Twelve-year-old Milan-based tech conglomerate Bending Spoons has quietly become one of the tech industry's most prolific buyers, now owning Meetup, WeTransfer and many others, but it remains largely unknown to the general public. Despite its catchy name, the company has stayed remarkably under the radar, and it typically makes headlines only when it adds another recognizable brand to its portfolio — the latest in date being Eventbrite, which it agreed to buy for $500 million last December. Its focus is on acquiring underperforming but popular tech brands, then transforming them to serve millions of users more efficiently. The company tends to make news when it restructures these acquired companies, often through significant layoffs, or makes controversial changes to beloved products — as it did with both Evernote and WeTransfer. Still, Bending Spoons remains largely unknown, even though its roster of products has served more than a billion people, with over 300 million monthly active users and 10 million paying customers. Bending Spoons describes itself as a company that acquires and transforms digital businesses. However, it didn't start that way — Bending Spoons' founders had taken a stab at building their own apps and products before eventually shifting their focus. The little-known backstory is that Bending Spoons was born out of the remains of Evertale, a Copenhagen-based startup that participated in Disrupt SF 2011's Startup Alley and raised seed funding for its photo-sharing app, Wink. Evertale failed not long after, and investors were able to exit, but its founders and a couple of employees kept working together, initially on in-house apps. Soon enough, the team made its first acquisition, followed by many others, CEO and co-founder Luca Ferrari told the venture podcast 20VC in a rare interview. In 2020, Bending Spoons made an exception when it created and donated Immuni, Italy's official COVID-19 contact-tracing app. While this focus on efficiency and revenue overlaps with private equity strategies, Bending Spoons claims a key difference: It “aims to hold forever, and has never sold an acquired business.” It is building a live portfolio, not collecting internet relics or presiding over a tech graveyard. To be clear, Bending Spoons' acquisition targets so far haven't necessarily been failing businesses — many still had substantial user bases and revenue. Let's recap these key deals, and what happened in their aftermath. While Bending Spoons acquired several companies between 2014 and 2021, including the AI-powered photo enhancer Remini, its most notable acquisitions happened more recently. The first half of following year, 2024, was particularly active, with the acquisition of Meetup, app maker Mosaic Group, and Hopin's StreamYard all happening within six months. In July 2024, it went on to acquire the publishing platform Issuu and the file transfer service WeTransfer, where it later cut staff and made changes to its free plan, introducing stricter limits. In December 2025, WeTransfer's cofounder Nalden criticized Bending Spoons' decisions and said he was building another file transfer service. In November 2024, Bending Spoons announced it would spend $233 million on an all-cash take-private deal to acquire video platform Brightcove. Bending Spoons also announced its intention to acquire Vimeo in a $1.38 billion all-cash deal, and soon after, to acquire AOL from Yahoo for an undisclosed amount. In December 2025, Bending Spoons announced it would acquire yet another well-known brand: Eventbrite. Once again, it may pay much less than Eventbrite was once worth — only some $500 million, a far cry from the company's $1.76 billion valuation when it went public in 2018. Earlier this month, Eventbrite stockholders filed a lawsuit in Delaware to upend the take-private deal over voting rights, and Eventbrite is currently fighting an effort to fast-track this challenge. Since October 2025, Bending Spoons has been one of Europe's rare tech decacorns (companies valued at more than $10 billion). This comes on the heels of Bending Spoons' latest funding round: $270 million from investors, including T. Rowe Price and earlier backers Baillie Gifford, Cox Enterprises, Durable Capital Partners, and Fidelity, plus a $440 million secondary share sale by existing shareholders. Ferrari's stake in Bending Spoons is now reportedly worth $1.4 billion, while co-founders Matteo Danieli, Luca Querella, and Francesco Patarnello each hold stakes worth $1.3 billion, according to Forbes estimates based on shareholder data published by the Italian Business Register. Though long bootstrapped, Bending Spoons had previously raised equity financing several times, including in September 2022 and early 2024. Upon announcing its new funding in October 2025, Bending Spoons said it would support future acquisitions and investment in its proprietary technology and AI capabilities. Bending Spoons said it intends to continue pursuing new acquisitions that expand its portfolio of consumer and enterprise digital products, and it now has funding to afford more prominent targets going forward — as confirmed by its decision to acquire Eventbrite. (Not long before acquiring AOL, Bending Spoons was also rumored to be eyeing app maker Elysium and Typeform, the Barcelona-based SaaS company known for its form creation tools.) Presumably to support its continued efforts to acquire companies, it also has openings across various roles, with new hires initially working from its Milan headquarters before gaining the option to work from offices in London, Madrid, and Warsaw, or remotely. In fact, despite warning candidates that Bending Spoons is a “demanding environment,” the company has said it already received more than 600,000 job applications in 2025, a figure that will likely climb as its recent deals generate additional attention. In November, Ferrari had told Reuters that should it decide to go public, Bending Spoons would probably list in the U.S., where tech companies tend to achieve higher valuations. This story was originally published in October 2025 and is updated periodically with new information. You can contact or verify outreach from Anna by emailing annatechcrunch [at] gmail.com. As a freelance reporter at TechCrunch since 2021, she has covered a large range of startup-related topics including AI, fintech & insurtech, SaaS & pricing, and global venture capital trends. As of May 2025, her reporting for TechCrunch focuses on Europe's most interesting startup stories. Anna has moderated panels and conducted onstage interviews at industry events of all sizes, including major tech conferences such as TechCrunch Disrupt, 4YFN, South Summit, TNW Conference, VivaTech, and many more. A former LATAM & Media Editor at The Next Web, startup founder and Sciences Po Paris alum, she's fluent in multiple languages, including French, English, Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese. Hear from 250+ tech leaders, dive into 200+ sessions, and explore 300+ startups building what's next. TikTok users freak out over app's ‘immigration status' collection — here's what it means Researchers say Russian government hackers were behind attempted Poland power outage Microsoft gave FBI a set of BitLocker encryption keys to unlock suspects' laptops: Reports SpaceX didn't properly inspect crane before collapse at Starbase, OSHA says

If your Gmail account didn't seem to be working properly Saturday, you were not alone. The official status dashboard for Google Workspace suggests that problems began at around 5am Pacific on Saturday morning, with users experiencing both “misclassification of emails in their inbox and additional spam warnings.” Other users complained on social media that “all the spam is going directly to my inbox” and that Gmail's filters seem “suddenly completely busted.” Later on Saturday evening, Google posted that the issue had been “fully resolved for all users.” The company also said that it will “publish an analysis of this incident once we have completed our internal investigation.” Hear from 250+ tech leaders, dive into 200+ sessions, and explore 300+ startups building what's next. Every weekday and Sunday, you can get the best of TechCrunch's coverage. TechCrunch Mobility is your destination for transportation news and insight. Startups are the core of TechCrunch, so get our best coverage delivered weekly. Provides movers and shakers with the info they need to start their day. By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice.

When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Researchers from the University of California, Irvine have developed a transceiver that works in the 140 GHz range and can transmit data at up to 120 Gbps, that's about 15 gigabytes per second. According to UC Irvine News, these new speeds could match most fiber optic cables used in data centers and other commercial applications, usually around at 100 Gbps. “But as such speeds, conventional transmitters that create signals using digital-to-analog converters are incredibly complex and power-hungry, and face what we call a DAC bottleneck.” The team replaced the DAC with three in-sync sub-transmitters, which only required 230 milliwatts to operate. By comparison, a DAC that can keep up with 120 Gbps would consume several watts of power, making it unsuitable for smartphone and other mobile device use. “If we stuck to traditional methods, the battery life of next-generation devices would vanish in minutes,” UC Irvine Nanoscale Communication Integrated Circuits Labs director Payam Heydari said. “Our group's answer is a transceiver that leapfrogs over current limitations by performing complex calculations in the analog domain, rather than the power-hungry digital domain.” Aside from its efficiency, the researchers said that the silicon is fabricated on 22nm node, using fully depleted silicon-on-insulator technology, which is so much easier to manufacture than cutting edge 2nm and 18A nodes from TSMC and Samsung. Moreover, the group also said that their new technology is a suitable alternative to the miles and miles of cabling that data centers require, allowing them to reduce their set-up and operating costs. Current 5G mmWave technology, which can go up to 71 GHz, has a range of about 300 meters, so you can expect this to have an even smaller radius. So, unless we see new innovations that could extend the reach of this high-speed wireless technology, we may see a future where our cities are dotted with high-speed cell sites. Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. Jowi Morales is a tech enthusiast with years of experience working in the industry. Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher.

When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Modder Jiachen Liu on X decided to remedy this issue by transplanting an RTX Titan core and 24GB of GDDR6 memory. Armed with all these upgrades, the modified RTX 2080 TI HoF (or supercharged Titan RTX, whatever you want to call it) was recorded pushing a whopping 18,038 points on the graphics score for 3DMark TimeSpy Extreme. To understand just how crazy this score is, the average score for two Titan RTX graphics cards in SLI is around 17,000 points, and an average RTX 3090 score is around 14,000 points in TimeSpy Extreme. 2080Ti HOF >> TITAN RTX modIt's time to do justice for this beautiful PCB with a fully unlocked TITAN core and 24GB of HC16 memory. No more deactivated shaders or unpopulated memory modules.4352sp >> 4608sp, 300W PL >> 900W 11GB 352bit Samsung HC14 >> 24GB 384bit Samsung… pic.twitter.com/ZLI1Qb8Q05January 23, 2026 The Titan RTX was the most powerful Turing graphics card made that was geared towards prosumers, featuring 72 SMs, 4608 CUDA cores, 72 RT cores, 576 tensor cores, 288 TMUs, 6MB of L2 cache, and 24GB of GDDR6 operating on a 384-bit interface. Again, all of this was done with one GPU. Maybe one day we'll see the same card paired in SLI with another card with the same Titan GPU swap. If that happens, we could see some new records being broken. 18,000 times two equates to a TimeSpy Extreme score that outperforms even an LN2 overclocked RTX 5090. Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds. Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox. Aaron Klotz is a contributing writer for Tom's Hardware, covering news related to computer hardware such as CPUs, and graphics cards. Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher.

Not because of Transformers, but because I—a millennial and self-proclaimed Cartoon Network kid—grew up on Dexter's Lab, and man, did that show burrow its way into my brain. Maybe if I hadn't been so awful at doing useful stuff like math and chemistry, Dexter might have compelled me to become a scientist or an engineer. As you may have gathered from reading this, though, I didn't do that. I say “next best” because this road, unbeknownst to me at the time, is one that led me straight to something that scratches that childhood itch just as much as lab coats and beakers: a big friggin' robotic Transformer. The Soundwave G1 is an impressive robot with bad sound. When I first saw Robosen's new ultra-expensive, elaborate Transformer robot, the Soundwave G1, it was hard not to get excited. In case you didn't catch my missive when this thing was launched, the Soundwave G1 takes Robosen's robotic Transformers (yes, there are many) a step further and features a Bluetooth speaker mode that can be used when Soundwave is all crumpled up in its cassette player form. That's sick for hardcore Transformer fans since it brings the original schtick of Soundwave to life, but also for me personally because I pay my bills in part by reviewing speakers. In short, my interests collided here in a big way, which means I got a chance to test out Soundwave myself, and boy, do I have some thoughts. I'm going to try to do both right now, and for the sake of all the potential Transformers fans out there reading this, I am going to start with the fun stuff first. How, you might ask, is the Soundwave G1 as a toy? When you pick it up, you can feel all the robotics inside, which is because there are a lot. According to Robosen, there are “28 high-precision intelligent servo motors” and 84 custom microchips. Even the cassette player portion pops out for dramatic effect, though you cannot actually play real tapes with it, which is a bummer. In Robosens' defense, I can only imagine fitting a tape deck in this thing would be an engineering nightmare. In terms of look and feel, it's the robot toy most people my age wanted as a kid, and for $1,400, it damn well should be. The Soundwave G1 also understands quite a few commands. With the help of a built-in microphone, you can shout at your expensive robot and get it to do things. Altogether, there are 48 pre-programmed voice commands that include stuff like “attack” or “defend,” which make the robot shoot with its included toy gun and gesture. There are also more Transformers-specific commands like “Megatron” or “Laserbeak,” in which the Soundwave G1 says stuff from the show while gesticulating. A fun fact here is that they got the original Soundwave voice actor, Frank Welker, to come in and do some voice acting for the robot. By shouting “Hey Soundwave, transform,” you get to watch the robot dramatically bend all of its limbs up and curl into a tape player from a robot mode or vice versa. It's wild, but also that leads me to my first and biggest downside of the Soundwave G1. I fear Soundwave, after all the years of laser battling with Autobots, may be a little hard of hearing. Time after time, I was forced to scream at this giant hunk of plastic, begging it to do stuff. C'mon, Robosen; if I wanted to be agitated by a voice assistant, I would just talk to my Nest speaker at home. That's partially because canonically, Soundwave talks in a vocoder-like voice that blends synth and human speech, but also because the speakers aren't the best (which is something I'll get into more later). With all that said, there is an app where you can punch in commands on your phone. There's other stuff you can do in the companion app, too Here, you can use a touchscreen D-pad to tell Soundwave to walk around (it can move left, right, forward, or backward), and you can even program your own actions. Action programming, I must warn you, is pretty far from intuitive, though I did have some minor success with using the block-based programming UI to get Soundwave to do simple stuff like twist its arms. Honestly, that may be my favorite app-based touch since I'm a big fan of the original score with all of its obnoxious guitar and '80s riffage. Lastly, there's a “mini theater” mode where Soundwave is meant to do what amounts to a short demo while you watch a video in the app, but I couldn't really get the feature to work correctly. In Robosen's defense, I was using an early version of the app to test Soundwave, so maybe that had something to do with it? As I mentioned before, there are two ways to review the Soundwave, and the second is as a Bluetooth speaker. By shouting at Soundwave to transform, you can use Robosen's robot as a Bluetooth speaker. All you have to do is pull up your phone's Bluetooth and connect, and boom, you're in business. As I wrote when this robot was first announced, I was curious about whether the Soundwave G1 would actually sound decent. I mean, it's a toy, to be sure, but it is also $1,400, so decent sound isn't totally out of the question, right? I'm sad to say my first inclination was correct; the Soundwave G1 sounds sort of bad. It's not unlistenable, but definitely not a speaker that you're going to want to use for anything other than the novelty of it all. Sound is pretty flat and one-dimensional, and for what I assume are engineering reasons, the sound actually emanates from the back of the robot when it's in cassette mode, which is not ideal for fidelity. It's bad enough that I sort of wish that Robosen had leaned into the badness, applying some kind of tape-like effect to the audio you listen to that makes it feel as though the '80s are alive and well. I mean, this thing doesn't actually play tapes, but what if it sounded like you were playing tapes? A nice touch is the inclusion of physical buttons on the Soundwave G1, which can be pressed and used as you would on a tape player. When I listened back to my recordings in the app, though, or tried to play them from the robot by pressing the play button, I didn't hear much of anything. Maybe the microphone on my robotic son is defective? And even if I did speak Decepticon, I wouldn't have to speak very much of it. I think, if you're lucky, you'll get an hour and a half out of the Soundwave G1, and that's at lower volumes. That bad battery can be a little dangerous, too. This is all to say that you do not want to use the Soundwave G1 as a Bluetooth speaker in any sort of serious way, which is probably fine for most people. But if you, like me, entertained the idea that Soundwave would sound decent, you can rid yourself of that fantasy now. That's more than a brand new iPhone 17, or two Nintendo Switch 2s, or almost half the price of a Chevy Chevette in 1984. But maybe you've been robbing banks with the Decepticons and have money to blow. And maybe you want to use a little bit of that cash on a robot that you can impress your friends with for five minutes. If you're that person, then I guess go for it: the Soundwave G1 is an impressive robot when it works, and you don't have to shout at it 400 times to transform. The Bluetooth speaker stuff is definitely a parlor trick, but as long as you know that going in, I'm going to say no harm, no foul. I don't know, call me soft, but it's just hard to get mad at a robot transformer that I don't think most people are expecting to do much other than, well, transform. If you want a good Bluetooth speaker, go buy that; if you want a robot that makes you feel like a kid again, and you're wealthier than I'll ever be, then I guess do as Megatron does and go with the Soundwave G1. Subscribe and interact with our community, get up to date with our customised Newsletters and much more. This is either the best or worst idea ever. Nintendo's Wonder Flower toy joins Alarmo to annoy everybody in the bedroom. It's got an incredibly bright OLED screen with performance that will keep you from using it for much else than work. SwitchBot's new video doorbell shines in a couple of ways, but fails hard in too many key smart home camera ways.

