I find it amusing and interesting that the "conservatives" want businesses to have rights and religion when they are discriminating against gays, but freak out when some business decides they don't want said "conservatives" as a customer.
It's a bit like the "tolerance" groups that only have tolerance for the groups/religions/etc. THEY like.
Left/Right, D/R, doesn't matter. They are all stupid.:)
In the IT groups I deal with, it's not IT requiring it. It's management. So yes, it is in fact, the users that are the problem there too.
Of course, there are always exceptions. Ideally, SSO without constant password changes and second factor would be a huge help, but good luck getting the corp to cut loose for 200 second factor auth keys.
Infrastructure should be required to be it's own thing, no direct sales, no content. This could be wires, fiber, or cellular/radio. I doubt we could get cellular, but wired needs to go here last decade.
ISPs ride on the infrastructure, and compete on it providing services to business, residential, etc.. I would also add a rule that the infrastructure provider has to work with any ISP and the rates are the same for everyone. 100 Mbit/s costs the same for 1M customers as 100 customers. No special deals for the incumbents.
Content should be required to be 100% separated from both. Even so far as they can't own stock in each other or share C** executives.
I honestly don't see a good reason to mess with the current Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple. Perhaps saying you can't own the store and sell apps on it, but even that's a little goofy and I can't think of any real abuses with it. Perhaps with Apple's walled garden, but it's not like Apple charges for their apps. Anyone can set up a social site, search engine, online store, etc.. There are even third party app stores (Amazon, F-Droid, for example). I don't see how anti-trust applies here.
I agree. On the MBP though, take it to Apple and let them replace it, or DIY. I still run a 2010 MBP. I had the battery going and the mainboard had the graphics chip recall. They replaced the battery for free with the mainboard.
But yes, sealed in batteries are a really bad idea that needs to go.
While consumers are certainly part of the problem, even those of us that would like something else have no options. If there is no other choice, you can't vote with your wallet, other than to not buy at all, which is actually stated as one of the reasons Apple growth is slowing. People are keeping machines longer. This isn't just because they are being cheap. I would buy a new Macbook Pro right now if they would offer one I'm willing to spend money on. My existing machine is from 2010 and works great still, in large part because I could upgrade the RAM and install an SSD. It's getting a bit up there, and the new CPUs would make a difference now. But with the lock in and trying to force thin to the point that it's breaking things like the fucking screen and keyboard, I'm not interested. Laptops are pretty useless without those.:)
They never would, but if they offered a mainboard upgrade for my existing machine, I'd be all over it. Even a new machine with the same form factor, newer CPU and such would be great. But I require a working keyboard and screen. The magsafe power and some of the ports missing on the new machines would also be very welcome.
Obviously this assumes Apple only. I'd be willing to consider something else, but I really don't want to go back to Windows and there aren't any interesting Linux laptops available.
We had a recent article about concrete being a huge source of atmospheric CO2. Nuke plants use a LOT of concrete. Has that been accounted for? Maybe it has, but it seems worth mentioning.
I think most people will agree that this wall stuff, if it's to be useful, is going to take FAR more than $5B. Even if they can build it for that, which I doubt, they can't keep it repaired and manned for any length of time with that level of funding. If I thought that was all it would take, I'd support it. But it won't. The numbers just don't add up, the ROI isn't there. And a businessman should know that. This is about stroking his ego, period.
About the only border control I could see being useful for any length of time in that price range would be land mines. Effective, perhaps, but even if the people in the US agree to it, you'll have a hell of a shitstorm on your hands on the world stage. And I suspect a vote of the people would not agree to it. Minefields are considered by most to be up there with the holocaust.
And yes, signing or not signing things is really his job, I totally agree with that. It's his choice to sign or not. So no, it's not executive overreach. I do agree there. I also think it's a stupid temper tantrum, but it is certainly his right to do so.
If you want to help with e-waste, you should like the headphone port. Breaking the USB port is one of the biggest reasons I see people buy a new device. They can't fix them, and they can't charge them now with the broken port. Using adapter dongles makes this worse as now you're hanging something else off that critical port. Combined with fixed batteries, so users can't just pull the battery and use a seperate charger, users now have bricks they can't use.
