extension of the iPhone more than its own device, even now.

The Apple Watch Series 5: much better, with a few similarities.

Sarah Tew/CNET

Today: the best watch in a war of attrition

You don't need an Apple Watch. In many ways, it's a toy: an amazing little do-it-all, a clever invention, a possibly time-saving companion, a wrist-worn assistant. It's also mostly a phone accessory for now. In the months and years to come, that may change: with Apple's assortment of iPads, Macs, Apple TV and who knows what else to come, the watch could end up being a remote and accessory to many things. Maybe it'll be the key to unlock a world of smart appliances, cars and connected places. In that type of world, a smartwatch could end up feeling utterly essential.

I think back to what the Apple Watch was competing against back then: Jawbone, Pebble, Fitbit, Google's Android Wear, Samsung's watches, the Microsoft Band. A lot of competitors are gone now. Fitbit was acquired by Google. Samsung still has watches. Garmin makes lots of dedicated fitness watches. There are still plenty of more affordable relative newcomers, too.

The original Apple Watch, with the Pebble Steel, Moto 360 and the original iPod Nano with wristband (clockwise from top left).

Sarah Tew

In a field of fewer alternatives, the Apple Watch's consistent addition of new features and ongoing performance improvements has made it the best option. It's Apple's commitment to gradual improvements that has made it a stand-out watch now, especially compared to the struggles of Google's Wear OS.

The Apple Watch is still an iPhone accessory. And it's still not an essential product. But it's become a really fluid and useful device, one with lots of key upgrades that work, and one that's a lot easier to use.

What's the best smartwatch now? The Apple Watch. That doesn't mean I don't want to see improvements: battery life, sleep tracking, a watch face store and most importantly, Android support and true standalone function. If the last five years are any indication, Apple will tackle these problems on its own... time.

---

Source

Tags:

• Apple Watch It S Been 5 Years Since Demonetisation
• Apple Watch It S Been 5 Years Since My Mom
• Apple Watch It S Been 5 Months Since You Went Away
• Apple Watch It S Been Seven Hours And Fifteen Days
• Apple Watch It Spin
• Apple Watch Bands
• Apple Watch Series 3

Coffee grind size: Why it matters and what you should be using

Coffee grind size: Why it matters and what you should be using

Making better coffee at home is spending a little extra time on a few, simple steps, such as using the correct temperature water, weighing coffee instead measuring by volume, and grinding your own beans on the spot.

Of everything you might encounter when brewing at home, grinding coffee is arguably one of the most crucial steps, as grind size alone can dramatically change the taste of your cup. Grind size and consistency can be the difference between one of the best cups you've ever had and a bitter, undrinkable mess.

Discover how grind size affects your cup and which is right for your brew method of choice.

Why grind size matters

When it comes to grind size, there are three factors which make the biggest difference: contact time,extraction rate and flow rate. To put it simply:

• The extraction rate of coffee grounds increases with a larger surface area.
• To increase surface area, grind the coffee finer.
• The higher the extraction rate, the less contact time is needed.
• A finer grind can reduce the flow rate of water, increasing the contact time.

Knowing this, if you have a brew method with a short contact time, the grind should be finer. In an immersion brewer, which steeps coffee grounds in water for several minutes, the contact time is much higher and, thus, requires a more coarse grind than most other brew methods.

If the contact time is too high or the grind is too fine, it will result in an over-extracted brew which can be bitter. If the grind is too coarse or the contact time is too short, the coffee will turn out weak.

Finding the proper balance between the two will help in producing the best cup of coffee possible.

Different types of filters, pressure and temperature can also play a part in determining grind size, but most brewing methods operate between 195 and 205 degrees Fahrenheit (90.6 and 96.1 degrees Celsius) with little to no added pressure.

Which grind size should you use?

With an array of different brewing methods, knowing which grind size to use is crucial to getting the best possible cup.

Taylor Martin/CNET

• Turkish coffee calls for an extra fine grind size, similar to that of powdered sugar.
• Espresso is a brewed through using pressure (approximately 9 bar) to force water through compacted coffee grounds. The contact time is very short, requiring an extra fine grind size.
• The AeroPress is a popular single-cup manual coffee maker. It's similar to a French press in design and use, though users have come up with a laundry list of ways to brew. Recommended grind size is between medium and fine, depending on steep time.
• Siphon brewers use pressure to force water into a chamber holding the coffee grounds. Once the steep has finished, heat is removed, which creates a vacuum in the lower chamber and pulls the water through a filter. This method calls for a medium-fine grind size.
• Pour-over brewers come in an array of different sizes and shapes. While different brewers require varying grind sizes to control the flow rate of water, most pour over methods call for a medium to medium-fine grind.
• A stovetop espresso maker or Moka pot is a coffee maker which uses steam pressure to force water upwards through a filter basket full of coffee grounds. The contact time is quite short, but the pressure (approximately 1.5 bar) is a bit higher than your typical manual brewer. It calls for a medium grind size.
• A single-cup coffee maker, such as a Keurig or Verismo machine, is a drip brewer method, similar to the commercial drip brewers found in cafes. The contact time is fairly low, meaning it calls for a medium to medium-fine grind size, comparable to that of table salt.
• Drip coffee is what you typically get from a cafe or coffee shop. It's made in large batches and contact time is dictated by a small hole in the bottom of the brewing basket, so recommended grind size varies between medium-coarse to medium.
• The French press is an immersion brewer. Water is added to coffee grounds and allowed to steep for several minutes before straining out the grounds. This method calls for a coarse grind setting.
• Cold Brew, unlike other brewing methods, is done at or below room temperature and takes between 12 and 72 hours. Due to the low temperature, the extraction rate is low, regardless of grind size. A coarse or extra coarse grind size is recommended, as it's easier to filter. A finer grind size will work just as well (with a slightly shorter steep time), but can cause the final product to appear a bit cloudy.

Of course, all the above recommendations are just that -- recommendations. They are subject to change based on preferences and slight differences in brewers. Getting the grind size exactly right requires some testing and tweaking.

If you feel your cup of coffee is a tad weak, try a slightly finer grind size next time. Or if the coffee tastes too strong or slightly bitter, test with a slightly larger grind size to see if it solves the problem.

---

Source

Tags:

• How Does Grind Size Affect Coffee
• Does Grinding Coffee Finer Make It Stronger
• Coffee Grind Size Chart Pdf
• Coffee Grind Size Guide
• How To Determine Coffee Grind Size
• Advantages Of Grinding Your Own Coffee
• Coffee Grind Size Guide
• What Are Coffee Grinds
• Coffee Grinder Walmart
• Coffee Grinders Top Rated
• Coffee Grinders For Sale
• Coffee Grinder Manual