Rather, it's a traditional, teardrop-shaped, behind-the-ear hearing aid that takes its name from Phonak's new Spheric Speech Clarity 2.0 system, designed to enhance the understandability of conversations in noisy conditions, no matter what direction the voices are coming from. Yes, Phonak Audeo Infinio Ultra Sphere is indeed a mouthful. For this review, I'll call it the Ultra Sphere. The new DeepSonic DNN (deep neural network) chip is responsible for multidirectional speech processing in noise. Are two chips better than one for hearing clearly? I wore the Ultra Sphere hearing aids for a week to find out. The Ultra Sphere hearing aids are visibly larger than most modern behind-the-ear (BTE) aids, clearly due to the extra silicon inside. But while they're more readily visible to outside observers, that differential doesn't noticeably impact comfort, even with long-term wear. Both hearing aids have a two-way rocker button used for power, volume, and media control. Tap control is also an option for certain Bluetooth functions, but this is disabled in the MyPhonak app by default. The units carry an IP68 weatherproof rating and are available in seven colors. You'll also be fitted with your preferred eartip style (open, closed, or Phonak's new wax-resistant EasyGuard domes) during your professional evaluation. These prescription hearing aids worked quite well across the board in my testing. Tuned professionally by a Phonak representative, their claims of hearing better in noisy conditions were accurate, mildly—though not transformatively—dulling background sound in most cases. It's nearly impossible to quantify exactly how much better the Ultra Sphere aids worked compared to other models on this front. This light hiss effect was sustained throughout my experience, but I could only detect it when there wasn't any other noise in the room. The aids offered an appropriate and gentle level of support—never overwhelming me with sound when I didn't need it and overall improving my ability to understand speech both in person and while watching TV. High-pitched and sharp sounds like keyboard taps and mouse clicks registered a bit too loudly for complete comfort, but this could likely be improved with a return visit to the audiologist. Bluetooth streaming quality is very good for BTE hearing aids. These aids can't effectively cancel heavy ambient noise during media streaming (particularly with open eartips), but on the whole, they were good enough for casual music and phone call usage. However, I encountered a few brief connectivity drop-outs during listening sessions. I was stunned by how comfortable these hearing aids are, even for long periods of wear stretching into multiple hours. Phonak specifies a huge battery range of up to 56 hours, depending on usage patterns. Phonak offers several add-ons that work with the Infinio Ultra line, including its TV Connector (about $320), which plugs into your television and pipes sound straight to your hearing aids, similar to how Auracast works, bypassing the need for ambient sound amplification. This device, which sells for a hefty $1,800 to $2,000, is a portable microphone that can also be used to pipe remote sounds into the Phonak hearing aids. The mic can also be clipped to a lapel or worn like a pendant to amplify the wearer's voice (and only the wearer), picking up audio from a person standing up to 80 feet away. It's insanely powerful, though I noticed it also had a tendency to pick up every sound in between me and my desired source: running water, rustling clothes, people chewing, and so on. (Prices can vary widely and are dependent on the provider.) My classic advice on this front still stands: Most people with moderate hearing loss will do perfectly well with one of our over-the-counter hearing aid picks, and save a lot of cash to boot. Those with more profound hearing loss and/or the need for significant tuning may want to consider a more sophisticated hearing support device like the Ultra Sphere. WIRED may earn a portion of sales from products that are purchased through our site as part of our Affiliate Partnerships with retailers. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast.

They compared their system to others, including mine, and made kind of a big checklist of who's better in what, and no surprise, theirs came out on top. But digging deeper, it quickly became clear that they didn't understand how to run my software correctly; and in many other places they bent over backwards to cherry-pick, and made a lot of bold and completely wrong claims. Correcting the record would place their software far below mine.Mind you, I'm VERY happy to see newer toolkits which are better than mine -- I wrote this thing over 20 years ago after all, and have since moved on. After a lot of back-and-forth however, it became clear that the journal's editor was too embarrassed and didn't want to require a retraction or revision. And the authors kept coming up with excuses for their errors. Mind you, I'm VERY happy to see newer toolkits which are better than mine -- I wrote this thing over 20 years ago after all, and have since moved on. After a lot of back-and-forth however, it became clear that the journal's editor was too embarrassed and didn't want to require a retraction or revision. And the authors kept coming up with excuses for their errors. I was an undergraduate at the University of Maryland when you were a graduate student there in the mid nineties. A lot of what you had to say shaped the way I think about computer science. The journal agreed with me, and rejected the paper.A couple of months later, I saw it had been published unchanged in a different journal. This is one of the reasons you should never accept a single publication at face value. But this isn't a bug — it's part of the algorithm. It's just that most muggles don't know how science actually works. Once you read enough papers in an area, you have a good sense of what's in the norm of the distribution of knowledge, and if some flashy new result comes over the transom, you might be curious, but you're not going to accept it without a lot more evidence.This situation is different, because it's a case where an extremely popular bit of accepted wisdom is both wrong, and the system itself appears to be unwilling to acknowledge the error. This situation is different, because it's a case where an extremely popular bit of accepted wisdom is both wrong, and the system itself appears to be unwilling to acknowledge the error. Admitting and correcting a mistake can feel difficult, but it makes you credible.As a reader, I would have much greater trust in a journal that solicited criticism and readily published corrections and retractions when warranted. As a reader, I would have much greater trust in a journal that solicited criticism and readily published corrections and retractions when warranted. We all know good people who do bad things> They were just in situations where it was easier to do the bad thing than the good thingI can't believe I just read that. What's the bar for a bad person if you haven't passed it at "it was simply easier to do the bad thing? Actually, multiple choices at different times, it seems. If you keep choosing the easy path instead of the path that is right for those that depend on you, it's easier for me to just label you a bad person. > They were just in situations where it was easier to do the bad thing than the good thingI can't believe I just read that. What's the bar for a bad person if you haven't passed it at "it was simply easier to do the bad thing? Actually, multiple choices at different times, it seems. If you keep choosing the easy path instead of the path that is right for those that depend on you, it's easier for me to just label you a bad person. What's the bar for a bad person if you haven't passed it at "it was simply easier to do the bad thing? Actually, multiple choices at different times, it seems. If you keep choosing the easy path instead of the path that is right for those that depend on you, it's easier for me to just label you a bad person. Actually, multiple choices at different times, it seems. If you keep choosing the easy path instead of the path that is right for those that depend on you, it's easier for me to just label you a bad person. I happen to agree that labeling them as villains wouldn't have been helpful to this story, but they didn't do that.> It obscures the root causes of why the bad things are happening, and stands in the way of effective remedy.There's a toxic idea built into this statement: It implies that the real root cause is external to the people and therefore the solution must be a systemic change.This hits a nerve for me because I've seen this specific mindset used to avoid removing obviously problematic people, instead always searching for a “root cause” that required us all to ignore the obvious human choices at the center of the problem.Like blameless postmortems taken to a comical extreme where one person is always doing some careless that causes problems and we all have to brainstorm a way to pretend that the system failed, not the person who continues to cause us problems. > It obscures the root causes of why the bad things are happening, and stands in the way of effective remedy.There's a toxic idea built into this statement: It implies that the real root cause is external to the people and therefore the solution must be a systemic change.This hits a nerve for me because I've seen this specific mindset used to avoid removing obviously problematic people, instead always searching for a “root cause” that required us all to ignore the obvious human choices at the center of the problem.Like blameless postmortems taken to a comical extreme where one person is always doing some careless that causes problems and we all have to brainstorm a way to pretend that the system failed, not the person who continues to cause us problems. There's a toxic idea built into this statement: It implies that the real root cause is external to the people and therefore the solution must be a systemic change.This hits a nerve for me because I've seen this specific mindset used to avoid removing obviously problematic people, instead always searching for a “root cause” that required us all to ignore the obvious human choices at the center of the problem.Like blameless postmortems taken to a comical extreme where one person is always doing some careless that causes problems and we all have to brainstorm a way to pretend that the system failed, not the person who continues to cause us problems. This hits a nerve for me because I've seen this specific mindset used to avoid removing obviously problematic people, instead always searching for a “root cause” that required us all to ignore the obvious human choices at the center of the problem.Like blameless postmortems taken to a comical extreme where one person is always doing some careless that causes problems and we all have to brainstorm a way to pretend that the system failed, not the person who continues to cause us problems. Like blameless postmortems taken to a comical extreme where one person is always doing some careless that causes problems and we all have to brainstorm a way to pretend that the system failed, not the person who continues to cause us problems. You can do a blameless postmortem guiding a change in policy which ends in some people getting fired. In theory maybe, but in my experience the blameless postmortem culture gets taken to such an extreme that even when one person is consistently, undeniably to blame for causing problems we have to spend years pretending it's a system failure instead. I think engineers like the idea that you can engineer enough rules, policies, and guardrails that it's impossible to do anything but the right thing.This can create a feedback loop where the bad players realize they can get away with a lot because if they get caught they just blame the system for letting them do the bad thing. This can create a feedback loop where the bad players realize they can get away with a lot because if they get caught they just blame the system for letting them do the bad thing. Not necessarily, although certainly people sometimes fall into that trap. If they weren't problematic when they arrived, does that mean there were corrosive elements in the environment that led to the change?When a person who is a cog within a larger machine fails that is more or less by definition also an instance of the system failing.Of course individual intent is also important. If Joe dropped the production database intentionally then in addition to asking "how the hell did someone like him end up in this role in the first place" you will also want to eject him from the organization (or at least from that role). But focusing on individual intent is going to cloud the process and the systemic fix is much more important than any individual one.There's also a (meta) systemic angle to the above. Not everyone involved in carrying out the process will be equally mature, objective, and deliberate (by which I mean that unfortunately any organization is likely to contain at least a few fairly toxic people). If people jump to conclusions or go on a witch hunt that can constitute a serious systemic dysfunction in and of itself. Rigidly adhering to a blameless procedure is a way to guard against that while still working towards the necessary systemic changes. When a person who is a cog within a larger machine fails that is more or less by definition also an instance of the system failing.Of course individual intent is also important. If Joe dropped the production database intentionally then in addition to asking "how the hell did someone like him end up in this role in the first place" you will also want to eject him from the organization (or at least from that role). But focusing on individual intent is going to cloud the process and the systemic fix is much more important than any individual one.There's also a (meta) systemic angle to the above. Not everyone involved in carrying out the process will be equally mature, objective, and deliberate (by which I mean that unfortunately any organization is likely to contain at least a few fairly toxic people). If people jump to conclusions or go on a witch hunt that can constitute a serious systemic dysfunction in and of itself. Rigidly adhering to a blameless procedure is a way to guard against that while still working towards the necessary systemic changes. If Joe dropped the production database intentionally then in addition to asking "how the hell did someone like him end up in this role in the first place" you will also want to eject him from the organization (or at least from that role). But focusing on individual intent is going to cloud the process and the systemic fix is much more important than any individual one.There's also a (meta) systemic angle to the above. Not everyone involved in carrying out the process will be equally mature, objective, and deliberate (by which I mean that unfortunately any organization is likely to contain at least a few fairly toxic people). If people jump to conclusions or go on a witch hunt that can constitute a serious systemic dysfunction in and of itself. Rigidly adhering to a blameless procedure is a way to guard against that while still working towards the necessary systemic changes. There's also a (meta) systemic angle to the above. Not everyone involved in carrying out the process will be equally mature, objective, and deliberate (by which I mean that unfortunately any organization is likely to contain at least a few fairly toxic people). If people jump to conclusions or go on a witch hunt that can constitute a serious systemic dysfunction in and of itself. Rigidly adhering to a blameless procedure is a way to guard against that while still working towards the necessary systemic changes. > any organization is likely to contain at least a few fairly toxic people Going fully into blameless postmortems adds the precondition that you can't blame people, you are obligated to transform the obvious into a problem with some process or policy.Anyone who has hired at scale will eventually encounter an employee who seems lovely in interviews but turns out to be toxic and problematic in the job. The most toxic person I ever worked with, who culminated in dozens of peers quitting the company before he was caught red handed sabotaging company work, was actually one of the nicest and most compassionate people during interviews and when you initially met him. He, of course, was a big proponent of blameless postmortems and his toxicity thrived under blameless culture for longer than it should have. Anyone who has hired at scale will eventually encounter an employee who seems lovely in interviews but turns out to be toxic and problematic in the job. The most toxic person I ever worked with, who culminated in dozens of peers quitting the company before he was caught red handed sabotaging company work, was actually one of the nicest and most compassionate people during interviews and when you initially met him. He, of course, was a big proponent of blameless postmortems and his toxicity thrived under blameless culture for longer than it should have. It could also well be that Joe did the same thing at his last employer, someone in hiring happened to catch wind of it, a disorganized or understaffed process resulted in the ball somehow getting dropped, and here you are. If Joe dropped the production database and you're uncertain about his intentions then perhaps it would be a good idea to do the bare minimum by reducing his access privileges for the time being. No more than that though.Whereas if you're reasonably certain that there was no intentional foul play involved then focusing on the individual from the outset isn't likely to improve the eventual outcome (rather it seems to me quite likely to be detrimental). Whereas if you're reasonably certain that there was no intentional foul play involved then focusing on the individual from the outset isn't likely to improve the eventual outcome (rather it seems to me quite likely to be detrimental). It's impossible to identify every problematic person at the interview stage.Some times, it really is the person's own fault. Doing mental gymnastics to assume the system caused the person to become toxic is just a coping mechanism to avoid acknowledging that some people really are problematic and it's nobody's fault but their own. It's impossible to identify every problematic person at the interview stage.Some times, it really is the person's own fault. Doing mental gymnastics to assume the system caused the person to become toxic is just a coping mechanism to avoid acknowledging that some people really are problematic and it's nobody's fault but their own. Some times, it really is the person's own fault. Doing mental gymnastics to assume the system caused the person to become toxic is just a coping mechanism to avoid acknowledging that some people really are problematic and it's nobody's fault but their own. I'm saying that it's extremely important not to start there and not to use the possibility of arriving there as an excuse to shirk asking difficult questions about the inner workings and performance of the broader organization.