If you really want to limit tossing good devices, require the headphone port and the USB port to be on seperate boards that are easily replaced and require removable batteries.
To go even further, require that manufacturers provide the required code and any signing keys needed so that maker types can repurpose them. Sure, they can't run the latest phone software, but the built in stuff would make a kickass robot control board or similar. But people can't really do that due to forced obsolescence and lack of code. Old phones could be great for lots of stuff that way. Or even fixed up and re-used as phones. But then the MBAs can't force as many people to buy the latest.
Then require the US telcos to block all calls from international sources that do not enforce it on their end. They will get their shit in order real fast then. They can do it now, but they profit from not doing it. So turn it around on them. One fail and you're blocked for an hour. 4 for a day.
While they are at it, tell Google to quit being dickbags and implement contact list whitelisting. Not in my contacts, direct to voicemail or dropped entirely at the user's discretion. Apple already does it, which tells me a fair bit about Google. I know we like to hate on Apple around here, with some good reasons, but Google is getting to be far worse.
Living under rightist cronies in Utah, they are no better and not really any worse either. The false dichotomy of D/R, red/blue is the problem. Neither group really wants to limit government, they differ in what areas they prefer more government, but the net result is always more and always helps out those with the most gold.
Most mainstream EVs charge fine on a 15A 110V circuit. That's really an overnight charge, but it works. At home fast-charge is about 4 hours, 30A 220V. An oven or electric clothing dryer outlet. Nothing special.
There are high energy chargers out there that can push 100A or more. They are usually only used if you need to charge on the go. Most EV users don't bother with them most of the time. >90% of the time my driving for a day uses less than half the capacity of my battery. I've used public charging twice, more out of curiosity than anything else.
In my garage, I installed a 30A/220V unit. Easy. It takes #8 copper wire. Nothing to it. About 6 months ago, my employer installed a bank of 6 of these in the parking garage, most of us are able to charge either in the morning or afternoon with these. Assuming someone doesn't leave their car there all day. There are a couple jerks most days.
As for the grid, if you're getting brownouts from AC, your power company and local government are doing it wrong. In my area, we have no such issues. AC+EV is about the same as AC+Oven. Likely better as it isn't adding heat to the room you're trying to cool. And the power company could offer time based metering to encourage people to charge in the low times etc.. It's also not like everyone is going to switch overnight. There will be decades for things to get sorted out.
Current EVs are not 100% solutions. They are likely able to be close to 80% though. Combined with natural gas and propane, you probably could convert a small country like Israel without too much hassle. And that doesn't even attempt to take advancements into account.
And, yet, I don't need 4 different music streaming services to listen to everything. Metal, country, rock, pop, boy bands, funk, jazz, it's all there in one app for one price. And somehow they manage to make money. If you want my money, that's the level of service I require. I don't want to exit the app I'm in, and load HBO for Game of Thrones, then switch to Netflix for Altered Carbon, then switch to CBS for ST:D. I want to simply tell the app I'm in and paying for that I want to watch something else. They are CAUSING the piracy, then whining about it. So, no, I don't feel bad for them. Most people are willing to pay for this. I pay for Netflix for this, even though I don't get it all, it's generally close enough. With Disney/Fox/Marvel/etc. switching to their own, I may well just dust off the old eye patch.
What we are paying for is CONVENIENCE. If you won't give it to us, we can get it for free with a little less convenience. It's not even that much less convenient.
It works fine for music. I can pay for one of Spotify, Amazon, Apple, Google, etc... I can listen to all the music. If I had to pay for all of them to get all the music I wanted, I would pay for none of them and go back to maintaining my own library via whatever means I felt like. That's the problem. We don't care how many services there are to choose from, we care that there is so much exclusivity. The reason music piracy is fading is that streaming services have everything and are cheap. Some are even free with ads. Sure there are still a few people unwilling to pay, but those people were ALWAYS unwilling to pay and there will always be some of them. Everyone else just wanted to enjoy music for a reasonable price without all the silly restrictions. It's really the same with video. Say I watch a few shows, I don't want to have to pay for and use a seperate application for each one. I want to pay one that I happen to like and watch it all there. Play exclusivity games and people will shrug and pirate. Keep it reasonably priced and available, and most people won't bother.
