Not to apologize for the irresponsible deployment of this chatbot but it should be noted that the guy got the number from a Google search (think about the results you'd get for "facebook support number"). It's been a massive problem for at least the last 10 years.
Corporations really are amazing. They are, simultaneously, in a superposition of getting away with crimes because they don't exist, and providing goods and services and benefitting shareholders because they do. Remarkable.
No they don't. Rules for companies and individuals are different in this country, unless you possess some secret to getting away with potentially ruining the lives of 1.5 times the population of the United States with the financial equivalent of a slap on the wrist.
Ah, so you want a service that forces employers to tell the truth. I think that's called "Congress", but it looks like it's been abandoned for a few years now.
Crazy idea: provide a search box, and when the user hits "enter", POST the data to the backend, which queries the database, and then returns the relevant results.
It's possible to make autosuggest performant on poor Internet connections, it just needs a little more thought put into optimizing for it:
1. Debounce!
2. Use WebSockets to minimize unnecessary round trips
3. Cache previous results and use them when the input is a superstring of a previous input (e.g. results for "Android mobile dev" will always be a subset of the results for "mobile dev")
How is securely connecting to a device that isn’t, itself, connected to the cloud, fetching a webpage from it, and rendering it out of scope for a web browser? Certainly URLs like http://192.168.1.1 have been in scope for decades — why can’t a web browser figure out how to support that use case well?
I truly do not understand the complaints about Firefox, the browser (and not Mozilla's questionable stewardship thereof). Every time someone starts talking about their issue, it's either something super niche and inconsequential, or something that doesn't seem to have sufficient evidence to blame on the browser (turns out, crappy web apps will make any browser slow to a crawl). I used Chrome for a few years back in the mid-teens, then switched back to Firefox, and manage to use the Web just fine. It's a browser, it renders web pages. I really don't understand the fuss. Meanwhile, Google (the advertising company) would totally like you to use Google (the browser), for totally innocent reasons.
Those web APIs aren't actually standard (WebUSB, for example, is still in draft status), and they have some gnarly privacy implications.
Google steamrolls over standards bodies, and then somehow people believe their browser is the standard. I'm not sure if this is a concerted marketing effort by Google, or simply intellectual laziness. Either way, though, Firefox is not at fault for not supporting non-standard Web APIs.
While I’d never personally use Chrome, you can describe this in another way too.
“Chrome supports draft standards like webUSB, which more and more hardware tools and platforms have started to adopt to enable being able to support users regardless of platform, without needing to design native apps for them.”
You can argue this is good in other ways too, it means that instead of a potentially invasive hardware application for something you might configure or update once, you are using something heavily sandboxed that has to request permissions for anything outside the normal. Another benefit is that depending on what the hardware device is, suddenly these hardware devices can be configured on platforms like Linux and FreeBSD, where vendors are much less inclined to support or cater to natively.
Say what you want about draft standards, but Firefox not playing ball and adopting commonly used ones is a massive miss on its part that hurts its ability to be competitive.
Until Google decides to give developers the ability to let the browser invade the rest of the system, which, in six months, will suddenly be necessary for everyone to do things like bank online and pay utility bills.