> Doing mental gymnastics to assume the system caused the person to become toxicNo, don't assume. "No that does not appear to be the case" can sometimes be a perfectly reasonable conclusion to arrive at but it should never be an excuse to avoid confronting uncomfortable realities. "No that does not appear to be the case" can sometimes be a perfectly reasonable conclusion to arrive at but it should never be an excuse to avoid confronting uncomfortable realities. "No that does not appear to be the case" can sometimes be a perfectly reasonable conclusion to arrive at but it should never be an excuse to avoid confronting uncomfortable realities. 1) Basic morality (good vs evil) with total agency ascribed to the individual2) Basic systems (good vs bad), with total agency ascribed to the system and people treated as perfectly rational machines (where most of the comments here seem to sit)3) Blended system and morality, or "Systemic Morality": agency can be system-based or individual-based, and morality can be good or bad. This is the single largest rung, because there's a lot to digest here, and it's where a lot of folks get stuck on one ("you can't blame people for making rational decisions in a bad system") or the other ("you can't fault systems designed by fallible humans"). It's why there's a lot of "that's just the way things are" useless attitudes at present, because folks don't want to climb higher than this rung lest they risk becoming accountable for their decisions to themselves and others.4) "Comprehensive Morality": an action is net good or bad because of the system and the human. A good human in a bad system is more likely to make bad choices via adherence to systemic rules, just as a bad human in a good system is likely to find and exploit weaknesses in said system for personal gain. You cannot ascribe blame to one or the other, but rather acknowledge both separately and together. Think "Good Place" logic, with all of its caveats (good people in bad systems overwhelmingly make things worse by acting in good faith towards bad outcomes) and strengths (predictability of the masses at scale).5) "Historical Morality": a system or person is net good or bad because of repeated patterns of behaviors within the limitations (incentives/disincentives) of the environment. Individual acts or outcomes are less important than patterns of behavior and results. Yet it's because of that degree of accountability - that you can and will be held to account for past harms, even in problematic systems - that we have the rule of law, and civilization as a result.Like a lot of the commenters here, I sat squarely in the third rung for years before realizing that I wasn't actually smart, but instead incredibly ignorant and entitled by refusing to truly evaluate root causes of systemic or personal issues and address them accordingly. It's not enough to merely identify a given cause and call it a day, you have to do something to change or address it to reduce the future likelihood of negative behaviors and outcomes; it's how I can rationalize not necessarily faulting a homeless person in a system that fails to address underlying causes of homelessness and people incentivized not to show empathy or compassion towards them, but also rationalize vilifying the wealthy classes who, despite having infinite access to wealth and knowledge, willfully and repeatedly choose to harm others instead of improving things.Villainy and Heroism can be useful labels that don't necessarily simplify or ignorantly abstract the greater picture, and I'd like to think any critically-thinking human can understand when someone is using those terms from the first rung of the ladder versus the top rung. 2) Basic systems (good vs bad), with total agency ascribed to the system and people treated as perfectly rational machines (where most of the comments here seem to sit)3) Blended system and morality, or "Systemic Morality": agency can be system-based or individual-based, and morality can be good or bad. This is the single largest rung, because there's a lot to digest here, and it's where a lot of folks get stuck on one ("you can't blame people for making rational decisions in a bad system") or the other ("you can't fault systems designed by fallible humans"). It's why there's a lot of "that's just the way things are" useless attitudes at present, because folks don't want to climb higher than this rung lest they risk becoming accountable for their decisions to themselves and others.4) "Comprehensive Morality": an action is net good or bad because of the system and the human. A good human in a bad system is more likely to make bad choices via adherence to systemic rules, just as a bad human in a good system is likely to find and exploit weaknesses in said system for personal gain. You cannot ascribe blame to one or the other, but rather acknowledge both separately and together. Think "Good Place" logic, with all of its caveats (good people in bad systems overwhelmingly make things worse by acting in good faith towards bad outcomes) and strengths (predictability of the masses at scale).5) "Historical Morality": a system or person is net good or bad because of repeated patterns of behaviors within the limitations (incentives/disincentives) of the environment. Individual acts or outcomes are less important than patterns of behavior and results. Yet it's because of that degree of accountability - that you can and will be held to account for past harms, even in problematic systems - that we have the rule of law, and civilization as a result.Like a lot of the commenters here, I sat squarely in the third rung for years before realizing that I wasn't actually smart, but instead incredibly ignorant and entitled by refusing to truly evaluate root causes of systemic or personal issues and address them accordingly. It's not enough to merely identify a given cause and call it a day, you have to do something to change or address it to reduce the future likelihood of negative behaviors and outcomes; it's how I can rationalize not necessarily faulting a homeless person in a system that fails to address underlying causes of homelessness and people incentivized not to show empathy or compassion towards them, but also rationalize vilifying the wealthy classes who, despite having infinite access to wealth and knowledge, willfully and repeatedly choose to harm others instead of improving things.Villainy and Heroism can be useful labels that don't necessarily simplify or ignorantly abstract the greater picture, and I'd like to think any critically-thinking human can understand when someone is using those terms from the first rung of the ladder versus the top rung. This is the single largest rung, because there's a lot to digest here, and it's where a lot of folks get stuck on one ("you can't blame people for making rational decisions in a bad system") or the other ("you can't fault systems designed by fallible humans"). It's why there's a lot of "that's just the way things are" useless attitudes at present, because folks don't want to climb higher than this rung lest they risk becoming accountable for their decisions to themselves and others.4) "Comprehensive Morality": an action is net good or bad because of the system and the human. A good human in a bad system is more likely to make bad choices via adherence to systemic rules, just as a bad human in a good system is likely to find and exploit weaknesses in said system for personal gain. You cannot ascribe blame to one or the other, but rather acknowledge both separately and together. Think "Good Place" logic, with all of its caveats (good people in bad systems overwhelmingly make things worse by acting in good faith towards bad outcomes) and strengths (predictability of the masses at scale).5) "Historical Morality": a system or person is net good or bad because of repeated patterns of behaviors within the limitations (incentives/disincentives) of the environment. Individual acts or outcomes are less important than patterns of behavior and results. Yet it's because of that degree of accountability - that you can and will be held to account for past harms, even in problematic systems - that we have the rule of law, and civilization as a result.Like a lot of the commenters here, I sat squarely in the third rung for years before realizing that I wasn't actually smart, but instead incredibly ignorant and entitled by refusing to truly evaluate root causes of systemic or personal issues and address them accordingly. It's not enough to merely identify a given cause and call it a day, you have to do something to change or address it to reduce the future likelihood of negative behaviors and outcomes; it's how I can rationalize not necessarily faulting a homeless person in a system that fails to address underlying causes of homelessness and people incentivized not to show empathy or compassion towards them, but also rationalize vilifying the wealthy classes who, despite having infinite access to wealth and knowledge, willfully and repeatedly choose to harm others instead of improving things.Villainy and Heroism can be useful labels that don't necessarily simplify or ignorantly abstract the greater picture, and I'd like to think any critically-thinking human can understand when someone is using those terms from the first rung of the ladder versus the top rung. A good human in a bad system is more likely to make bad choices via adherence to systemic rules, just as a bad human in a good system is likely to find and exploit weaknesses in said system for personal gain. You cannot ascribe blame to one or the other, but rather acknowledge both separately and together. Think "Good Place" logic, with all of its caveats (good people in bad systems overwhelmingly make things worse by acting in good faith towards bad outcomes) and strengths (predictability of the masses at scale).5) "Historical Morality": a system or person is net good or bad because of repeated patterns of behaviors within the limitations (incentives/disincentives) of the environment. Individual acts or outcomes are less important than patterns of behavior and results. Yet it's because of that degree of accountability - that you can and will be held to account for past harms, even in problematic systems - that we have the rule of law, and civilization as a result.Like a lot of the commenters here, I sat squarely in the third rung for years before realizing that I wasn't actually smart, but instead incredibly ignorant and entitled by refusing to truly evaluate root causes of systemic or personal issues and address them accordingly. It's not enough to merely identify a given cause and call it a day, you have to do something to change or address it to reduce the future likelihood of negative behaviors and outcomes; it's how I can rationalize not necessarily faulting a homeless person in a system that fails to address underlying causes of homelessness and people incentivized not to show empathy or compassion towards them, but also rationalize vilifying the wealthy classes who, despite having infinite access to wealth and knowledge, willfully and repeatedly choose to harm others instead of improving things.Villainy and Heroism can be useful labels that don't necessarily simplify or ignorantly abstract the greater picture, and I'd like to think any critically-thinking human can understand when someone is using those terms from the first rung of the ladder versus the top rung. Individual acts or outcomes are less important than patterns of behavior and results. Yet it's because of that degree of accountability - that you can and will be held to account for past harms, even in problematic systems - that we have the rule of law, and civilization as a result.Like a lot of the commenters here, I sat squarely in the third rung for years before realizing that I wasn't actually smart, but instead incredibly ignorant and entitled by refusing to truly evaluate root causes of systemic or personal issues and address them accordingly. It's not enough to merely identify a given cause and call it a day, you have to do something to change or address it to reduce the future likelihood of negative behaviors and outcomes; it's how I can rationalize not necessarily faulting a homeless person in a system that fails to address underlying causes of homelessness and people incentivized not to show empathy or compassion towards them, but also rationalize vilifying the wealthy classes who, despite having infinite access to wealth and knowledge, willfully and repeatedly choose to harm others instead of improving things.Villainy and Heroism can be useful labels that don't necessarily simplify or ignorantly abstract the greater picture, and I'd like to think any critically-thinking human can understand when someone is using those terms from the first rung of the ladder versus the top rung. Like a lot of the commenters here, I sat squarely in the third rung for years before realizing that I wasn't actually smart, but instead incredibly ignorant and entitled by refusing to truly evaluate root causes of systemic or personal issues and address them accordingly. It's not enough to merely identify a given cause and call it a day, you have to do something to change or address it to reduce the future likelihood of negative behaviors and outcomes; it's how I can rationalize not necessarily faulting a homeless person in a system that fails to address underlying causes of homelessness and people incentivized not to show empathy or compassion towards them, but also rationalize vilifying the wealthy classes who, despite having infinite access to wealth and knowledge, willfully and repeatedly choose to harm others instead of improving things.Villainy and Heroism can be useful labels that don't necessarily simplify or ignorantly abstract the greater picture, and I'd like to think any critically-thinking human can understand when someone is using those terms from the first rung of the ladder versus the top rung. Villainy and Heroism can be useful labels that don't necessarily simplify or ignorantly abstract the greater picture, and I'd like to think any critically-thinking human can understand when someone is using those terms from the first rung of the ladder versus the top rung. 1. Who is responsible for adding guardrails to ensure all papers coming in are thoroughly checked & reviewed?2. How are we going to ensure this is not repeated by others? How are we going to ensure this is not repeated by others? How are we going to ensure this is not repeated by others? I've read multiple times that a large percentage of the crime comes from a small group of people. Jail them, and the overall crime rate drops by that percentage. ← It took more words to describe the act in that very sentence. If the two things match, you have a single idea. Simple.Speaking personally, if someone's very first contact with me is a lie, they are to be avoided and disregarded. I don't even care what "kind of person" they are. And getting to the root cause of their stuff or rehabilitating them is not a priority for me; that's their own job. Such is life in the high-pressure world of impressing rdiddly. Speaking personally, if someone's very first contact with me is a lie, they are to be avoided and disregarded. I don't even care what "kind of person" they are. And getting to the root cause of their stuff or rehabilitating them is not a priority for me; that's their own job. Such is life in the high-pressure world of impressing rdiddly. If we equate being bad to being ignorant, then those people are ignorant/bad (with the implication that if people knew better, they wouldn't do bad things)I'm sure I'm over simplifying something, looking forward to reading responses. Personally, I do believe that there are benefits to labelling others as villains if a certain threshold is met. It cognitively reduces strain by allowing us to blanket-label all of their acts as evil [0] (although with the drawback of occasionally accidentally labelling acts of good as evil), allowing us to prioritise more important things in life than the actions of what we call villains. You aren't going to magically sidestep cause and effect.The act itself is bad.The human performing the act was misguided.I view people as inherently perfect whose view of life, themselves, and their current situations as potentially misguided.Eg, like a diamond covered in shit.Just like it's possible for a diamond to be uncovered and polished, the human is capable of acquiring a truer perspective and more aligned set of behaviors - redemption. Thinking otherwise may be convenient but is ultimately misguided too.So the act and the person are separate.Granted, we need to protect society from such misguidedness, so we have laws, punishments, etc.But it's about protecting us from bad behavior, not labeling the individual as bad. The act itself is bad.The human performing the act was misguided.I view people as inherently perfect whose view of life, themselves, and their current situations as potentially misguided.Eg, like a diamond covered in shit.Just like it's possible for a diamond to be uncovered and polished, the human is capable of acquiring a truer perspective and more aligned set of behaviors - redemption. Thinking otherwise may be convenient but is ultimately misguided too.So the act and the person are separate.Granted, we need to protect society from such misguidedness, so we have laws, punishments, etc.But it's about protecting us from bad behavior, not labeling the individual as bad. The human performing the act was misguided.I view people as inherently perfect whose view