The other thing I hate even more about this USB-C everything is that you are now using the most important bit of the phone for audio. If I break the audio jack, it's annoying. If I break the USB-C, I can't charge the damn phone! Without charge, a phone is useless. And they solder that port to the mainboard, so you can't really replace it. I can do SMT soldering, but those ports are a PITA to replace. And damage to the port often rips up traces on the board. They can't physically support them properly, because there's no room to do so with the devices so stupid thin.
I'm still running a V20 as it has the audio jack, SD support, and replaceable batteries. I even use an extended battery, makes the phone much easier to hold and I never run out of power. If I get low, even 30min on a quick charger gets more than enough to finish up the day, but that rarely happens. I can generally go 2 days on a charge, saving a little wear on the USB port. With improvements in mobile CPUs and such slowing down, using an "old" device isn't a big deal these days.
Another thing I dislike about OnePlus, their proprietary fast charge. I don't really care if they think it's better. Qualcomm's quick charge and USB-PD have it covered. Proprietary charging is something that should have died years ago. Even Qualcomm at this point should bow out for USB-PD, even though there are things I like better about QC.
It would be nice if someone made a phone I was willing to buy. It's a bit like replacing my older Macbook Pro. Apple makes nothing I want anymore, and OSX is going downhill fast. And most of the Windows machines are crap, and run Windows, though Linux would fix that.
Exactly. It's not perfect, but nothing is. However, making the batteries easy to remove means they are more likely to be isolated from the rest of the material and can even be stored in fire-resistant containers for recycling etc..
It would also be nice to require that devices manufacturers no longer want to support are required to be provided with code and unlock keys so they can be re-used by makers etc.. Lots of old phones and such would be great for projects, but we can't use them because they are so locked down and/or have non-replaceable batteries. At the very least, it keeps them out of the waste stream that much longer.
Long term we need to figure out a way to make recycling them more workable. I have yet to see a good option for that though.
I'm all for research into new nuclear designs and processes. However, I disagree that the current form is economical if you include all costs associated with decommissioning and cleanup of the sites. This is not generally done, the companies involved take the money, move it, declare bankruptcy or get out of paying for it due to regulatory capture, and leave the taxpayers with the bill. This is not a sustainable solution.
I'd love to see more of them, and particularly more modern designs. However, I need to see a few things happen first.
1) Any company must post a bond equal to the estimated cleanup costs including inflation. Inflation adjustments can be made every 5 years. They can use the money in this bond to pay for cleanup, if they don't do it the local government will use the money to do so. Cleanup means radiation and other chemical contamination are returned to pre-construction levels and suitable for human habitation within 5 years.
2) Reprocessing to reduce waste levels. The current setup is stupid and needs to die. The costs involved are a cost of doing business. If that drives up the costs of running the reactor, it should make power generated by it cost more. No different from cleaning up coal ash etc..
3) Yucca Mountain or other long term facility for storage of waste we cannot yet handle properly and contaminated reactor parts. The companies that store material here will pay for the full cost of storage as part of #1.
4) Any company caught cutting corners on safety and maintenance is subject to the corporate death penalty and the C** level execs are personally liable for any damages.
And before you accuse me of favoring other types, I'm fine with all of them held to the same requirements. Want to build a 100 acre solar array? Same deal. Of course, without radioactive or chemical toxins, these costs will be much lower, but there's no reason they shouldn't have the same requirements. For example, if there are batteries on site, they could leak, catch fire, etc.. Either way, they should also be required to clean up the mess they make. I'm tired of the bullshit companies being allowed to privatize the profit while dumping the costs on the public.
