Well that was another thing - Elon did the usual bait and switch, promising a vehicle one price and then delivering something costing nearly double. He did the same with the Model 3 - promising 30k but launch price was nearer 60k.

Anyway I don’t think this vehicle is worth 40k either. At least the Model 3 was fundamentally sound design unlike the Cybertruck.

I think Musk drew this thing on the back of an envelope and forced it through to production against the protests and objections of everybody in Tesla. It sucks as a truck, it sucks as an EV, it costs way too much money, it’s so dangerous that it is banned in most of the world, it’s impractical, costly to repair, uninsurable and it falls to bits. It’s no wonder the thing failed.

You’re getting it the wrong way around. People aren’t arrested for the phone they have. This is a complete nonsense by a clickbait article. They are arrested based on observation or intelligence of criminal activity. After the fact, when they are arrested they are found to have one of these phones flashed to use a privacy OS. Do you think such a phone convinces the cops they got the wrong person or not? The answer quite obviously is it convinces the cops this person is a criminal and is attempting to hide what they are up to.

It would be absurd to think cops are staring at people’s phones to initiate arrests because they are not.

This is not hard to understand.

Having a phone installed with an OS favoured by criminals doesn’t exculpate a person arrested for criminal activity, or make the cops think they’re innocent.

The cops quite obviously don’t think owning a Pixel makes somebody a drug dealer. But if they arrest or detain a suspect then owning a Pixel flashed with GrapheneOS isnt exactly a sign of innocence. Even if nothing could be extracted from the phone, I’m sure a judge and jury could be convinced what they were doing if they have such a device in their possession.

Also, regardless of the security the OS claims to have, most criminals are not the brightest and I bet some can be squeezed to hand over the key or the phone can be unlocked with a face id or fingerprint. It also motivates the cops to do what they’ve done in the past where they have compromised supposedly secure operating systems or apps and installed backdoors.

It’s funny watching rapey getting ratioed on his own echo chamber platform.

Soon these oligarchs won’t even own a window to jump out of

While I wouldn’t want flakpak going deep into the OS I think the advantage of using them on the desktop is obvious. Developers can release to multiple dists from a single build and end users get updates and versions immediately rather than waiting for the dist to update its packages. Plus the ability to lock the software down with sandboxes.

The tradeoff is disk consumption but it’s not really that big of a deal. Flatpaks are layered so apps can share dependencies. e.g. if the app is GNOME it can share the GNOME runtime with other apps and doesn’t need to ship with its own.

Make bigger batches and freeze portions. And whatever expense groceries are, you can expect food cooked by someone else and delivered by someone else to be 3x as much.

Some government hand out “baby kits” for newborns - cot, blanket, nappies, bottles etc.

I think they should also hand out “self sufficiency kits” to new adults - pot & pan, utensils, cutlery, self sufficiency book w recipes, salt/pepper/herbs, coffee, tea seeds, vouchers and some other bits & pieces. Basically something to foster some independence, interest in cooking, diet and other life skills in new adults. And the school curriculum should also foster life skills.

Doesn’t stop people eating out or buying takeaways but it shouldn’t be the norm.

I don’t get why people would waste money on delivery services. Would it kill someone to cook their own food, or collect food from a takeaway themselves? That’s especially true for fast food where the fees & delivery charges could cost almost as much as the food itself.

Germany collects glass, plastic & aluminium. Glass and plastic can be single use or multiuse. It’s kind of interesting how most beer is sold multi-use (every brand is using the same size bottles) to reduce the amount of recycling necessary. Beer bottles can be washed and reused rather than broken into cullet and remelted. I don’t know what France does but I could see people losing their minds if wine bottles were standardised the way beer is. But really glass could be collected and recycled even if it isn’t reusable.

The cap and the bottle in soft drinks are made of PET. Most deposit schemes will accept plastic (PET), or aluminium and a machine will separate and sort the material into the appropriate bin. Cans get melted down, plastic is stripped, washed, turned into pellets and fed back into hoppers that make new bottles. Because it’s all the same plastic material it can be ground up into pellets and fed back into a machine to make new bottles. The biggest issue is probably that caps are usually black, red, blue or whatever so I imagine somewhere in the process the chopped up plastic goes past cameras that sort fragments by colour.

If people don’t like social constructs, go build a shack in wilderness and don’t ever make contact with other human beings again. That isn’t to say there are things we do for tradition, or societal norms that constrain us in silly ways but “social construct” is not some get out of jail free excuse.

In many countries people collect their own bottles because there is a refundable tax on the container. Here in Ireland it’s 15c, i.e. a can of coke might be €1 but you’ll be charged €1.15. So it motivates people to take the empties back to a supermarket and receive a refund chit. It also motivates homeless people to pick up bottles & cans that people toss, so that too.

I don’t know what % of plastic the cap comprises in a plastic bottle but I bet its double digits. So annoying as it is to use, attaching the cap to the bottle does make sense for recycling. It also lessens litter.

But it needs to be paired up with a deposit refund scheme. Lots of countries do this already and encourages circular economies - the soft drinks companies purchasing recycle material to reuse. I bet those schemes measured a significant jump in recovered plastic when virtually all the caps come back with the bottles.

I think Windows Defender is a fantastic line of defence and it’s definitely better than installing garbage from Trend, McAfee etc. That said, Lenovo, HP, MSI, Dell etc still preinstall crapware on their new machines from Norton or their ilk threatening that my machine is “at risk” if I don’t pay them money.

I wouldn’t turn it off unless I knew that I was only installing games from Steam. But if I did I think performance would improve. A game from Steam could still contain malware so you have to exercise some common sense. Even on SteamOS a game could be malicious but since its containerized the scope for damage is limited but not necessarily impossible to break out.

I remember watching some fox channels with a lot of rescue foxes including one called Finnegan. Was that her? So sad that anyone would harass somebody like that.

All modern versions of Windows will have Microsoft’s Defender antivirus/malware protection turned on by default. That means you incur a penalty every time a file is accessed from disk, or a process is launched, or a library loaded, or sockets are used or certain APIs are called.

It’s better than most 3rd party AV software but it’s still a performance overhead that could be turned off.

Very unlikely that has anything to do with it.