of life, themselves, and their current situations as potentially misguided.Eg, like a diamond covered in shit.Just like it's possible for a diamond to be uncovered and polished, the human is capable of acquiring a truer perspective and more aligned set of behaviors - redemption. Thinking otherwise may be convenient but is ultimately misguided too.So the act and the person are separate.Granted, we need to protect society from such misguidedness, so we have laws, punishments, etc.But it's about protecting us from bad behavior, not labeling the individual as bad. I view people as inherently perfect whose view of life, themselves, and their current situations as potentially misguided.Eg, like a diamond covered in shit.Just like it's possible for a diamond to be uncovered and polished, the human is capable of acquiring a truer perspective and more aligned set of behaviors - redemption. Thinking otherwise may be convenient but is ultimately misguided too.So the act and the person are separate.Granted, we need to protect society from such misguidedness, so we have laws, punishments, etc.But it's about protecting us from bad behavior, not labeling the individual as bad. Eg, like a diamond covered in shit.Just like it's possible for a diamond to be uncovered and polished, the human is capable of acquiring a truer perspective and more aligned set of behaviors - redemption. Thinking otherwise may be convenient but is ultimately misguided too.So the act and the person are separate.Granted, we need to protect society from such misguidedness, so we have laws, punishments, etc.But it's about protecting us from bad behavior, not labeling the individual as bad. Just like it's possible for a diamond to be uncovered and polished, the human is capable of acquiring a truer perspective and more aligned set of behaviors - redemption. Thinking otherwise may be convenient but is ultimately misguided too.So the act and the person are separate.Granted, we need to protect society from such misguidedness, so we have laws, punishments, etc.But it's about protecting us from bad behavior, not labeling the individual as bad. So the act and the person are separate.Granted, we need to protect society from such misguidedness, so we have laws, punishments, etc.But it's about protecting us from bad behavior, not labeling the individual as bad. Granted, we need to protect society from such misguidedness, so we have laws, punishments, etc.But it's about protecting us from bad behavior, not labeling the individual as bad. I don't buy that for a moment. It presumes people do not have choices.The difference between a man and an animal is a man has honor. Each of us gets to choose if we are a man or an animal. Each of us gets to choose if we are a man or an animal. These failures aren't on that list because they require active intent. Both can be pursued without immediately jumping to defending a crime Blameless post-mortems are critical for fixing errors that allowed incident to happen. On the one hand, it is possible to become judgmental, habitually jumping to unwarranted and even unfair conclusions about the moral character of another person. Sure, pathological systems can create perverse incentives, even ones that put extraordinary pressure on people, but moral character is not just some deterministic mechanical response to incentive. Murder doesn't become okay because you had a “hard life”, for example. And even under “perfect conditions”, people would misbehave. In fact, they may even misbehave more in certain ways (think of the pathologies characteristic of the materially prosperous first world).So, yes, we ought to condemn acts, we ought to be charitable, but we should also recognize human vice and the need for justice. In some cases, it would even be harmful to society not to harm the reputations of certain people. The latter (externalization) is obvious when people habitually blame “systems” to rationalize misbehavior. Sure, pathological systems can create perverse incentives, even ones that put extraordinary pressure on people, but moral character is not just some deterministic mechanical response to incentive. Murder doesn't become okay because you had a “hard life”, for example. And even under “perfect conditions”, people would misbehave. In fact, they may even misbehave more in certain ways (think of the pathologies characteristic of the materially prosperous first world).So, yes, we ought to condemn acts, we ought to be charitable, but we should also recognize human vice and the need for justice. In some cases, it would even be harmful to society not to harm the reputations of certain people. In some cases, it would even be harmful to society not to harm the reputations of certain people. We know for an absolute fact that changing the underlying system matters massively but we must continue to acknowledge the individual choice because the system of consequences and as importantly the system of shame keeps those who wouldn't act morally in check. So we punish the person who was probably lead poisoned the same as any other despite knowing that we are partially at fault for the system that lead to their misbehavior. The fact that they can publish lies and others are happy to build on lies ind indicates the whole community is a cancer. The fact that the community rejects calls for correction indicates its metastasized and at least as far as that particular community the patient is dead and there is nothing left to save.They ought to be properly ridiculed and anyone who has published obvious trash should have any public funds yanked and become ineligible for life. People should watch their public ruin and consider their own future action.If you consider the sheer amount of science that has turned out to be outright fraud in the last decade this is a crisis. They ought to be properly ridiculed and anyone who has published obvious trash should have any public funds yanked and become ineligible for life. People should watch their public ruin and consider their own future action.If you consider the sheer amount of science that has turned out to be outright fraud in the last decade this is a crisis. If you consider the sheer amount of science that has turned out to be outright fraud in the last decade this is a crisis. God gave us free will to choose good or evil in various circumstances. We need to recognize that in our assessments. We must reward good choices and address bad ones (eg the study authors'). We should also change environments to promote good and oppose evil so the pressures are pushing in the right direction. Until then, there is ongoing harm to public science. Until then, there is ongoing harm to public science. He really may be that, or maybe he's having an extraordinarily stressful day, or maybe he's just not integrated with the values of your society ("cutting the line is bad, no matter what") or anything else BUT none of all that really helps you think clearly. So you left your values now too because you are busy fighting a stereotype.IMHO, correct course of action is assuming good faith even with bad actions, and even with persistent bad actions, and thinking about the productive things you can do to change the outcome, or decide that you cannot do anything.You can perhaps warn the guy, and then if he ignores you, you can even go to security or pick another hill to die on.I'm not saying that I can do this myself. IMHO, correct course of action is assuming good faith even with bad actions, and even with persistent bad actions, and thinking about the productive things you can do to change the outcome, or decide that you cannot do anything.You can perhaps warn the guy, and then if he ignores you, you can even go to security or pick another hill to die on.I'm not saying that I can do this myself. You can perhaps warn the guy, and then if he ignores you, you can even go to security or pick another hill to die on.I'm not saying that I can do this myself. Turns out that calling someone on their bullshit can be a perfectly productive thing to do, it not only deals with that specific incident, but also promotes a culture in which it's fine to keep each other accountable. It's also important to recognize that there are a lot of situations where calling someone out isn't going to have any (useful) effect. In such cases any impulsive behavior that disrupts the environment becomes a net negative. It's also important to base your actions on what's at hand, not teaching a lesson to "those people". It's fine and even good to assume good faith, extend your understanding, and listen to the reasons someone has done harm - in a context where the problem was already redressed and the wrongdoer is labelled.This is not that. This is someone publishing a false paper, deceiving multiple rounds of reviewers, manipulating evidence, knowingly and for personal gain. And they still haven't faced any consequences for it.I don't really know how to bridge the moral gap with this sort of viewpoint, honestly. This is someone publishing a false paper, deceiving multiple rounds of reviewers, manipulating evidence, knowingly and for personal gain. And they still haven't faced any consequences for it.I don't really know how to bridge the moral gap with this sort of viewpoint, honestly. I don't really know how to bridge the moral gap with this sort of viewpoint, honestly. Figure out what you can do that's productive. But if you start from an assumption of bad faith your judgment will almost certainly be clouded and thus there is a very real possibility that you will miss useful courses of action.The above is on an individual level. From an organizational perspective if participants know that a process could result in a bad faith determination against them they are much more likely to actively resist the process. This is what we see in the aviation world and it seems to work extremely well. Assuming good faith tends to be an important thing to start with if the goal is an objective assessment. But if you start from an assumption of bad faith your judgment will almost certainly be clouded and thus there is a very real possibility that you will miss useful courses of action.The above is on an individual level. From an organizational perspective if participants know that a process could result in a bad faith determination against them they are much more likely to actively resist the process. This is what we see in the aviation world and it seems to work extremely well. From an organizational perspective if participants know that a process could result in a bad faith determination against them they are much more likely to actively resist the process. This is what we see in the aviation world and it seems to work extremely well. I mean, do not put the others into any stereotype. Just look at the hand you are dealt and objectively think what to do.If there is an arsonist, you deal with that a-hole yourself, call the police, or first try to take your loved ones to safety first?Getting mad at the arsonist doesn't help. If there is an arsonist, you deal with that a-hole yourself, call the police, or first try to take your loved ones to safety first?Getting mad at the arsonist doesn't help. Getting mad at the arsonist doesn't help. This isn't going to happen, so the right thing to do is for the vast majority of practitioners to just ignore academia whilst politically campaigning for the zeroing of government research grants. Maybe the answer to building a resilient system lies in why it is still up. Unfortunately academia as a pursuit has never had a larger headcount and the incentives to engage in misconduct have likely never been higher (and appear to be steadily increasing). When the opposition is called evil it's not because logic dictates it must be evil, it's called evil for the same reason it's called ugly, unintelligent, weak, cowardly and every other sort of derogatory adjective under the sun.These accusations have little to do with how often people consider others things such as "ugly" or "weak", it's just signaling. These accusations have little to do with how often people consider others things such as "ugly" or "weak", it's just signaling. This is true though, and one of those awkward times where good ideals like science and critical feedback brush up against potentially ugly human things like pride and ego.I read a quote recently, and I don't like it, but it's stuck with me because it feels like it's dancing around the same awkward truth:"tact is the art of make a point without making an enemy"I guess part of being human is accepting that we're all human and will occasionally fail to be a perfect human.Sometimes we'll make mistakes in conducting research. Sometimes these mistakes will chain together to create situations like the post describes.Making mistakes is easy - it's such a part of being human we often don't even notice we do it. I think we should all be at least slightly afraid and apprehensive of doing that, even if it's for a greater good. I read a quote recently, and I don't like it, but it's stuck with me because it feels like it's dancing around the same awkward truth:"tact is the art of make a point without making an enemy"I guess part of being human is accepting that we're all human and will occasionally fail to be a perfect human.Sometimes we'll make mistakes in conducting research. Sometimes these mistakes will chain together to create situations like the post describes.Making mistakes is easy - it's such a part of being human we often don't even notice we do it. I think we should all be at least slightly afraid and apprehensive of doing that, even if it's for a greater good. "tact is the art of make a point without making an enemy"I guess part of being human is accepting that we're all human and will occasionally fail to be a perfect human.Sometimes we'll make mistakes in conducting research. Sometimes these mistakes will chain together to create situations like the post describes.Making mistakes is easy - it's such a part of being human we often don't even notice we do it. I think we should all be at least slightly afraid and apprehensive of doing that, even if it's for a greater good. I guess part of being human is accepting that we're all human and will occasionally fail to be a perfect human.Sometimes we'll make mistakes in conducting research. Sometimes these mistakes will chain together to create situations like the post describes.Making mistakes is easy - it's such a part of being human we often don't even notice we do it. I think we should all be at least slightly afraid and apprehensive of doing that, even if it's for a greater good. Sometimes these mistakes will chain together to create situations like the post describes.Making mistakes is easy - it's such a part of being human we often don't even notice we do it. I think we should all be at least slightly afraid and apprehensive of doing that, even if it's for a greater good. Making mistakes is easy - it's such a part of being human we often don't even notice we do it. I think we should all be at least slightly afraid and apprehensive of doing that, even if it's for a greater good. Whatever happens, avoid direct confrontation at all costs. On the other hand, it sounds like this workplace has weak leadership - have you considered leaving for some place better? If the manager can't do their job enough to give you decent feedback and stop a guy giving 10 min stand ups, LEAVE.Reasons for not leaving? A blameless organization can work, so long as people within it police themselves. As a society this does not happen, thus making people more steadfast in their anti-social behavior I've seen a lot of variety in the ethical standards that people will publicly espouse. > Vonnegut is not, I believe, talking about mere inauthenticity. He is talking about engaging in activities which do not agree with what we ourselves feel are our own core morals while telling ourselves, “This is not who I really am. I am just going along with this on the outside to get by.” Vonnegut's message is that the separation I just described between how we act externally and who we really are is imaginary.https://thewisdomdaily.com/mother-night-we-are-what-we-prete... No the complicity isn't right.The banality of evil. This needs to be addressed, most obviously through system change, esp. 2) errors are made, wrong or unexpected result for different intention.3) errors are caused, the error case is the intended outcome. This needs to be addressed, most obviously through system change, esp. This needs to be addressed, most obviously through system change, esp. This needs to be addressed, most obviously through system change, esp. The whole "bad vs good person" framing is probably not a very robust framework, never thought about it much, so if that's your position you might well be right. But it's not a consideration that escaped me, I reasoned under the same lens the person above did on intention. These people are terrible at their job, perhaps a bit malicious too. They may be great people as friends and colleagues. > If we systematically tie bad deeds to bad people, then surely those people we love and know to be good are incapable of what they're being accused.A strong claim that needs to be supported and actually the question who's nuances are being discussed in this thread. A strong claim that needs to be supported and actually the question who's nuances are being discussed in this thread. For starters, the bar should be way higher than accusations from a random person.For me,there's a red flag in the story: posting reviews and criticism of other papers is very mundane in academia. Some Nobel laureates even authored papers rejecting established theories. For me,there's a red flag in the story: posting reviews and criticism of other papers is very mundane in academia. Some Nobel laureates even authored papers rejecting established theories. So where is the author's paper featuring commentaries and letters, subjecting the author's own criticism to peer review? Other than just the label being difficult to apply, these factors also make the argument over who is a "bad person" not really productive and I will put those sorts of caveats into my writings because I just don't want to waste my time arguing the point. I think it makes a lot more sense to label them clearer labels which we have a lot more evidence for, like "untrustworthy scientist" (which you might think is a bad person inherently or not). I have a relative