1) Right to repair. They are required to allow users to install updates and repair the devices. Flash is not significantly more expensive than OTP at this point, so cost is not an excuse. If the company chooses not to provide further software updates, they are required to release full source code, schematics, and any keys the user would require to sign it with. Ideally, devices would also include a user-programmable key space so we could also generate our own keys. And then remote disable existing devices until the user fixes it. Sucks, but unmaintained devices are a huge risk. There's no need to landfill them, but we can't allow them to keep running. And yes, this does open a DoS attack, but only on the devices themselves, not all of us. A warning about it for existing users should be mandatory as well, 30 days perhaps?
2) Liability for breaches. The manufacturer is liable for any and all damages caused by insecurity in their devices for disclosed attacks. Zero-days are probably unreasonable to punish them for here. But if your device is still vulnerable to, say, heartbleed, you deserve it. Your smart lock fails and my house gets robbed, you pay. Management that signs off on it are personally liable. We've all seen cases where the right way would take too long and/or cost too much so the PHB mandates that you not do it properly. Not that I would own a smart lock, but that's beside the point.:)
Decent security doesn't have to use more code. It would likely use LESS as more code usually means a larger attack surface. 90% of the IoT attacks I've seen are either lack of verification on updates, allowing MITM attacks, or default admin passwords. All are easy and cheap to fix.
As for small manufacturers being crushed, if they can't do the job properly, they SHOULD be crushed. Evolve or die.
And even that may not be all that great. It doesn't cover the cheap Chinese imports that come in direct. I don't see any way we can deal with that problem with a US law. Even a UN level setup would likely be no good. And then you get into various schemes to avoid responsibility. So while I see why the idea appeals to people, I don't think it's practical. I still think right to repair should be the law though. At least we could get anything sold by a US company that way. And it would limit the amount of electronic waste as there would be a market for older but still useful gear we could reuse.
Of course they have. What you're failing to realize, is that the "right" is no better. They just have differing identities. The only option I see is to ignore both sides and vote for other people. By themselves, they might not do much, but if we get more of a mix in the pot we have a better chance of coming out somewhere in the middle.
Will the people I vote for win elections? Maybe not. That's not the point though. Left/Right, Democrat/Republican, it's all a false dichotomy. If people choose to realize that, something might be done about it. But doing nothing or the same thing we've always done is certainly not going to achieve anything new.
Google's policy seems reasonable. There's a fixed version, so disclose the info.
Not only is it a shitty installer, the whole idea of an installer app on Android is shitty. Just have people download the APK and use the built in package installer. If it's about download size, use the same trick most big games do and have the app load data files on first launch into its own protected data directory. All of that is built in and is quite safe and audited.
Not that Google never does anything shitty, but this one is on Epic.
Before you go off about EU taxes, go add up how much you pay in all the various taxes in most US states. In my area, it's above 50%. And I get far worse results for my money.
Does that mean I want the EU system here? Not really. I honestly don't have a good solution. But I'm also not naive enough to believe that I'm taxed so much less that our friends across the pond. Their governments are just more honest about it is all.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The first phrase is a justification for the second. It should also be noted that the US government has no authority to maintain a standing army, at least, not at the time it was written. There is some debate about that in the present time. So the militia was the army. "regulated" in this context was often used in the period to mean "equipped". A soldier without a weapon is pretty useless, so they wanted to ensure that their pool of soldiers had weapons available.
There is some debate about that interpretation in the present day as well, but looking at the language of the time, that makes the most sense to me. There is also the idea that from a legal perspective, things added later supersede those previous. Thus amendments supersede the original terms. Otherwise, only white male landowners would be allowed to vote, for example. As the latest text that has anything to do with weapons in the document is "shall not be infringed", that is pretty clear. This also creates some issues with things like WMDs, which I think the vast majority would agree should not be held privately, if at all.
Slashdot Mirror
I find it amusing and interesting that the "conservatives" want businesses to have rights and religion when they are discriminating against gays, but freak out when some business decides they don't want said "conservatives" as a customer.
It's a bit like the "tolerance" groups that only have tolerance for the groups/religions/etc. THEY like.
