I don’t think it would be that far of a stretch to have “consensual sex” include prostitution.

Maybe we should spell it: D-A-Y-O-F-W-I-N-D ?

The competition doesn’t need to be open, they just need to motivate Google to be open.

…but could that actually happen? I’m not sure what WOULD motivate Google to be open. Even if there were three or four more major mobile players (all with equal market share), and Google had the only platform that allowed unblessed software to be installed, I’m not sure that would pressure Google to continue to be “the open choice”, but more likely to take this same action as “the odd man out”.

At a fundamental level, there is an illusion/concept planted in the human mind that “force answers everything”, and when they run out of ideas (or all the ideas that they have would require too much [re]work to their liking) the tendency is to fall back onto “just use force” as an easy “solution”.

If I had to guess, I would speculate that their motivation is a long-term play to squash the general perception that Android has more malware (and is therefor less secure) than iPhone. Just about every article I’ve seen to that effect includes (1) enable unknown sources, and (2) install this malware app; so they probably see the current hurdles as insufficient and intend to perma-ban dev accounts that they find signing malware apps.

Nope. Here’s a hint: https://www.cgaa.org/article/scam-insurance-phone-calls-and-emails-to-work-emails

Read it again, more carefully… :)

I guess AI is best measured by how much power it consumes… ?

“I” is a whole column in Excel, not a single field! :)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_(psychology)

Literally laughed out loud.

That sounds like the basis for some kick-ass sci-fi.

I wonder if this ordeal has made people stop buying (or maybe, start panic-buying) Tylenol.

It’s not safe to feel safe.

“Spoiled Onions” sounds like a cool sublemmy name…

If you’re up for some constructive criticism: I think the meme would be more effective if you put the silksong price in the lower panel to balance the $70 figure found in the top panel. Said another way, the lower text is missing the suffix “…for $20”.

…and I guess while I’m at it, whatever that meme law is about fewer words is better makes me think the top panel could be trimmed down: The gaming industry explains why they need to charge $70 for a game in order to make a profit.

That would be the brute force approach.

I thought they already gutted much of AOSP. Like removing the dialer or contacts and stuff.

I would say simply to avoid buying phones from ad-companies, but more generally… if you buy hardware from vendors that respect ownership (i.e. that have user-unlockable bootloaders) then you don’t really have to worry about this kind of thing, as even if the company turns evil later, you can probably flash the phone with a 3rd party rom.

In theory, yes. There is a first-stage bootloader (that actually finds, loads, verifies, and jumps-into fastboot) baked into the hardware (implemented in fuses and ROMs [like REAL roms, not “flashable” ROMs]), and AFAIK it cannot effectively be modified after the phone is manufactured, so they try to keep it as simple as possible.

So if it were real, the psuedocode would be something like this:

var fastbootPartition=locateFastbootPartition();

if (fastbootPartition == null || !verifySignature(fastbootPartition))
{
     // AFAIK, this code block is already a thing in production, but the
    // message is more like a "signature failed" or "corrupted" than
    // a "you done goofed".
    displayRudeMessage();
    halt();
}

var fastbootAddress=load(fastBootPartition);
jumpTo(fastbootAddress);