who lives in Memphis, Tennessee. A few years ago some guy got out of prison, went to a fellow's home to buy a car, shot the car owner dead, stole the car and drove it around until he got killed by the police.One of the neighbors said, I kid you not, "he's a good kid" But there is a concern which goes out of the "they" here. Actually, "they" could just as well not exist, and all narrative in the article be some LLM hallucination, we are still training ourself how we respond to this or that behavior we can observe and influence how we will act in the future.If we go with the easy path labeling people as root cause, that's the habit we are forging for ourself. We are missing the opportunity to hone our sense of nuance and critical thought about the wider context which might be a better starting point to tackle the underlying issue.Of course, name and shame is still there in the rhetorical toolbox, and everyone and their dog is able to use it even when rage and despair is all that stay in control of one mouth. Using it with relevant parcimony however is not going to happen from mere reactive habits. If we go with the easy path labeling people as root cause, that's the habit we are forging for ourself. We are missing the opportunity to hone our sense of nuance and critical thought about the wider context which might be a better starting point to tackle the underlying issue.Of course, name and shame is still there in the rhetorical toolbox, and everyone and their dog is able to use it even when rage and despair is all that stay in control of one mouth. Using it with relevant parcimony however is not going to happen from mere reactive habits. Using it with relevant parcimony however is not going to happen from mere reactive habits. On my side-project todo list, I have an idea for a scientific service that overlays a "trust" network over the citation graph. Authors and institutions that accumulate too many of such sketchy works should be labeled equally. Over time this would provide an additional useful signal vs. just raw citation numbers. You could also look for citation rings and tag them. I think that could be quite useful but requires a bit of work. The idea failed a simple sanity check: just going to Google Scholar, doing a generic search and reading randomly selected papers from within the past 15 years or so. It turned out most of them were bogus in some obvious way. A lot of ideas for science reform take as axiomatic that the bad stuff is rare and just needs to be filtered out. Once you engage with some field's literatures in a systematic way, it becomes clear that it's more like searching for diamonds in the rough than filtering out occasional corruption.But at that point you wonder, why bother? There is no alchemical algorithm that can convert intellectual lead into gold. If a field is 90% bogus then it just shouldn't be engaged with at all. But at that point you wonder, why bother? There is no alchemical algorithm that can convert intellectual lead into gold. If a field is 90% bogus then it just shouldn't be engaged with at all. Publishing does not say anything about your quality as a researcher, since anyone can do it.2) Being published doesn't mean it's right, or even credible. No one is filtering the stream, so there's no cachet to being published.We then let memetic evolution run its course. This is the system that got us Newton, Einstein, Darwin, Mendeleev, Euler, etc. It works, but it's slow, sometimes ugly to watch, and hard to game so some people would much rather use the "Approved by A Council of Peers" nonsense we're presently mired in. 2) Being published doesn't mean it's right, or even credible. No one is filtering the stream, so there's no cachet to being published.We then let memetic evolution run its course. This is the system that got us Newton, Einstein, Darwin, Mendeleev, Euler, etc. It works, but it's slow, sometimes ugly to watch, and hard to game so some people would much rather use the "Approved by A Council of Peers" nonsense we're presently mired in. We then let memetic evolution run its course. This is the system that got us Newton, Einstein, Darwin, Mendeleev, Euler, etc. It works, but it's slow, sometimes ugly to watch, and hard to game so some people would much rather use the "Approved by A Council of Peers" nonsense we're presently mired in. Still I'm skeptical about any sort of system trying to figure out 'trust'. Just too many people trying to get into the system (and getting in is the most important part). The system ends up promoting an even more conservative culture. What might start great will end up with groups and institutions being even more protective of 'their truths' to avoid getting tainted.Don't think there's any system which can avoid these sort of things, people were talking about this before WW1, globalisation just put it in overdrive. Don't think there's any system which can avoid these sort of things, people were talking about this before WW1, globalisation just put it in overdrive. When you added it up, most of the hard parts were Engineering, and a bit Econ. You would really struggle to work through tough questions in engineering, spend a lot of time on economic theory, and then read the management stuff like you were reading a newspaper.Management you could spot a mile away as being soft. There's certainly some interesting ideas, but even as students we could smell it was lacking something. Entertaining, certainly, but it felt like false enlightenment. Management you could spot a mile away as being soft. There's certainly some interesting ideas, but even as students we could smell it was lacking something. Entertaining, certainly, but it felt like false enlightenment. You have to contact the authors for full datasets. I can see why it would not be possible to publish them in the past due to limited space in printed publications. And from the comments:> From my experience in social science, including some experience in managment studies specifically, researchers regularly belief things – and will even give policy advice based on those beliefs – that have not even been seriously tested, or have straight up been refuted.Sometimes people use fewer than one non replicatable studies. The supposed study suggests that people who write down their goals are more likely to achieve them than people who do not. However, Harvard itself cannot find such a study existing:https://ask.library.harvard.edu/faq/82314 > From my experience in social science, including some experience in managment studies specifically, researchers regularly belief things – and will even give policy advice based on those beliefs – that have not even been seriously tested, or have straight up been refuted.Sometimes people use fewer than one non replicatable studies. The supposed study suggests that people who write down their goals are more likely to achieve them than people who do not. However, Harvard itself cannot find such a study existing:https://ask.library.harvard.edu/faq/82314 Sometimes people use fewer than one non replicatable studies. The supposed study suggests that people who write down their goals are more likely to achieve them than people who do not. However, Harvard itself cannot find such a study existing:https://ask.library.harvard.edu/faq/82314 (E.g., a new finding about memory comes out, my field is emotion, I might do a new study looking at how emotion and your memory finding interact. )If the effect is replicable, it will end up used in other studies (subject to randomness and the file drawer effect, anyway). But if an effect is rarely mentioned in the literature afterwards...run far, FAR away, and don't base your research off it.A good advisor will be able to warn you off lost causes like this. If the effect is replicable, it will end up used in other studies (subject to randomness and the file drawer effect, anyway). But if an effect is rarely mentioned in the literature afterwards...run far, FAR away, and don't base your research off it.A good advisor will be able to warn you off lost causes like this. A good advisor will be able to warn you off lost causes like this. Ioannidis' work during Covid raised him in my esteem. It's rare to see someone in academics who is willing to set their own reputation on fire in search of truth. “Most Published Research Findings Are False” —> “Most Published COVID-19 Research Findings Are False” -> “Uh oh, I did a wrongthink, let's backtrack at bit”.Is that it? If IFR is low then a lot of the assumptions that justified lockdowns are invalidated (the models and assumptions were wrong anyway for other reasons, but IFR is just another). So Ioannidis was a bit of a class traitor in that regard and got hammered a lot.The claim he's a conspiracy theorist isn't supported, it's just the usual ad hominem nonsense (not that there's anything wrong with pointing out genuine conspiracies against the public! Wikipedia gives four citations for this claim and none of them show him proposing a conspiracy, just arguing that when used properly data showed COVID was less serious than others were claiming. Grokipedia's article is significantly less biased and more accurate. Wikipedia gives four citations for this claim and none of them show him proposing a conspiracy, just arguing that when used properly data showed COVID was less serious than others were claiming. Grokipedia's article is significantly less biased and more accurate. https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/04/19/fatal-flaw...That said, I'd put both his serosurvey and the conduct he criticized in "Most Published Research Findings Are False" in a different category from the management science paper discussed here. Those seem mostly explainable by good-faith wishful thinking and motivated reasoning to me, while that paper seems hard to explain except as a knowing fraud. That said, I'd put both his serosurvey and the conduct he criticized in "Most Published Research Findings Are False" in a different category from the management science paper discussed here. Those seem mostly explainable by good-faith wishful thinking and motivated reasoning to me, while that paper seems hard to explain except as a knowing fraud. The case for lockdowns was being promoted based on, amongst other things, the idea that PCR tests have a false positive rate of exactly zero, always, under all conditions. This belief is nonsense although I've encountered wet lab researchers who believe it - apparently this is how they are trained. In one case I argued with the researcher for a bit and discovered he didn't know what Ct threshold COVID labs were using; after I told him he went white and admitted that it was far too high, and that he hadn't known they were doing that.Gellman's demands for an apology seem very different in this light. Ioannidis et al not only took test FP rates into account in their calculations but directly measured them to cross-check the manufacturer's claims. Nearly every other COVID paper I read simply assumed FPs don't exist at all, or used bizarre circular reasoning like "we know this test has an FP rate of zero because it detects every case perfectly when we define a case as a positive test result". I wrote about it at the time because this problem was so prevalent:https://medium.com/mike-hearn/pseudo-epidemics-part-ii-61cb0...I think Gellman realized after the fact that he was being over the top in his assessment because the article has been amended since with numerous "P.S." paragraphs which walk back some of his own rhetoric. If the cost of pointing out problems in your field is that every paper you write has to be considered perfect by every possible critic from that point on, it's just another way to stop people flagging problems. Gellman's demands for an apology seem very different in this light. Ioannidis et al not only took test FP rates into account in their calculations but directly measured them to cross-check the manufacturer's claims. Nearly every other COVID paper I read simply assumed FPs don't exist at all, or used bizarre circular reasoning like "we know this test has an FP rate of zero because it detects every case perfectly when we define a case as a positive test result". I wrote about it at the time because this problem was so prevalent:https://medium.com/mike-hearn/pseudo-epidemics-part-ii-61cb0...I think Gellman realized after the fact that he was being over the top in his assessment because the article has been amended since with numerous "P.S." paragraphs which walk back some of his own rhetoric. If the cost of pointing out problems in your field is that every paper you write has to be considered perfect by every possible critic from that point on, it's just another way to stop people flagging problems. paragraphs which walk back some of his own rhetoric. If the cost of pointing out problems in your field is that every paper you write has to be considered perfect by every possible critic from that point on, it's just another way to stop people flagging problems. paragraphs which walk back some of his own rhetoric. If the cost of pointing out problems in your field is that every paper you write has to be considered perfect by every possible critic from that point on, it's just another way to stop people flagging problems. Fairly classic human nature.> "The most erroneous stories are those we think we know best -and therefore never scrutinize or question. I'm not sure what they are counting, probably all the pdf uploaded to ResearchGateI'm not sure how they count 6000 citations, but I guess they are counting everything, including quotes by the vicepresident. Journals should disclose comments, complaints, corrections, and retraction requests. Einstein articles will be full of comments explaining why he is wrong, from racist to people that can spell Minkowski to save their lives. In /newest there is like one post per week from someone that discover a new physics theory with the help of ChatGPT. I'm not sure how they count 6000 citations, but I guess they are counting everything, including quotes by the vicepresident. Journals should disclose comments, complaints, corrections, and retraction requests. Einstein articles will be full of comments explaining why he is wrong, from racist to people that can spell Minkowski to save their lives. In /newest there is like one post per week from someone that discover a new physics theory with the help of ChatGPT. Journals should disclose comments, complaints, corrections, and retraction requests. Einstein articles will be full of comments explaining why he is wrong, from racist to people that can spell Minkowski to save their lives. In /newest there is like one post per week from someone that discover a new physics theory with the help of ChatGPT. Journals should disclose comments, complaints, corrections, and retraction requests. Einstein articles will be full of comments explaining why he is wrong, from racist to people that can spell Minkowski to save their lives. In /newest there is like one post per week from someone that discover a new physics theory with the help of ChatGPT. Einstein articles will be full of comments explaining why he is wrong, from racist to people that can spell Minkowski to save their lives. In /newest there is like one post per week from someone that discover a new physics theory with the help of ChatGPT. Judging from PubPeer, which allows people to post all of the above anonymously and with minimal moderation, this is not an issue in practice. It has 0 comments, for an article that forgot "not" in "the result is *** statistical significative". The word "bad" loses its meaning if you explain away every bad deed by such people as something else. Putting other people's lives at risk by deciding to drive when you are drunk sounds like very bad people to me.> They're living in a world in which doing the bad thing–covering up error, refusing to admit they don't have the evidence to back up their conclusions–is easy, whereas doing the good thing is hard.I don't understand this line of reasoning. How does this make sense?> As researchers they've been trained to never back down, to dodge all criticism.Exactly the opposite is taught. These people are deciding not to back down and admit wrong doing out of their own accord. > They're living in a world in which doing the bad thing–covering up error, refusing to admit they don't have the evidence to back up their conclusions–is easy, whereas doing the good thing is hard.I don't understand this line of reasoning. How does this make sense?> As researchers they've been trained to never back down, to dodge all criticism.Exactly the opposite is taught. These people are deciding not to back down and admit wrong doing out of their own accord. I don't understand this line of reasoning. How does this make sense?