Left/Right, D/R, doesn't matter. They are all stupid. :)
Do you really trust they will do something LESS stupid than the old rules?
The FCC had no choice about the old rules either. They tried that, the courts shut them down and said they needed Title II if they wanted to do that.
In the IT groups I deal with, it's not IT requiring it. It's management. So yes, it is in fact, the users that are the problem there too.
Of course, there are always exceptions. Ideally, SSO without constant password changes and second factor would be a huge help, but good luck getting the corp to cut loose for 200 second factor auth keys.
Sure. However, while I don't expect a carpenter to forge a hammer, I do expect them to be able to use it without embedding it in the guy next to them.
Just like I don't expect the marketing guy to write the OS, but I do expect them to be able to use it for basic tasks without hand holding from IT.
100% agree.
Infrastructure should be required to be it's own thing, no direct sales, no content. This could be wires, fiber, or cellular/radio. I doubt we could get cellular, but wired needs to go here last decade.
ISPs ride on the infrastructure, and compete on it providing services to business, residential, etc.. I would also add a rule that the infrastructure provider has to work with any ISP and the rates are the same for everyone. 100 Mbit/s costs the same for 1M customers as 100 customers. No special deals for the incumbents.
Content should be required to be 100% separated from both. Even so far as they can't own stock in each other or share C** executives.
I honestly don't see a good reason to mess with the current Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple. Perhaps saying you can't own the store and sell apps on it, but even that's a little goofy and I can't think of any real abuses with it. Perhaps with Apple's walled garden, but it's not like Apple charges for their apps. Anyone can set up a social site, search engine, online store, etc.. There are even third party app stores (Amazon, F-Droid, for example). I don't see how anti-trust applies here.
I agree. On the MBP though, take it to Apple and let them replace it, or DIY. I still run a 2010 MBP. I had the battery going and the mainboard had the graphics chip recall. They replaced the battery for free with the mainboard.
But yes, sealed in batteries are a really bad idea that needs to go.
Thanks for the tip. I'll check out the compatibility with the latest models as I consider options.
While consumers are certainly part of the problem, even those of us that would like something else have no options. If there is no other choice, you can't vote with your wallet, other than to not buy at all, which is actually stated as one of the reasons Apple growth is slowing. People are keeping machines longer. This isn't just because they are being cheap. I would buy a new Macbook Pro right now if they would offer one I'm willing to spend money on. My existing machine is from 2010 and works great still, in large part because I could upgrade the RAM and install an SSD. It's getting a bit up there, and the new CPUs would make a difference now. But with the lock in and trying to force thin to the point that it's breaking things like the fucking screen and keyboard, I'm not interested. Laptops are pretty useless without those. :)
They never would, but if they offered a mainboard upgrade for my existing machine, I'd be all over it. Even a new machine with the same form factor, newer CPU and such would be great. But I require a working keyboard and screen. The magsafe power and some of the ports missing on the new machines would also be very welcome.
Obviously this assumes Apple only. I'd be willing to consider something else, but I really don't want to go back to Windows and there aren't any interesting Linux laptops available.
We had a recent article about concrete being a huge source of atmospheric CO2. Nuke plants use a LOT of concrete. Has that been accounted for? Maybe it has, but it seems worth mentioning.
I think most people will agree that this wall stuff, if it's to be useful, is going to take FAR more than $5B. Even if they can build it for that, which I doubt, they can't keep it repaired and manned for any length of time with that level of funding. If I thought that was all it would take, I'd support it. But it won't. The numbers just don't add up, the ROI isn't there. And a businessman should know that. This is about stroking his ego, period.
About the only border control I could see being useful for any length of time in that price range would be land mines. Effective, perhaps, but even if the people in the US agree to it, you'll have a hell of a shitstorm on your hands on the world stage. And I suspect a vote of the people would not agree to it. Minefields are considered by most to be up there with the holocaust.
And yes, signing or not signing things is really his job, I totally agree with that. It's his choice to sign or not. So no, it's not executive overreach. I do agree there. I also think it's a stupid temper tantrum, but it is certainly his right to do so.
