Pika
I personally think that the GOS team is intentionally not wanting to, not due to the requirements, but due to the water so to speak.
There was a lot of bad blood between a company that Fairphone closely partners with, so therefore they don't want to even think about the concept of it. I think that shows quite well when you look at their post considering that their post goes into detail on the supply chain aspects of it and who they're partnered with instead of focusing on the actual issues with the device.
Being said, I understand their points on the software updates and the hardware requirement. But, ostensibly I don't think they are rejecting it due to those concerns.
Honestly, the only thing that stopped me from going them this time around was the ip55 rating. I do too much stuff that involves my phone getting wet. So, realistically, I can't look at anything that has less than IP68 because I need that full immersion rating. The quest for repairability doesn't need to compromise that, you can have an IP68 rating with a battery that is removable by screws. The Samsung X-Cover Pro proved that. It's just not financially incentivized for consumer devices, which is why you normally only find it for dedicated corporate device lines
likely because they know no one would pay for it. YouTube would die overnight(in terms of content creation). The only people remaining would be the people like Markiplier or the huge content creators that made it big way early on, and even then, I think you would expect heavy resistance against the big content creators just because they're gonna be the ones that are fronting the majority of the bill just due to how many videos they have uploaded.
YouTube would have better chance of survival requiring a subscription to watch the platform than if they were to try to get content creators to pay for storage, it would be content source suicide.
I should clarify. I don't understand why it's been tolerated for as long as it is. I do understand why it happens, but I don't understand why it's allowed to happen.
I'm not sure I'm understanding the point of your comment. It sounds like you are making the case that somehow Ublock origin announcing they are no longer blocking ads on facebook because it's too cumbersome, somehow will not cause companies to be like "oh facebook figured out the ad blocking problem, what did they do" and then try to implement similar systems.
Yes more people could contribute, but you know what else would help the cause as well? Not announcing to the world the solution to break your product. They have now put in writing that the solution to making the "problem" their product creates go away, is to just make it super obnoxious/tedious for the team to try and find filters on. This is going to act like gas on fire and only cause more work for them than if they had just silently let the filters phase out and use the excuse none of the maintainers are on the platform anymore.
they need to be sued for deceptive marketing practices to be honest. The ways it tries to sneak you resubscribing to it without your knowledge is super deceptive. My gramp has accidentally subscribed at least 4 times now when he goes to place a normal order they have like 3 different locations that toggle on where you need to keep telling them no you don't want a free trial, and then we don't actually find out about it till months after because he is very old fashion and doesn't always check things.
Considering that despite my grandfather having an ad blocker, he sees constant scams in their advertising. I would have to say, yeah, it's already a dangerous place.
Honestly, I don't understand why more companies don't get charged criminally for the blatant scams they have in their ads because all of the FANG companies do it.
Honestly, I would use that even if it meant an additional gig and a half to two gigs of ram usage to run the browser. I'm already having to allocate one to four gigs for the browser anyway, so might as well.
Not that I use Facebook myself, but I think this was a misstep in the U block team.
All this did was tell the major companies out there that the only thing they have to do to make it so u block origins no longer works on their site is to make it extremely tedious for the team working on the project to make filters. So I expect that now that they've officially dropped support for Facebook, the other major sites are going to look at how Facebook is doing it, and they're going to adopt a similar systems
It's a one participant race. They're throwing fears about Chinese LLM because of the fact that many of their models end up being open-source, and they know if they don't get people cemented into their models before some open-sourced Chinese alternative manages to meet(or even exceed ) their performance. No company is going to pay them money because they're just gonna run it themselves for way less than subscription costs.
right now, they acknowledge that the non-US alternatives for the models are gaining traction and are getting pretty dang good, and that scares them, so they've moved over to customer lock-in hoping that the effort it would take to move from a subscription model over to one of the alternative models wouldn't be worth it for a company. A US only pause would almost certainly leave them dead in the water.
I think this will depend less on the FAA and more on local jurisdiction. the FAA doesn't really have that much restrictions in place for low altitude drones (< 400 ft) they require it to be registered due to commercial but, the 2026 modifications for usage removed a lot of the safety barriers and controls that were in place for them. Now it's basically as long as its registered and the lights are bright enough to be seen, it's allowed unless there's a local law forbidding it.