> As researchers they've been trained to never back down, to dodge all criticism.Exactly the opposite is taught. These people are deciding not to back down and admit wrong doing out of their own accord. These people are deciding not to back down and admit wrong doing out of their own accord. These people are deciding not to back down and admit wrong doing out of their own accord. > because they know they can get away with itthe point is that the paved paths lead to bad behaviorwell designed systems make it easy to do good> Exactly the opposite is taught. well designed systems make it easy to do good> Exactly the opposite is taught. “That's a bad thing to do…”Maybe should be: “That's a stupid thing to do…”Or: reckless, irresponsible, selfish, etc.In other words, maybe it has nothing to do with morals and ethics. Bad is kind of a lame word with limited impact. Maybe should be: “That's a stupid thing to do…”Or: reckless, irresponsible, selfish, etc.In other words, maybe it has nothing to do with morals and ethics. Bad is kind of a lame word with limited impact. Or: reckless, irresponsible, selfish, etc.In other words, maybe it has nothing to do with morals and ethics. Bad is kind of a lame word with limited impact. In other words, maybe it has nothing to do with morals and ethics. Bad is kind of a lame word with limited impact. You guys are saying that drink driving does not make someone a bad person. Where do you draw the line for someone being a bad person?I mean with this line of reasoning you can "explain way" every bad deed and then nobody is a bad person. So do you guys consider someone to be actually a bad person and what did they have to do to cross that line where you can't explain away their bad deed anymore and you really consider them to be bad? I mean with this line of reasoning you can "explain way" every bad deed and then nobody is a bad person. So do you guys consider someone to be actually a bad person and what did they have to do to cross that line where you can't explain away their bad deed anymore and you really consider them to be bad? But if you're going to quote the whole thing it seems easier to just say so rather than quoting it bit by bit interspersed with "King continues" and annotating each I with [King]. With the above, I think we've empirically proven that we can't trust mathmeticians more than any other humans We should still rigorously verify their work with diverse, logical, and empirical methods. Also, build ground up on solid ideas that are highly vetted. They'll also oftne use a reliable formalism to check other formalisms. (Who knows except when tested empirically on many programs or proofs, like CompCert was.) They'll also oftne use a reliable formalism to check other formalisms. (Who knows except when tested empirically on many programs or proofs, like CompCert was.) But, we still need people to look at the specs of all that to see if there are spec errors. (Who knows except when tested empirically on many programs or proofs, like CompCert was.) And therein lies the uncomfortable truth: Collaborative opportunities take priority over veracity in publications every time. These probably have bigger chance of being published as you are providing a "novel" result, instead of fighting the get-along culture (which is, honestly, present in the workplace as well). but not politically) harder to do because they possibly mean you have figured out an actual thing.Not saying this is the "right" approach, but it might be a cheaper, more practical way to get a paper turned around.Whether we can work this out in research in a proper way is linked to whether we can work this out everywhere else? How many times have you seen people tap each other on the back despite lousy performance and no results? It's just easier to switch private positions vs research positions, so you'll have more of them not afraid to highlight bad job, and well, there's this profit that needs to pay your salary too. Not saying this is the "right" approach, but it might be a cheaper, more practical way to get a paper turned around.Whether we can work this out in research in a proper way is linked to whether we can work this out everywhere else? How many times have you seen people tap each other on the back despite lousy performance and no results? It's just easier to switch private positions vs research positions, so you'll have more of them not afraid to highlight bad job, and well, there's this profit that needs to pay your salary too. Whether we can work this out in research in a proper way is linked to whether we can work this out everywhere else? How many times have you seen people tap each other on the back despite lousy performance and no results? It's just easier to switch private positions vs research positions, so you'll have more of them not afraid to highlight bad job, and well, there's this profit that needs to pay your salary too. As I said, harder from a research perspective, but if you can show, for instance, that sustainable companies are less profitable with a better study, you have basically contradicted the original one. Benefits we can get from collective works, including scientific endeavors, are indefinitely large, as in far more important than what can be held in the head of any individual.Incitives are just irrelevant as far as global social good is concerned. Award prize monies split between the first two or three independent groups demonstrating a result.The 6k citations though ... I suspect most of those instances would just assert the result if a citation wasn't available. I suspect most of those instances would just assert the result if a citation wasn't available. If the flow of tax, student debt and philanthropic money were cut off, the journals would all be wiped out because there's no organic demand for what they're doing. They are pushed to publish a lot, which means journals have to review a lot of stuff (and they cannot replicate findings on their own). The result is papers getting popular even if no one has actually bothered to replicate the results, especially if those papers are quoted by a lot of people and/or are written by otherwise reputable people or universities. Living VPs Joe Biden — VP 2009–2017 (became President in 2021; after that he's called a former VP and former president)Not likely the one referenced after 2017 because he became president in 2021, so later citations would likely call him a former president instead of former VP.Dan Quayle — VP 1989–1993, alive through 2026Al Gore — VP 1993–2001, alive through 2026Mike Pence — VP 2017–2021, alive through 2026Kamala Harris — VP 2021–2025, alive through 2026J.D. Not likely the one referenced after 2017 because he became president in 2021, so later citations would likely call him a former president instead of former VP.Dan Quayle — VP 1989–1993, alive through 2026Al Gore — VP 1993–2001, alive through 2026Mike Pence — VP 2017–2021, alive through 2026Kamala Harris — VP 2021–2025, alive through 2026J.D. That's not right; retractions should only be for research misconduct cases. It is a problem with the article's recommendations too. But I agree with the point about replications, which are much needed. But the article is generally weird or even harmful too. Going to social media with these things and all; we have enough of that "pretty" stuff already. Secondarily, very few studies are replicated in the first place unless there is a demand for linked research to replicate it before building on it.There are also entire fields which are mostly populated by bullshit generators. Certain branches of psychology are rather interesting in that space. Certain branches of psychology are rather interesting in that space. Maybe, I cannot say, but what I can say is that CS is in the midst of a huge replication crisis because LLM research cannot be replicated by definition. So I'd perhaps tone down the claims about other fields. Pushing for retraction just like that and going off to private sector is…idk it's a decision. She was just done with it then and a pharma company said "hey you fed up with this shit and like money?" I went into software but still have connections back to academia which I left many years ago because it was a political mess more than anything. edit: as per the other comment, my background is mathematics and statistics after engineering. I went into software but still have connections back to academia which I left many years ago because it was a political mess more than anything. Now I am proficient in spoken and written Spanish, and I can perfectly understand what is said, and yet I still ran the English through Google Translate and printed it out without really checking through it.I got to the podium and there was a line where I said "electricity is in the air" (a metaphor, obviously) and the Spanish translation said "electricidad no está en el aire" and I was able to correct that on-the-fly, but I was pissed at Translate, and I badmouthed it for months. I got to the podium and there was a line where I said "electricity is in the air" (a metaphor, obviously) and the Spanish translation said "electricidad no está en el aire" and I was able to correct that on-the-fly, but I was pissed at Translate, and I badmouthed it for months. But no one will tell you even if they encounter. But no one will tell you even if they encounter. If they can't get it after many tries, they just move on, and try some other research approach. If they claim it's because the original study is flawed, people will just assume they don't have the skills to replicate it.One of the problems is that science doesn't have great collaborative infrastructure. Or maybe if you're lucky there's an email list for people in your field where they routinely troubleshoot each other's technique. But most of the time there's just not enough time to waste chasing these things down.I can't speak to whether people get blackballed. There's a lot of strong personalities in science, but mostly people are direct and efficient. But accusing someone of fraud is a serious accusation and you probably don't want to get a reputation for being an accuser, FWIW. One of the problems is that science doesn't have great collaborative infrastructure. Or maybe if you're lucky there's an email list for people in your field where they routinely troubleshoot each other's technique. But most of the time there's just not enough time to waste chasing these things down.I can't speak to whether people get blackballed. There's a lot of strong personalities in science, but mostly people are direct and efficient. But accusing someone of fraud is a serious accusation and you probably don't want to get a reputation for being an accuser, FWIW. I can't speak to whether people get blackballed. There's a lot of strong personalities in science, but mostly people are direct and efficient. But accusing someone of fraud is a serious accusation and you probably don't want to get a reputation for being an accuser, FWIW. I've also seen the resistance that results from trying to investigate or even correct an issue in a key result of a paper. Even before it's published the barrier can be quite high (and I must admit that since it's not my primary focus and my name was not on it, I did not push as hard as I could have on it) “We're all just here to do work and get paid. He's just doing what they make us do”. Most people are just “I put thing in tube. Make money by telling government about tube thing. We need to throw all of this out by default. For science, we need the scientific method applied with skeptical review and/or replication. Our tools, like statistical methods and programs, must be vetted.Like with logic, we shouldn't allow them to go beyond what's proven in this way. So, only the vetted claims are allowed as building blocks (premises) in newly-vetted work. If not, they are re-checked for the new circumstances. Then, the conclusions are stated with their preconditions and limitations to only he applied that way.I imagine many non-scientists and taxpayers assumed what I described is how all these "scientific facts" and "consensus" vlaims were done. So, we need to not onoy redo it but apply scientific method to the institutions themselves assessing their reliability. (Note: There are groups in many fields doing real research and experimental science. Maybe let them take the lead in consulting for how to fix these problems.) Like with logic, we shouldn't allow them to go beyond what's proven in this way. So, only the vetted claims are allowed as building blocks (premises) in newly-vetted work. If not, they are re-checked for the new circumstances. Then, the conclusions are stated with their preconditions and limitations to only he applied that way.I imagine many non-scientists and taxpayers assumed what I described is how all these "scientific facts" and "consensus" vlaims were done. So, we need to not onoy redo it but apply scientific method to the institutions themselves assessing their reliability. (Note: There are groups in many fields doing real research and experimental science. Maybe let them take the lead in consulting for how to fix these problems.) I imagine many non-scientists and taxpayers assumed what I described is how all these "scientific facts" and "consensus" vlaims were done. So, we need to not onoy redo it but apply scientific method to the institutions themselves assessing their reliability. (Note: There are groups in many fields doing real research and experimental science. Maybe let them take the lead in consulting for how to fix these problems.) (Note: There are groups in many fields doing real research and experimental science. Maybe let them take the lead in consulting for how to fix these problems.) > We need to throw all of this out by default. From public policy to courtrooms, we need to treat it like any other eyewitness claim.If you can't trust eyewitness claims, if you can't trust video or photographic or audio evidence, then how does one Find Truth? If you can't trust eyewitness claims, if you can't trust video or photographic or audio evidence, then how does one Find Truth? We need to develop education for people about how humanity actually works. We can improve steadily over time.On my end, I've been collecting resources that might be helpful. That includes Christ-centered theology with real-world application, philosophies of knowledge with guides on each one, differences between real vs organized science, biological impact on these, dealing with media bias (eg AllSides), worldview analyses, critical thinking (logic), statistical analyses (esp error spotting), writing correct code, and so on.One day, I might try to put it together into a series that equips people to navigate all of this stuff. For right now, I'm using it as a refresher to improve my own abilities ahead of entering the Data Science field. On my end, I've been collecting resources that might be helpful. That includes Christ-centered theology with real-world application, philosophies of knowledge with guides on each one, differences between real vs organized science, biological impact on these, dealing with media bias (eg AllSides), worldview analyses, critical thinking (logic), statistical analyses (esp error spotting), writing correct code, and so on.One day, I might try to put it together into a series that equips people to navigate all of this stuff. For right now, I'm using it as a refresher to improve my own abilities ahead of entering the Data Science field. One day, I might try to put it together into a series that equips people to navigate all of this stuff. For right now, I'm using it as a refresher to improve my own abilities ahead of entering the Data Science field. For example, look at how people interact with LLMs. Lots of superstition (take a deep breath) not much reading about the underlying architecture. But this here is just warm air build on a fundamental misunderstanding of how to measure and interpret citation data. “Your email is too long.”This whole thing is filled with “yeah, no s**” and lmao.More seriously, pretty sure the whole ESG thing has been debunked already, and those who care to know the truth already know it.A good rule of thumb is to be skeptical of results that make you feel good because they “prove” what you want them to. This whole thing is filled with “yeah, no s**” and lmao.More seriously, pretty sure the whole ESG thing has been debunked already, and those who care to know the truth already know it.A good rule of thumb is to be skeptical of results that make you feel good because they “prove” what you want them to. More seriously, pretty sure the whole ESG thing has been debunked already, and those who care to know the truth already know it.A good rule of thumb is to be skeptical of results that make you feel good because they “prove” what you want them to. A good rule of thumb is to be skeptical of results that make you feel good because they “prove” what you want them to. They are not going to came forward and say "I misinterpreted the data and made long reaching conclusions that are nonsense, sorry for misleading you and thousands of others".The process protects them as well. Someone can publish another paper, make different conclusions. Even if it's clear for anyone who digs a bit deeper it will not be communicated to the audience the academia is supposed to serve. It's there to serve the population not to exist in its own world and play its own politics and power games. Someone can publish another paper, make different conclusions. Even if it's clear for anyone who digs a bit deeper it will not be communicated to the audience the academia is supposed to serve. It's there to serve the population not to exist in its own world and play its own politics and power games. It's there to serve the population not to exist in its own world and play its own politics and power games. Today the elites rule the plebs by saying "Science sasy so, so you must do this".Author doesn't seem to understand this, the purpose of research papers is to be gospel, something to be believed, not scrutinized. There is a reason scriptures were kept away from the oppressed, or only made available to them in a heavily censored form (e.g. the Slaves Bible). (By a tortured analogy, you could say that Catholicism and Orthodoxy are common law Christianity, while Protestantism is civil law Christianity. )From a Catholic or Orthodox perspective, there is a living tradition from the days of Jesus and the Apostles to present day. From a Catholic or Orthodox perspective, there is a living tradition from the days of Jesus and the Apostles to present day. For example there is a long history of studies of the relationship between working hours and productivity which is one of the few things that challenges the idea that longer hours means more output. Even if you support sustainability, criticizing the paper will be treated as heresy by many.Despite our idealistic vision of Science(tm), it is a human process done by humans with human motivations and human weaknesses.From Galileo to today, we have repeatedly seen the enthusiastic willingness by majorities of scientists to crucify heretics (or sit by in silence) and to set aside scientific thinking and scientific process when it clashes against belief or orthodoxy or when it makes the difference whether you get tenure or publication. Despite our idealistic vision of Science(tm), it is a human process done by humans with human motivations and human weaknesses.From Galileo to today, we have repeatedly seen the enthusiastic willingness by majorities of scientists to crucify heretics (or sit by in silence) and to set aside scientific thinking and scientific process when it clashes against belief or orthodoxy or when it makes the difference whether you get tenure or publication. From Galileo to today, we have repeatedly seen the enthusiastic willingness by majorities of scientists to crucify heretics (or sit by in silence) and to set aside scientific thinking and scientific process when it clashes against belief or orthodoxy or when it makes the difference whether you get tenure or publication.