How about OnShape? It's web based, so that might cause other issues though.
If you want to help with e-waste, you should like the headphone port. Breaking the USB port is one of the biggest reasons I see people buy a new device. They can't fix them, and they can't charge them now with the broken port. Using adapter dongles makes this worse as now you're hanging something else off that critical port. Combined with fixed batteries, so users can't just pull the battery and use a seperate charger, users now have bricks they can't use.
If you really want to limit tossing good devices, require the headphone port and the USB port to be on seperate boards that are easily replaced and require removable batteries.
To go even further, require that manufacturers provide the required code and any signing keys needed so that maker types can repurpose them. Sure, they can't run the latest phone software, but the built in stuff would make a kickass robot control board or similar. But people can't really do that due to forced obsolescence and lack of code. Old phones could be great for lots of stuff that way. Or even fixed up and re-used as phones. But then the MBAs can't force as many people to buy the latest.
Then require the US telcos to block all calls from international sources that do not enforce it on their end. They will get their shit in order real fast then. They can do it now, but they profit from not doing it. So turn it around on them. One fail and you're blocked for an hour. 4 for a day.
While they are at it, tell Google to quit being dickbags and implement contact list whitelisting. Not in my contacts, direct to voicemail or dropped entirely at the user's discretion. Apple already does it, which tells me a fair bit about Google. I know we like to hate on Apple around here, with some good reasons, but Google is getting to be far worse.
Living under rightist cronies in Utah, they are no better and not really any worse either. The false dichotomy of D/R, red/blue is the problem. Neither group really wants to limit government, they differ in what areas they prefer more government, but the net result is always more and always helps out those with the most gold.
Most mainstream EVs charge fine on a 15A 110V circuit. That's really an overnight charge, but it works. At home fast-charge is about 4 hours, 30A 220V. An oven or electric clothing dryer outlet. Nothing special.
There are high energy chargers out there that can push 100A or more. They are usually only used if you need to charge on the go. Most EV users don't bother with them most of the time. >90% of the time my driving for a day uses less than half the capacity of my battery. I've used public charging twice, more out of curiosity than anything else.
In my garage, I installed a 30A/220V unit. Easy. It takes #8 copper wire. Nothing to it. About 6 months ago, my employer installed a bank of 6 of these in the parking garage, most of us are able to charge either in the morning or afternoon with these. Assuming someone doesn't leave their car there all day. There are a couple jerks most days.
As for the grid, if you're getting brownouts from AC, your power company and local government are doing it wrong. In my area, we have no such issues. AC+EV is about the same as AC+Oven. Likely better as it isn't adding heat to the room you're trying to cool. And the power company could offer time based metering to encourage people to charge in the low times etc.. It's also not like everyone is going to switch overnight. There will be decades for things to get sorted out.
Current EVs are not 100% solutions. They are likely able to be close to 80% though. Combined with natural gas and propane, you probably could convert a small country like Israel without too much hassle. And that doesn't even attempt to take advancements into account.
And, yet, I don't need 4 different music streaming services to listen to everything. Metal, country, rock, pop, boy bands, funk, jazz, it's all there in one app for one price. And somehow they manage to make money. If you want my money, that's the level of service I require. I don't want to exit the app I'm in, and load HBO for Game of Thrones, then switch to Netflix for Altered Carbon, then switch to CBS for ST:D. I want to simply tell the app I'm in and paying for that I want to watch something else. They are CAUSING the piracy, then whining about it. So, no, I don't feel bad for them. Most people are willing to pay for this. I pay for Netflix for this, even though I don't get it all, it's generally close enough. With Disney/Fox/Marvel/etc. switching to their own, I may well just dust off the old eye patch.
What we are paying for is CONVENIENCE. If you won't give it to us, we can get it for free with a little less convenience. It's not even that much less convenient.
