skuzz

Rethink actually seems to block Play Services if you choose to configure Rethink a certain way. It is delightful watching Play Services become more and more desperate. Trying other states, other countries, and even other Google devices on your local network in a desperate attempt to get online and shit telemetry back to Google.

Same can't be said about iOS. Apple routes their 17.x.x.x network and other traffic outside userspace, immune to even full-tunnel VPN. Android networking isn't that capable.

I dont know how you figure that flying is more efficient than driving.

Basic physics. Moving hundreds of people in one machine is almost always more efficient than hundreds of people moving in one machine per person.

https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint

Then, where you take a petrol car or fly depends on the distance. Flying has a higher carbon footprint for journeys less than 1000 kilometers than a medium-sized car. For longer journeys, flying would actually have a slightly lower carbon footprint per kilometer than driving alone over the same distance.

In the context of the US, which is giant compared to driving across an EU nation, there'd be no reason to fly a distance less than 621 miles (1000km mentioned above) for the most part, neither from a time or distance perspective, about 8-9 hours driving at expressway speeds. The country is huge. Whenever I've flown, for example, it is at least 1200 miles (1900km) or more.

Also that ‘if I dont fly on this plane, someone else would’ argument, I hope you realise that its nonsense if you think about it for a second.

No, it isn't, I didn't say "someone else will." I said the plane is going to fly whether you're in that seat or not, as they're used heavily for cargo transport. Airlines don't just cancel major flight routes just because you're not sitting on the plane, short-term anyway. Longer-term they would reduce flights if there's consistent lack of passengers/cargo. So long-term it would have a more substantial impact, but if someone is mulling over a trip to see their family and fretting over carbon footprint of one person, that airplane will be traveling to that destination with or without that person being onboard.

The US is a great example of how not to do things, to be clear. Take that 1200 mile trip as an example. Train will take longer than car because Amtrak is so dysfunctional, if you can even get Amtrak to plot a route, or if they even have stops where you want. Car will pollute more than airplane, and take more time than airplane, and you have to plot hotel stays and refueling points, and possibly have enough drivers if you're going to switch off drivers, if your car can even handle such a long trip. So airplane, it often is.

Wonder how this contradicts the global dimming studies done during 9/11 when all flights over the US were grounded and things became warmer in the absence of contrails.

Things like this formula are great, and useful for gathering data on how bad a jet might be, but at the same time, this article is doing one of those classic media gambits: Blame the small-income individual.

Some parts of the world are only easily accessible by aircraft. Likewise, flying commercial is much more efficient than Taylor Swift's private jet zipping all over, and much more efficient than driving. This isn't the 1980s when people rode commuter flights between two cities by airplane for work every day.

Bob the individual can do nothing to change climate with regards to aircraft, that plane they might buy a ticket on, or not, will still be flying, to ship the cargo in the cargo hold, mail, and other things. Passengers are actually the last-place item on most flights from a revenue generator perspective.

Making private jets more cost-prohibitive is a good first step. They are exploding in popularity as the world literally burns. On land where land transportation is more viable, nations like the US should embrace trains instead of air. Also, in the US, flying is quickly becoming too expensive for a majority of the population, which means more people will revert to driving thousands of miles, which means net sum pollution will go up.

How much carbon one seat of hundreds on one plane of tens of thousands takes is inconsequential at this stage, there are much bigger pollution areas to be focusing on.

We will make the most complex convoluted contrivances before laying down steel and locomotives. Funny part I always liked about the I, Robot movie. No, we didn't have public transport, everyone just has self-driving cars on roads controlled by a centralized AI.

Captive audience on the contracts side, so they can do whatever they want as crappy as they want and the contracts still generate revenue.

You wanted a usable product? Stay away from Big Tech anymore.

If apps didn't suck, and app devs weren't manipulative shits, updates would be rare anyway.

Awesome, so pointless manifest revisions to manipulate store reviews and falsify user engagement will update even faster? (Which are most "Bug fixes and quality improvements!" updates these days.)

Really can't wait for this terrible "app" update concept to go away. The market manipulation aspect drove shipping shittier code out the gate and generalized FOMO.

Or better, apps can go away entirely, lets go back to everything lives in the browser, it's generally safer, and most "apps" are just browser containers that only exist to harvest device telemetry.

Google could, and probably would become more malicious on deprecating and obsoleting old hardware, but that'd be a huge revenue loss for them. They tend to actively support the app layer on older Android OS versions (here's an arbitrary breakdown from some web search: https://composables.com/android-distribution-chart ) for a very long time, as older Android is used in many embedded devices, inexpensive devices, purpose-built devices, and other places.

Keeping the Play Services and Play Store up to date on older phones means they can continue a metadata-gathering and app-sale revenue stream on older phones for many years after they "age out".

Couple that with the fact that most "reasonable" vendors now try to support 3, 5, or more years on a piece of hardware, you should at least be able to get almost half a decade out of a phone before it no longer receives primary OS updates, and likely then another 5 or so years until they stop updating for that API level.

The ELI5-ish version of it is Android is composed of a few layers. The stuff that makes the hardware work, the stuff that makes the OS work (drawing on screen, install/remove programs, texting, calls), and the stuff that makes the software (apps, etc.) work. The part they stop updating is the stuff that makes the hardware work, and the stuff that makes the OS work. However, it's already working, soo.... Over the years, Google spent a lot of time migrating as much of Android as they could so that the apps, some bits of OS, and other things like app security could be updated even on very old versions of Android. You could turn on a phone from 2015 like the BlackBerry Priv right now, and install current apps and most things would run without issue.

Yes, there could be a slight risk that some malware comes out targeting older phones with older OSes and older hardware support, but that's generally a smaller audience than targeting the latest and greatest phones that are way more "popular" - so not really worth it to malware peeps. The hack targets would most frequently be at the app layer to cast as wide a net as possible. Since Google continues updating Play Services and the Play Store software at the app layer, this would mostly keep people safe from the majority of attack vectors. The diversity of phone hardware really helps here.

Mostly though, mobile marketing just tries as hard as they can to create FOMO that you might be missing out on something by using an older phone.

This is in every way superior.

They used to have very comprehensive automated testing processes to exercise all sorts of things. Unfortunately, like many tech companies these days like Apple, Google, etc., they're all punting QA as a concept because they just don't care - what are you going to do, go use another oligopoly platform?

Hopefully Lemmyists will stop citing them as a news source which still seems way too frequent.

The American version of those are fun. Two months before the expiration date, stored in a dark space around 50F or less, they separate into globs. Not spoiled, just separated. Globs settle in the bottom of coffee. Once you get enough air in there, you can shake the everloving shit out of it, and the globs break apart into a delightful foam that floats on top.