And Google's strategy is to continue removing differentiating features from Android that also help them mitigate the threat of antitrust? Surely the marginal revenue from the inconsequential number of sideloading users isn't attractive enough to justify that kind of strategic blunder. Also, while the Play store is an equally ad-riddled and unsearchable hellhole, at least Android does have with F-Droid a high quality alternative. I still think Overcast is nicer to use than Antenna Pod.Microsoft Office apps work much better on iDevices, in my experience. (I know they exist for Android, but I've never had much luck editing there, where it actually works pretty nicely on iDevices. (I have an Android tablet that I use for testing things, and they consistently reject it in favor of iPhone or iPad. )Flowkey (music instruction app) works much better with my MIDI keyboard on iDevices than on Android (where it doesn't work and has to resort to microphone, which is buggy as hell).I'm sure some of this is just a matter of the platform being more polished in general, but these are some apps that keep people in my house on iDevices despite having plenty of access to Android. Microsoft Office apps work much better on iDevices, in my experience. (I know they exist for Android, but I've never had much luck editing there, where it actually works pretty nicely on iDevices. (I have an Android tablet that I use for testing things, and they consistently reject it in favor of iPhone or iPad. )Flowkey (music instruction app) works much better with my MIDI keyboard on iDevices than on Android (where it doesn't work and has to resort to microphone, which is buggy as hell).I'm sure some of this is just a matter of the platform being more polished in general, but these are some apps that keep people in my house on iDevices despite having plenty of access to Android. (I have an Android tablet that I use for testing things, and they consistently reject it in favor of iPhone or iPad. )Flowkey (music instruction app) works much better with my MIDI keyboard on iDevices than on Android (where it doesn't work and has to resort to microphone, which is buggy as hell).I'm sure some of this is just a matter of the platform being more polished in general, but these are some apps that keep people in my house on iDevices despite having plenty of access to Android. Flowkey (music instruction app) works much better with my MIDI keyboard on iDevices than on Android (where it doesn't work and has to resort to microphone, which is buggy as hell).I'm sure some of this is just a matter of the platform being more polished in general, but these are some apps that keep people in my house on iDevices despite having plenty of access to Android. I'm sure some of this is just a matter of the platform being more polished in general, but these are some apps that keep people in my house on iDevices despite having plenty of access to Android. firefox with adblock is the high quality youtube app That made me realize how little I go to the Play store these days to just browse compared to the early days of Android.I personally can't stand Apple products ... dbut with Google doing their crap and Samsung acting like Microsoft with all the crap they load in I have to disable just to make the phone usable; I've seriously thought about moving to iPhone the past couple of years. I personally can't stand Apple products ... dbut with Google doing their crap and Samsung acting like Microsoft with all the crap they load in I have to disable just to make the phone usable; I've seriously thought about moving to iPhone the past couple of years. Almost all of the prosumer apps on iOS offer a consistently better experience. This is maybe less relevant on phones than on tablets, but music production, video editing, digital painting and drafting, etc... So for people who don't want to use computers. I cannot work with a tablet or phone. To give examples:- https://www.phonearena.com/news/google-photos-update-to-reac...- https://www.t3.com/tech/iphones/google-maps-gets-an-iphone-u...Both of the above are updates to Google apps that released on iOS but are planned on Android. - https://www.phonearena.com/news/google-photos-update-to-reac...- https://www.t3.com/tech/iphones/google-maps-gets-an-iphone-u...Both of the above are updates to Google apps that released on iOS but are planned on Android. Not for me at least usually (exception might be something like an rpg game expanding the world), apps nagging to get updated is annoying in fact. It just happens.My only gripe is that they seem to want to update right after I take it off the charger in the morning, instead of at night. But I only actually notice this once or twice per year, if I go to use an app that's in the process of installing within the first few minutes of waking up. My only gripe is that they seem to want to update right after I take it off the charger in the morning, instead of at night. But I only actually notice this once or twice per year, if I go to use an app that's in the process of installing within the first few minutes of waking up. On iPadOS you get full-fledged DAWs like Cubasis and Logic. The IOS versions of social media apps extract way less data from the device than on android, and is thus more privacy friendly.Sure the best way would be for people not to use them, but if you "have" to, then it's better to use those on IOS. > Meta devised an ingenious system (“localhost tracking”) that bypassed Android's sandbox protections to identify you while browsing on your mobile phone — even if you used a VPN, the browser's incognito mode, and refused or deleted cookies in every session.— https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44235467 The sandboxing of Android is actually pretty good (a lot better than, say, desktop OSes).There is pretty much nothing you can do against an app requesting e.g. your location data and sending it to their servers. Then you have to choose apps you trust, and it's easier to trust open source apps.What GrapheneOS brings in terms of sandboxing is that the Play Services run sandboxed like normal apps. Whereas on Android, the Play Services run with system permissions. There is pretty much nothing you can do against an app requesting e.g. your location data and sending it to their servers. Then you have to choose apps you trust, and it's easier to trust open source apps.What GrapheneOS brings in terms of sandboxing is that the Play Services run sandboxed like normal apps. Whereas on Android, the Play Services run with system permissions. What GrapheneOS brings in terms of sandboxing is that the Play Services run sandboxed like normal apps. Whereas on Android, the Play Services run with system permissions. AFAIK Graphene is oriented towards strong device security with privacy as more of a side effect. What microG solves is that it removes the Play Services that are root on your device, and it turns out that sandboxed Play Services do that as well.> The idea for more privacy is you run open source apps instead that just don't collect data.Yep exactly, I just wanted to add about the sandboxed Play Services, because it was not obvious to me at first :) > The idea for more privacy is you run open source apps instead that just don't collect data.Yep exactly, I just wanted to add about the sandboxed Play Services, because it was not obvious to me at first :) Yep exactly, I just wanted to add about the sandboxed Play Services, because it was not obvious to me at first :) Grapheneos doesn't prevent the installed apps fingerprinting you linked either. Honestly the state of anti-fingerprinting (app, browser, and otherwise) is fairly abysmal but that's hardly limited to android or even mobile as a whole. But there's no evidence that stock android leaks apps installed across profiles? The link you provided doesn't discuss profiles at all, and stock android also has private space and work profile just like grapheneos. > The IOS versions of social media apps extract way less data from the device than on android, and is thus more privacy friendly.I seriously doubt this. I agree that this is the perception but anyone working in the mobile space on both platforms for the past ~2 years will know Google is a lot more hard nosed in reviewing apps for privacy concerns than Apple these days (I say this negatively, there is a middle ground and Apple is much closer to it - Google is just friction seemingly in an attempt to lose their bad reputation). I agree that this is the perception but anyone working in the mobile space on both platforms for the past ~2 years will know Google is a lot more hard nosed in reviewing apps for privacy concerns than Apple these days (I say this negatively, there is a middle ground and Apple is much closer to it - Google is just friction seemingly in an attempt to lose their bad reputation). On Android it seemed like by installing the app, I had already agreed to give up my contacts… it was all or nothing. If I don't like one privacy compromising feature, I couldn't use the app at all.Android may have improved this in the last few years, but I found it to be a dealbreaker for the entire platform. On Android it seemed like by installing the app, I had already agreed to give up my contacts… it was all or nothing. If I don't like one privacy compromising feature, I couldn't use the app at all.Android may have improved this in the last few years, but I found it to be a dealbreaker for the entire platform. Android may have improved this in the last few years, but I found it to be a dealbreaker for the entire platform. I remember that it was being introduced like... more than a decade ago? iOS can just force everybody to use liquid glass with one update, Android has to think more about backward compatibility. Everything else I agree with, but the Android camera APIs do not allow developers to build good device independent camera apps the way they are available on iOS. Social media apps have historically been worse in Android, because of lax app and privacy controls.> What else is there, where is the advantage?Personally, I'd rather not have Google buried deep inside all aspects of my phone. > What else is there, where is the advantage?Personally, I'd rather not have Google buried deep inside all aspects of my phone. Personally, I'd rather not have Google buried deep inside all aspects of my phone. Since some updates ago, my keyboard is still broken if I type too fast, and autocorrect been essentially broken for the same amount of time. Must be happening for ~years now, still waiting for a new update to finally fix it.At least on Android you can change the keyboard to something else if you'd like, instead of being stuck with what your OS developer forces on you. How's that different than Google Messages being exclusive to Android? People on Android I've run into seem to have a half dozen apps and use anything but the built in messaging.A few months ago while on a trip I ran into an older couple that wanted some picture I took in a place they weren't physically up to going. They had Android, and the guy opened about 5 or 6 different messaging apps, not really knowing what any of them were, it seemed like a real mess. I sent them using Messages over RCS, assuming they'd go to Google Messages, or whatever the default equivalent standard app is for Google (they seem to have changed it a dozen times). It could be that the pictures were taking a while to send, my phone showed they sent, but he had no idea where to look or where they might have went, despite having so many messaging apps. I hope he is able to find them or they came through with a notification once he had a better single.Having one good app that everyone uses is better than the default app being sub-par, or so constantly in flux that the users and smattered about to dozens of different apps that can't talk to each other. They had Android, and the guy opened about 5 or 6 different messaging apps, not really knowing what any of them were, it seemed like a real mess. I sent them using Messages over RCS, assuming they'd go to Google Messages, or whatever the default equivalent standard app is for Google (they seem to have changed it a dozen times). It could be that the pictures were taking a while to send, my phone showed they sent, but he had no idea where to look or where they might have went, despite having so many messaging apps. I hope he is able to find them or they came through with a notification once he had a better single.Having one good app that everyone uses is better than the default app being sub-par, or so constantly in flux that the users and smattered about to dozens of different apps that can't talk to each other. Having one good app that everyone uses is better than the default app being sub-par, or so constantly in flux that the users and smattered about to dozens of different apps that can't talk to each other. I mean, one could say the exact same thing but swapping Google with Apple. This is especially relevant for the camera, but also various other sensors and hardware modules that exist inside these phones.That said, in recent years there are just a number of other areas that android is much better at such as deeper AI integration, which goes back to even prior to the current LLM craze. That said, in recent years there are just a number of other areas that android is much better at such as deeper AI integration, which goes back to even prior to the current LLM craze. And because of that Sarafi has made our lives miserable. Now you have a crappy app that only works on some devices, and now with no tabs, no links, text you cannot select anymore because they used the wrong component, etc.Ugh. I didn't take WebUSB seriously until I steered someone to flashing a small firmware onto something and they could do it straight from the browser! And it was a nice workflow too, just a few button and a permission click.Two other examples I can think of are flashing Via (keyboard) firmware and Poweramp using WebADB via WebUSB to make gaining certain permissions very easy for the layman. I imagine it's gonna get more and more user in enterprise too.Firefox is seriously behind by refusing to implement it. Two other examples I can think of are flashing Via (keyboard) firmware and Poweramp using WebADB via WebUSB to make gaining certain permissions very easy for the layman. I imagine it's gonna get more and more user in enterprise too.Firefox is seriously behind by refusing to implement it. Firefox is seriously behind by refusing to implement it. Consider the fact that Chromium has to specifically blacklist Yubikey and other known WebAuthn vendor IDs, otherwise any website could talk to your Yubikey pretending to be a browser and bypass your 2FA on third party domains.I'm conflicted on WebUSB because it's convenient but on the balance I think it's too dangerous to expose to the general public. I don't know how it could be made safer without sacrificing its utility and convenience. I'm conflicted on WebUSB because it's convenient but on the balance I think it's too dangerous to expose to the general public. I don't know how it could be made safer without sacrificing its utility and convenience. For values of “just work” close to 0.Make a picture, connect with a Windows PC, iOS needs a password, then the picture is not visible to the PC, disconnect, go with Apple photos to look at the picture, repeat connecting, with password, now it is visible.Try to set up a hotspot, there is no button to turn the hotspot on/off.So yes, it “just works" Make a picture, connect with a Windows PC, iOS needs a password, then the picture is not visible to the PC, disconnect, go with Apple photos to look at the picture, repeat connecting, with password, now it is visible.Try to set up a hotspot, there is no button to turn the hotspot on/off.So yes, it “just works" You can even put it on the settings drawer. Look for "personal hotspot".I don't have a mac anymore, but IIRC you could even turn it on from the paired mac. Do Android phones come with a physical button to enable hotspot? Another example is Sonos, where the iOS app contains TruePlay to tune your speakers. They can do this because there is relatively few iPhone models (microphones). But this is a general, noticeable trend, where developers will add more / better / polished features to the iOS app. I researched iOS vs Android last year so some of my info may be out of date but this is what I collected.Apple iOS exclusives (or earlier app versions because devs prioritized iOS): ChatGPT iOS app -2 months before Android Sora -2 months before 2025-11 Android Bluesky iOS app -2 months before Android (February 2023 iOS invitation-only beta; April 2023, it was released for Android) Blackmagic Design camera 2023-09-15 -9 months before Android 2024-06-24 Halide camera app https://old.reddit.com/r/ios/comments/17klq40/what_are_some_good_examples_of_iphoneexclusive/k7efznt/ Zoom F6 https://zoomcorp.com/en/us/software-product-page/software-sub-cat/F6-control-app/ https://apps.apple.com/us/app/f6-control/id1464118916 Godox Light https://www.diyphotography.net/godox-finally-launches-android-app-for-the-a1-but-only-for-some-phones/ ForeFlight Mobile https://support.foreflight.com/hc/en-us/articles/115004919307-Does-ForeFlight-Mobile-work-on-Android-devices https://old.