It works fine for music. I can pay for one of Spotify, Amazon, Apple, Google, etc... I can listen to all the music. If I had to pay for all of them to get all the music I wanted, I would pay for none of them and go back to maintaining my own library via whatever means I felt like. That's the problem. We don't care how many services there are to choose from, we care that there is so much exclusivity. The reason music piracy is fading is that streaming services have everything and are cheap. Some are even free with ads. Sure there are still a few people unwilling to pay, but those people were ALWAYS unwilling to pay and there will always be some of them. Everyone else just wanted to enjoy music for a reasonable price without all the silly restrictions. It's really the same with video. Say I watch a few shows, I don't want to have to pay for and use a seperate application for each one. I want to pay one that I happen to like and watch it all there. Play exclusivity games and people will shrug and pirate. Keep it reasonably priced and available, and most people won't bother.
The other thing I hate even more about this USB-C everything is that you are now using the most important bit of the phone for audio. If I break the audio jack, it's annoying. If I break the USB-C, I can't charge the damn phone! Without charge, a phone is useless. And they solder that port to the mainboard, so you can't really replace it. I can do SMT soldering, but those ports are a PITA to replace. And damage to the port often rips up traces on the board. They can't physically support them properly, because there's no room to do so with the devices so stupid thin.
I'm still running a V20 as it has the audio jack, SD support, and replaceable batteries. I even use an extended battery, makes the phone much easier to hold and I never run out of power. If I get low, even 30min on a quick charger gets more than enough to finish up the day, but that rarely happens. I can generally go 2 days on a charge, saving a little wear on the USB port. With improvements in mobile CPUs and such slowing down, using an "old" device isn't a big deal these days.
Another thing I dislike about OnePlus, their proprietary fast charge. I don't really care if they think it's better. Qualcomm's quick charge and USB-PD have it covered. Proprietary charging is something that should have died years ago. Even Qualcomm at this point should bow out for USB-PD, even though there are things I like better about QC.
It would be nice if someone made a phone I was willing to buy. It's a bit like replacing my older Macbook Pro. Apple makes nothing I want anymore, and OSX is going downhill fast. And most of the Windows machines are crap, and run Windows, though Linux would fix that.
Exactly. It's not perfect, but nothing is. However, making the batteries easy to remove means they are more likely to be isolated from the rest of the material and can even be stored in fire-resistant containers for recycling etc..
It would also be nice to require that devices manufacturers no longer want to support are required to be provided with code and unlock keys so they can be re-used by makers etc.. Lots of old phones and such would be great for projects, but we can't use them because they are so locked down and/or have non-replaceable batteries. At the very least, it keeps them out of the waste stream that much longer.
Long term we need to figure out a way to make recycling them more workable. I have yet to see a good option for that though.
I'm all for research into new nuclear designs and processes. However, I disagree that the current form is economical if you include all costs associated with decommissioning and cleanup of the sites. This is not generally done, the companies involved take the money, move it, declare bankruptcy or get out of paying for it due to regulatory capture, and leave the taxpayers with the bill. This is not a sustainable solution.
I'd love to see more of them, and particularly more modern designs. However, I need to see a few things happen first.
1) Any company must post a bond equal to the estimated cleanup costs including inflation. Inflation adjustments can be made every 5 years. They can use the money in this bond to pay for cleanup, if they don't do it the local government will use the money to do so. Cleanup means radiation and other chemical contamination are returned to pre-construction levels and suitable for human habitation within 5 years.
2) Reprocessing to reduce waste levels. The current setup is stupid and needs to die. The costs involved are a cost of doing business. If that drives up the costs of running the reactor, it should make power generated by it cost more. No different from cleaning up coal ash etc..
3) Yucca Mountain or other long term facility for storage of waste we cannot yet handle properly and contaminated reactor parts. The companies that store material here will pay for the full cost of storage as part of #1.
4) Any company caught cutting corners on safety and maintenance is subject to the corporate death penalty and the C** level execs are personally liable for any damages.
And before you accuse me of favoring other types, I'm fine with all of them held to the same requirements. Want to build a 100 acre solar array? Same deal. Of course, without radioactive or chemical toxins, these costs will be much lower, but there's no reason they shouldn't have the same requirements. For example, if there are batteries on site, they could leak, catch fire, etc.. Either way, they should also be required to clean up the mess they make. I'm tired of the bullshit companies being allowed to privatize the profit while dumping the costs on the public.
