azuth

Well it’s science fiction. Being ‘genetically perfect’ (rofl) will impart less of an advantage than actually existing, mundane factors such as wealth and which country you were born in. Hell, the biggest advantage they could get is making sure their children is of the ‘right’ color.

I do not even think the biggest assholes like say Musk would genetically modify their children. He already thinks he is perfect.

I can also think of a few factors that would disadvantage poor people more than lack of eugenics.

Lack of healthcare. Climate change leading to people having to abandon their homeland and also exacerbating another factor. Bad nutrition. Bad education in combination with disinformation by wealth controlled media.

Genetic modification is not really a problem. It could also help some people if we fix our politics and make sure people get access to healthcare based on needs rather than means.

Seriously, fiction is not necessarily a good guide for politics.

It’s fiction.

You can find actual discrimination based on genetics or wealth or class into the present and past of the real world.

I agree that Play integrity is a huge problem and a way for Google to maintain control of Android.

However a Linux phone wouldn’t solve that at least in the beginning.

The devs who don’t allow apps to run on devices that do not pass Play integrity are unlikely to make a Linux phone app.

That does not make sense. Even in the worse scenarios Android would be more open than Apple and there would be Android options unaffected by this. Not many and not the most mainstream, though certainly more so than non-Android Linux phones.

But compared to a picking a non-Android Linux phone it makes even less sense. Unfortunately it’s true.

Unfortunatel, even here on Lemmy, that is a not techier/fossier than the mainstream, a lot of people say they will switch to… IOS.

Doubtful, phone vendors already had access to binary blobs to run Linux (Android) on them.

It’s no surprise Valve who is buying those SOCs is also provided with them.

No matter what?

There are android phones outside Google’s garden that will remain outside it’s walls. Apple’s walled garden vs Google’s future wall garden is a false dilemma.

I think I misread a statement about existing users not having their settings changed possibly on an update?

For individuals using JetBrains IDEs with commercial licenses, free trials, free community licenses, or EAP builds who do not explicitly consent to the new data collection model – nothing changes.

Am I missing something? Non-paid versions also have to opt-in, no?

Delusional apple fanboy.

I don’t need a my phone to be a ‘flagship’. I am not an influencer. I also wonder what loads are you running on a phone that you meet performance issues.

You can get an android with microSD and 3.5mm jack for 250€.

You can still run all the software you want. Adblockers, torrent clients, emulators, even… browsers! There will still be new android phones that won’t suffer those limitations. They will also be cheaper than iphones.

Don’t get me wrong android is in a bad trajectory, it’s true that’s Google has been enshitificating as much as it can get away with. It’s still light years ahead of iOS.

If anybody cares for privacy or control of their devices, saving Android, even in alternative versions/vendors, is a much more viable option than switching to iPhone.

Developer ID verification will be part of Google Play and won’t be present in GrapheneOS

Straight from the horse’s mouth. The rest of the post is a good reminder that GrapheneOS are morons.

But why would you lie about this?

Because one walled garden does not exist yet. Because it’s possible to get around the proposed walled garden. Because there are android manufacturers that ship phones that are not going to be affected by this.

But no lets just promote the whole iOS and Android are 100% the same (not Apple and Google, those are the same) and give up on fighting those changes.

Good riddance

Allow vendors to completely control what apps run on your phone and banning websites and PWAs becomes trivial for them. Browsers are apps.

But if you break the law after on 2026 you don’t get any excuse for not having time to adapt to the new circumstances.

DRM is not free, somebody is getting paid to provide that DRM and they certainly don’t go unpaid if it doesn’t work.

You can just escape the spaces with a \ .

Why would it be more difficult to maintain and update a complex system?

They don’t have to accept outsider contributions on their mainline nor employ less people to work on it.

You don’t get to redefine open source. It’s always been about giving the source code to whoever you give the software.

Making it publicly available is an acceptable alternative to fulfill that obligation.