margana

You do realize you can buy DDR5 SODIMM from anywhere, right? Even if they didn't have it in stock for individual purchases, how did that force you to abandon the whole system? That's like throwing away your phone because you couldn't buy a replacement standard USB PD charger specifically from the phone manufacturer.

Not just "could be used in one", but age verification is the raison d'être for the introduction and existence of these fields. Not sure why some people pretend otherwise when it is obvious.

The problem isn't just getting something that works across all European countries. It's getting something that works globally.

While we may make most of our payments within EU, basically everyone still occasionally pays for something outside of EU, either online or when they travel. This means if the new thing only works in EU, every European will still need and have a MasterCard/Visa even if they use it less often than before.

This is still a massive amount of leverage - MC/Visa still have the ability to block payments made from EU citizens/companies to outside.

Almost all PCs do however have USB ports, which means they can have anything you can plug into an USB port.

Sounds similar to ignoring clearly fraudulent DMCAs. Technically you are not allowed to ignore one no matter how clearly fraudulent it is, but in practice no one would follow up on those.

As I understand, there is also a rule that you must be able to buy an exact amount of premium currency for a specific thing you want. So if that's also enforced, clearly the price shown would have to be how much it costs to buy that exact amount of premium currency.

The hard part about ditching Visa and Mastercard is keeping the ability to make international payments even outside of EU. If you still need Visa or Mastercard to buy anything from outside of EU, including any non-EU digital service, most people would still have a Visa or Mastercard.

Russia did it because they're blocked from everywhere anyway and can't get Visa or Mastercard anyway. So this isn't really a concern. For an EU credit card to be successful and actually displace Visa/Mastercard among EU citizens, we would have to convince every merchant from Philippines to Argentina to South Africa to accept it.

If Visa works everywhere, and Eurocard would work only in Europe, your options would be to have either only Visa or have both. And few people would would want to get multiple cards if one works universally already.

Why not both?

I thought it would be something like recompiling to utilize AVX512 capabilities or something.

Saying that something that has ~40% market share "doesn't matter" and the other thing that has ~60% is suddenly orders of magnitude more relevant sounds ridiculous.

Piracy isn't even the main use case of yt-dlp. It's archival of videos that you want to keep a copy of in case something happens to the video. There is literally no way to get that "feature" by paying Google. But you are correct that yt-dlp would not be necessary if Google offered an option to download videos (also in an automated way because many people have something set up to archive certain videos automatically).

Even entertaining the idea is extremely disturbing and dystopian. Having control over what we watch and what we listen to should be basic human rights. And those are inalienable, meaning we can't sign away those rights, not in a contract, not in any terms of service.

People who accept that as something a company should be allowed to do are a massive problem. Because of you, they might actually do it. It will start by making sure you cannot mute the sound in any way, designing hardware in a way to enforce that - devices will start overriding the use of external speakers and play ads from internal ones to make absolutely sure you haven't muted it. Next they will force always-on cameras on us which will make sure our eyes are open and looking at the ad. Next we will have brain implants to make sure you're actually paying attention and not thinking about something else.

I find it extremely disturbing that you don't feel disgusted about even thinking of "yes".

That's just personal preference. It works the other way around too.

The goal of Asahi Linux is to create a Linux distribution that is compatible with Apple devices. Using Rust is not a goal of the project, it's just something they decided to use due to personal preference, and is making the process of upstreaming anything much harder. If anything, it works against them in achieving their goal. Abandoning Rust is a possibility, abandoning Linux is not.

This. It's gotten to the point where I don't check email at all because of the constant spam of mails that are not actionable and/or urgent. There are so many different types of automated mails that setting up filters is a never-ending battle. For me, email now serves as an archive/log of everything that has been going on in the company. I search my email to find details about things I am notified about via other channels.

Due to many people doing this, all important notifications that are actually actionable are now sent via Slack as well. So far these notifications are only for things where I actually need to urgently respond or do something, so none of the spam has yet reached Slack.

Also, no one ever seems to personally send an email to another employee because Slack is always the better option, and people actually respond on Slack, unlike via email.

There are Apple phones and there are Android phones, that's pretty much it. It's a duopoly. It is practically impossible for a third player to enter the market. This circular logic of "if Android does not offer enough liberties, use an Apple phone" and "if Apple does not offer enough liberties, use an Android phone" doesn't make any logical sense and everyone who uses your argument knows it, but chooses to continue making it to push an agenda.

What are you even talking about? The vast majority of hardware that can run Windows has no technical measures in place to prevent some other operating system from being installed. Windows itself does not prevent third party applications from being installed without Microsoft's permission. Most computers not coming with Linux preinstalled is not because of Microsoft doing anything to achieve that, it's because desktop Linux is just not popular enough for stores to stock systems with it preinstalled.

Ah, can trust HN to always derail the topic whenever EU is mentioned. This has literally nothing to do with the subject matter of the article.

Odd that you would say "only Suspend to RAM", because that is far more difficult to reliably implement in terms of hardware compatibility than Suspend to Disk.

Because the phone market is a duopoly that was impenetrable for even Microsoft. This "why don't you just make your own Apple?" argument is ridiculous, it will not happen no matter how much you "encourage" it as a consumer. You even contradict this yourself by saying "we're left with what <megacrops> provide us".

You can't play 4K Netflix on Linux, period. Because of DRM. Before you say "this is just a Netflix issue" - you can't play 4K Prime Video on Linux either. Nor 4K Disney+. And many other services. Piracy is the only way to watch most 4K streaming content on Linux. You may have the most capable and up-to-date hardware on the market, you still can't.

Why is this such a huge issue if it merely shows it's busy, but the performance of it indicates that it actually isn't? Switching to Linux can be a good choice for a lot of people, the reason just seems a bit odd here. Maybe it was simply the straw that broke the camel's back.

The lack of awareness of this post is incredible. Apple is leveraging intentional incompatibility to make people use social pressure on each other to switch to Apple. That is not a good thing. This is a great example of why interoperability is necessary - "become an Apple customer or be ostracized" is not something people should be constantly threatened with.

If the consumer intentionally uses the affiliate links to support the creator, then they are deceived if someone else steals that cut. This would be similar to charity money being stolen by some third party - the donator would not be getting that money anyway, yet they might feel hurt if it turns out their money didn't go where they wanted it to go.

I would argue that the consumer was deceived as well. People may click the links intentionally to also support the creators. They expect the affiliate money to go to that creator. Saying the consumer was not deceived would be similar to arguing that stealing money donated to charity doesn't hurt the ones who donated since they didn't gain anything directly either way.

The same way that uBlock Origin was built. Scams being the only way to make your product "profitable" doesn't validate the scams. That's like saying "I made a business offering to clean people's houses for free. Of course I'm gonna steal their stuff while doing it, how else do you expect me to make money?!"

Apple refusing to notarize it actually makes me want to use it more. That means Rossmann and his associates have got under Apple's skin enough that they would try to sabotage projects that he is involved with.

Do you also suggest never releasing any software for Linux because there is no megacorporation there policing what software you should and shouldn't run?

EU constantly does things the US hasn't - such as consumer protection laws. But HN response to that is always "oh no EU is bullying US companies".

Hello, a person from a country with a public health care system here. There is no concept of a per incident denial. There is a list of procedures that are covered, and if the doctor decides you need a procedure from that list, it is covered, they don't send a request to some suits for acceptance, they just schedule the procedure and that's it. There is no "line", there is a list, and the list is applied equally to everyone.