Keep the regulation simple.
1) Right to repair. They are required to allow users to install updates and repair the devices. Flash is not significantly more expensive than OTP at this point, so cost is not an excuse. If the company chooses not to provide further software updates, they are required to release full source code, schematics, and any keys the user would require to sign it with. Ideally, devices would also include a user-programmable key space so we could also generate our own keys. And then remote disable existing devices until the user fixes it. Sucks, but unmaintained devices are a huge risk. There's no need to landfill them, but we can't allow them to keep running. And yes, this does open a DoS attack, but only on the devices themselves, not all of us. A warning about it for existing users should be mandatory as well, 30 days perhaps?
2) Liability for breaches. The manufacturer is liable for any and all damages caused by insecurity in their devices for disclosed attacks. Zero-days are probably unreasonable to punish them for here. But if your device is still vulnerable to, say, heartbleed, you deserve it. Your smart lock fails and my house gets robbed, you pay. Management that signs off on it are personally liable. We've all seen cases where the right way would take too long and/or cost too much so the PHB mandates that you not do it properly. Not that I would own a smart lock, but that's beside the point. :)
Decent security doesn't have to use more code. It would likely use LESS as more code usually means a larger attack surface. 90% of the IoT attacks I've seen are either lack of verification on updates, allowing MITM attacks, or default admin passwords. All are easy and cheap to fix.
As for small manufacturers being crushed, if they can't do the job properly, they SHOULD be crushed. Evolve or die.
And even that may not be all that great. It doesn't cover the cheap Chinese imports that come in direct. I don't see any way we can deal with that problem with a US law. Even a UN level setup would likely be no good. And then you get into various schemes to avoid responsibility. So while I see why the idea appeals to people, I don't think it's practical. I still think right to repair should be the law though. At least we could get anything sold by a US company that way. And it would limit the amount of electronic waste as there would be a market for older but still useful gear we could reuse.
Of course they have. What you're failing to realize, is that the "right" is no better. They just have differing identities. The only option I see is to ignore both sides and vote for other people. By themselves, they might not do much, but if we get more of a mix in the pot we have a better chance of coming out somewhere in the middle.
Will the people I vote for win elections? Maybe not. That's not the point though. Left/Right, Democrat/Republican, it's all a false dichotomy. If people choose to realize that, something might be done about it. But doing nothing or the same thing we've always done is certainly not going to achieve anything new.
Google's policy seems reasonable. There's a fixed version, so disclose the info.
Not only is it a shitty installer, the whole idea of an installer app on Android is shitty. Just have people download the APK and use the built in package installer. If it's about download size, use the same trick most big games do and have the app load data files on first launch into its own protected data directory. All of that is built in and is quite safe and audited.
Not that Google never does anything shitty, but this one is on Epic.
Before you go off about EU taxes, go add up how much you pay in all the various taxes in most US states. In my area, it's above 50%. And I get far worse results for my money.
Does that mean I want the EU system here? Not really. I honestly don't have a good solution. But I'm also not naive enough to believe that I'm taxed so much less that our friends across the pond. Their governments are just more honest about it is all.
The full text....
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The first phrase is a justification for the second. It should also be noted that the US government has no authority to maintain a standing army, at least, not at the time it was written. There is some debate about that in the present time. So the militia was the army. "regulated" in this context was often used in the period to mean "equipped". A soldier without a weapon is pretty useless, so they wanted to ensure that their pool of soldiers had weapons available.
There is some debate about that interpretation in the present day as well, but looking at the language of the time, that makes the most sense to me. There is also the idea that from a legal perspective, things added later supersede those previous. Thus amendments supersede the original terms. Otherwise, only white male landowners would be allowed to vote, for example. As the latest text that has anything to do with weapons in the document is "shall not be infringed", that is pretty clear. This also creates some issues with things like WMDs, which I think the vast majority would agree should not be held privately, if at all.