Power brick, power adapter, or USB charger are what come to mind for me.

I gotta say I disagree heavily with your fiancee on dongles. IMO dongles are adapters for data of some kind, not just power from the wall. But to each their own I guess.

deleted by creator

There was debate around whether they should use lidar. I thought I remembered that the initial plan was lidar but that musk dropped it before any actually got into the hands of consumers. I could be wrong though

This is ancient news, but I still cant believe they ditched lidar. Relying in computer vision alone when you could easily give it more reliable data to work with is just stupid.

So let’s look at these requirements:

• violence: not really. Vandalism and destruction of equipment aren’t violence, to my knowledge PA has not harmed or attacked anyone.

• non combatants: they targeted weapon shipments and military equipment. While I suppose you could argue the UK military aren’t combatants as they aren’t part of the war directly, but honestly that point is entirely moot given that they didn’t target people.

• political and ideological aims: sure, they are a political activist organization. Obviously that alone doesn’t make them terrorists.

So, even by what Wikipedia defines as the “broadest” definition, not terrorists.

I mean, at an absolute minimum, terrorism requires violence against people, which they did not do. They targeted planes and other military equipment. That’s not terrorism no matter how much damage they caused.

Im not saying what they did isn’t illegal. I’m saying it’s not terrorism. This is like if someone was charged with murder and punished for it only to turn out all they did was rob a store and you’re like “well akshually ☝️🤓 they’re a criminal so it’s fine”

Then the UK’s legal definition is fucking stupid. Terrorism is when a group attempts to strike fear and terror into a populace to coerce them. It definitionally requires violence and fear.

So they vandalized some planes and snipped some cables? And this got them declared as terrorists?

I’ve noticed a pattern where “terrorist” is often used as a stand in for any group that opposes the government.

Sure they did something highly illegal, but anyone who thinks that illegally trying to stop a weapons shipment is terrorism is insane. If “using force to achieve a political goal” is terrorism, then nearly every country on the planet is a terrorist organization. Idk if thats like actually the UK’s definition or something but that is a ludicrous definition for terrorism.

Terrorists use terror. Its why they are called that. Not the use of force, but specifically attempting to strike deep fear into a civilian populace. At no point was PA trying to make people fearful. They were trying to stop people from dying.

What’s acts of terror has Palestine action committed for it to be classified as a terrorist organization?

I find it very promising. As much as I love meat, its pretty undeniable that raising livestock is super inefficient. It takes so much food to raise livestock that, iirc, more farmland in the US is dedicated to growing food for our food than to growing food for us. Lab grown meat doesn’t completely solve this - there are still lost calories in the process to my knowledge - but its way more efficnient. Plus less land usage, less fossil fuel emissions, overall it would be more sustainable.

I see 2 big problems facing it right now:

The first is scale, which is the more significant. We’d need to figure out how to grow meat on a truly massive scale. Definitely doable though, just needs more research.

The second is “realism” or how close it seems to natural meat. Lab grown meat has the advantage over like plant based stuff because it is actually meat. However, ifnits too perfect or uniform, or maybe doesnr have enough fat or variety, it might be seen as unnatural by many (even just subconsciously) and push them away from it.

But yeah, could be awesome.

To some people “seeing through western propaganda” means deciding what to believe by whatever the opposite of western forces want

Hate to break it to you but that’s not thinking for yourself, in fact it takes no more self reflection and thought than it would to just blindly believe it all

Obviously this is subjective, but I use android auto all the time and something similar for a linux phone would be really nice for me. Don’t dismiss them just cause you wouldn’t use them

Sure, but it still seems to be like a simply stupid move on their part. They’re gonna turn one of the most influential activists of this generation from an outside observer to an eye witness

Ah yes, because as everyone knows the best way to stop determined activists from talking about your human rights abuses is to show them first hand your human rights abuses. I’m sure they’ll just shut up after that.

I know a pilot and he mentioned a similar proposal he saw, he thought that the only reason anyone wanted them was so that they would have one less pilot to pay per flight.

Ok, the openAI thing is not great. However…

they advertise themselves as degoogled, but instead let you connect to Google/Microsoft/etc services

What the fuck are you talking about? Degoogled doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be allowed to connect to Google services. It just mean that it doesn’t require Google services to function and that the default configuration shouldn’t include any Google services. If the end user actively wants to use google/microsoft/etc services then they should be able to. It seems as though you are advocating for an open source operating system to lock itself down from allowing the end user to use certain features, which is against the FOSS ethos. Remember, “free” as in “freedom.”

Probably. But that might be under the umbrella of optional usage statistics/reporting that you can opt out of. Since this new tracking would be “necessary” for their “security” feature to work, there’s no chance that it could be avoided.

Could be, but that could also just be done locally. Like your phone checking the apps you have installed and seeing if the same ones are on the play store. Having an install limit for an app - assuming that means that the app can only be installed some total number of times globally (a local install limit wouldn’t make any sense I think) - necessarily implies that when you install an app through an APK, it has to tell Google that you installed that app so it can track how many people have installed it and not approve installation of the app if it’s over whatever the limit is.

Something kind of concerning I just found - there’s an option for “limited distribution” which is “Intended for ‘students, hobbyists, and other personal use.’” One of the differences is the following:

Has “capped number of apps and installs”(specific limits not disclosed)

Doesn’t this imply there’s going to be global tracking of what apps people are installing even through sideloading or APKs? I can’t think of any other way to enforce this. They would have to know how many times people installed an app even when its not through any kind of app store or even from the internet at all.