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/1883eya/the_authoritative_answer_to_why_isnt_foreflight/ Adobe Fresco Procreate FlexRadio SmartSDR SSDR 2023-10-27T13:15:09+00:00 https://community.flexradio.com/discussion/8029186/smartsdr-for-android-device Google Android app exclusives TouchDRO for milling Kodi media player There really aren't many popular/prominent Android-only apps that's intended for direct consumer download from the Google Play Store. Instead, Android dominates in OEM use as "turnkey" and "embedded" base os as the GUI for their customized hardware devices: Amazon Fire Stick, car infotainment, music workstations, sewing machine GUI, geology soil tester, etc If it's a typical mainstream user (browser + Youtube/Tiktok + WhatsApp etc), they won't see any iOS ecosystem advantages over Android. Google Android app exclusives TouchDRO for milling Kodi media player There really aren't many popular/prominent Android-only apps that's intended for direct consumer download from the Google Play Store. Instead, Android dominates in OEM use as "turnkey" and "embedded" base os as the GUI for their customized hardware devices: Amazon Fire Stick, car infotainment, music workstations, sewing machine GUI, geology soil tester, etc If it's a typical mainstream user (browser + Youtube/Tiktok + WhatsApp etc), they won't see any iOS ecosystem advantages over Android. Google Android app exclusives TouchDRO for milling Kodi media player There really aren't many popular/prominent Android-only apps that's intended for direct consumer download from the Google Play Store. Instead, Android dominates in OEM use as "turnkey" and "embedded" base os as the GUI for their customized hardware devices: Amazon Fire Stick, car infotainment, music workstations, sewing machine GUI, geology soil tester, etc If it's a typical mainstream user (browser + Youtube/Tiktok + WhatsApp etc), they won't see any iOS ecosystem advantages over Android. There really aren't many popular/prominent Android-only apps that's intended for direct consumer download from the Google Play Store. Instead, Android dominates in OEM use as "turnkey" and "embedded" base os as the GUI for their customized hardware devices: Amazon Fire Stick, car infotainment, music workstations, sewing machine GUI, geology soil tester, etc If it's a typical mainstream user (browser + Youtube/Tiktok + WhatsApp etc), they won't see any iOS ecosystem advantages over Android. Amazon Fire Stick, car infotainment, music workstations, sewing machine GUI, geology soil tester, etc If it's a typical mainstream user (browser + Youtube/Tiktok + WhatsApp etc), they won't see any iOS ecosystem advantages over Android. The tone of that seems like you thought I was taking the discussion into fanboy evangelism and therefore Android needed to be defended. That wasn't the intent and I already tried to downplay my comment by stating the iOS ecosystem specifics do not matter to 99% of mainstream users. Yes, everybody on HN already knows Android has a much bigger market share.The point was simply to inform the gp asking the question about iOS that there are apps and niches he may not be aware of. You answered to:>> I don't see any iOS advantage with the apps anymore.With a list of apps, some of which only listed because they got Android support a few months later. ).I get why those apps matter to you, but it feels a bit arbitrary. While the quote refers to something that was more general (which suggests that "at a point, iOS had a lot more quality apps"). I am just saying that the answer "no but I checked the app I like on iOS and a handful of them don't exist on Android" was kind of one anecdotal data point in the discussion.And my point about Android having a bigger market share was that my intuition is that probably popular apps end up on Android eventually, or alternatives exist.I honestly really don't care if people prefer iOS, Android, GrapheneOS, or a Linux for mobile distro. >> I don't see any iOS advantage with the apps anymore.With a list of apps, some of which only listed because they got Android support a few months later. ).I get why those apps matter to you, but it feels a bit arbitrary. While the quote refers to something that was more general (which suggests that "at a point, iOS had a lot more quality apps"). I am just saying that the answer "no but I checked the app I like on iOS and a handful of them don't exist on Android" was kind of one anecdotal data point in the discussion.And my point about Android having a bigger market share was that my intuition is that probably popular apps end up on Android eventually, or alternatives exist.I honestly really don't care if people prefer iOS, Android, GrapheneOS, or a Linux for mobile distro. ).I get why those apps matter to you, but it feels a bit arbitrary. While the quote refers to something that was more general (which suggests that "at a point, iOS had a lot more quality apps"). I am just saying that the answer "no but I checked the app I like on iOS and a handful of them don't exist on Android" was kind of one anecdotal data point in the discussion.And my point about Android having a bigger market share was that my intuition is that probably popular apps end up on Android eventually, or alternatives exist.I honestly really don't care if people prefer iOS, Android, GrapheneOS, or a Linux for mobile distro. I get why those apps matter to you, but it feels a bit arbitrary. While the quote refers to something that was more general (which suggests that "at a point, iOS had a lot more quality apps"). I am just saying that the answer "no but I checked the app I like on iOS and a handful of them don't exist on Android" was kind of one anecdotal data point in the discussion.And my point about Android having a bigger market share was that my intuition is that probably popular apps end up on Android eventually, or alternatives exist.I honestly really don't care if people prefer iOS, Android, GrapheneOS, or a Linux for mobile distro. And my point about Android having a bigger market share was that my intuition is that probably popular apps end up on Android eventually, or alternatives exist.I honestly really don't care if people prefer iOS, Android, GrapheneOS, or a Linux for mobile distro. I honestly really don't care if people prefer iOS, Android, GrapheneOS, or a Linux for mobile distro. Literally the only reason I have iOS devices is because of app availability in this category. Literally the only reason I have iOS devices is because of app availability in this category. The apps that are more specialized to reach OS tend to prioritize iOS because if you look at app revenue, iOS users wildly outspend Android users. At least this was true when i was doing mobile shit a couple years agoThat doesn't mean the android app sucks, but it's usually given lower priority. That doesn't mean the android app sucks, but it's usually given lower priority. Whenever there is an app with full feature parity (WhatsApp) you assume at best it can be equal, based on nothing. Whenever there is a choice in apps, they're often cross-written in something that allows easy porting, and very similar, or the native Apple solution is much smoother. It's rare that an app just feels better on Android, and usually limited to cases where a specific app is only available on Android or, you know, Google. Android at least has features like scoped storage.Where is the ios equivalent of newpipe? iOS isn't particularly open source friendly, but mostly people don't do it because of personal incentives, not because it can't be done.It's subjective, and I get that, but what you miss is that features are subjective too. Missing parity apps are only relevant when you care about that feature; at no point in my life have I ever thought my life would be better or more convenient if I could only torrent on my phone.But having an app that is responsive and works well has made my life better. (Ironically, I've kind of noticed this is part of the Unix ethos writ small: do one thing and do it well. It's not exact, and iOS for sure has tons of crud everything apps. Missing parity apps are only relevant when you care about that feature; at no point in my life have I ever thought my life would be better or more convenient if I could only torrent on my phone.But having an app that is responsive and works well has made my life better. (Ironically, I've kind of noticed this is part of the Unix ethos writ small: do one thing and do it well. It's not exact, and iOS for sure has tons of crud everything apps. But having an app that is responsive and works well has made my life better. (Ironically, I've kind of noticed this is part of the Unix ethos writ small: do one thing and do it well. It's not exact, and iOS for sure has tons of crud everything apps. (Ironically, I've kind of noticed this is part of the Unix ethos writ small: do one thing and do it well. It's not exact, and iOS for sure has tons of crud everything apps. App addressable user base is another problem for Google, one that they have mentioned in developer conferences. If Google isn't careful they could find themselves in a downward spiral situation, stuck between apple on one side, and android forks on the other.And the last answer is, as always, money- browser is deemphasized on iOS, and so it's weaker feature set matters less- iOS is generally easier to develop for because of less device differentiation- on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.- easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)- unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)- apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Yes, Apple doesn't have something like fdroid, and that's really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people And the last answer is, as always, money- browser is deemphasized on iOS, and so it's weaker feature set matters less- iOS is generally easier to develop for because of less device differentiation- on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.- easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)- unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)- apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Yes, Apple doesn't have something like fdroid, and that's really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people - browser is deemphasized on iOS, and so it's weaker feature set matters less- iOS is generally easier to develop for because of less device differentiation- on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.- easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)- unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)- apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Yes, Apple doesn't have something like fdroid, and that's really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people - iOS is generally easier to develop for because of less device differentiation- on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.- easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)- unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)- apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Yes, Apple doesn't have something like fdroid, and that's really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people - on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.- easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)- unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)- apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Yes, Apple doesn't have something like fdroid, and that's really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people - easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)- unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)- apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Yes, Apple doesn't have something like fdroid, and that's really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people - unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)- apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Yes, Apple doesn't have something like fdroid, and that's really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people - apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Yes, Apple doesn't have something like fdroid, and that's really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people Yes, Apple doesn't have something like fdroid, and that's really disappointing and honestly a legitimate dealbreaker for a lot of people It's been a while since I was last using Android, but first-party Apple apps no longer meet my standards for "polished".e.g. The answer should not be negative, but the app says "-4".The desktop Contacts app has been putting invisible LTR and RTL codes around phone numbers for years now, breaking web forms when auto-entered. Deleting a selection of items from browsing history is limited to about 5 items per second, as it deletes one then rebuilds the entire list before deleting the next.If I'm listening to a podcast on headpones and an alarm goes off, it doesn't play the alarm through my headphones, it plays on device speakers only.Podcast app's "Up Next" is a magical mystery list that can't be disabled or guided.The "Do Not Disturb" mode can be activated unexpectedly, leading to missed calls, and cannot be deleted.Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point. The answer should not be negative, but the app says "-4".The desktop Contacts app has been putting invisible LTR and RTL codes around phone numbers for years now, breaking web forms when auto-entered. Deleting a selection of items from browsing history is limited to about 5 items per second, as it deletes one then rebuilds the entire list before deleting the next.If I'm listening to a podcast on headpones and an alarm goes off, it doesn't play the alarm through my headphones, it plays on device speakers only.Podcast app's "Up Next" is a magical mystery list that can't be disabled or guided.The "Do Not Disturb" mode can be activated unexpectedly, leading to missed calls, and cannot be deleted.Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point. The answer should not be negative, but the app says "-4".The desktop Contacts app has been putting invisible LTR and RTL codes around phone numbers for years now, breaking web forms when auto-entered. Deleting a selection of items from browsing history is limited to about 5 items per second, as it deletes one then rebuilds the entire list before deleting the next.If I'm listening to a podcast on headpones and an alarm goes off, it doesn't play the alarm through my headphones, it plays on device speakers only.Podcast app's "Up Next" is a magical mystery list that can't be disabled or guided.The "Do Not Disturb" mode can be activated unexpectedly, leading to missed calls, and cannot be deleted.Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point. The desktop Contacts app has been putting invisible LTR and RTL codes around phone numbers for years now, breaking web forms when auto-entered. Deleting a selection of items from browsing history is limited to about 5 items per second, as it deletes one then rebuilds the entire list before deleting the next.If I'm listening to a podcast on headpones and an alarm goes off, it doesn't play the alarm through my headphones, it plays on device speakers only.Podcast app's "Up Next" is a magical mystery list that can't be disabled or guided.The "Do Not Disturb" mode can be activated unexpectedly, leading to missed calls, and cannot be deleted.Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point. Deleting a selection of items from browsing history is limited to about 5 items per second, as it deletes one then rebuilds the entire list before deleting the next.If I'm listening to a podcast on headpones and an alarm goes off, it doesn't play the alarm through my headphones, it plays on device speakers only.Podcast app's "Up Next" is a magical mystery list that can't be disabled or guided.The "Do Not Disturb" mode can be activated unexpectedly, leading to missed calls, and cannot be deleted.Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point. If I'm listening to a podcast on headpones and an alarm goes off, it doesn't play the alarm through my headphones, it plays on device speakers only.Podcast app's "Up Next" is a magical mystery list that can't be disabled or guided.The "Do Not Disturb" mode can be activated unexpectedly, leading to missed calls, and cannot be deleted.Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point. Podcast app's "Up Next" is a magical mystery list that can't be disabled or guided.The "Do Not Disturb" mode can be activated unexpectedly, leading to missed calls, and cannot be deleted.Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point. The "Do Not Disturb" mode can be activated unexpectedly, leading to missed calls, and cannot be deleted.Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point. Localisation is inconsistent at every level, including system share sheet and behaviour of decimal separators.I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point. I could go on, but you get the point. Apple's quality control just isn't visible in the software at this point. Most calculators, even CAS ones, simply get this always right. Famously, "it works for me" is not how high quality software happens. They gimped their browser so there's bigger incentive to use their proprietary system frameworks.> iOS is generally easier to develop for because of less device differentiationThat's nonsense. I've heard this like 10 years ago when there only 1 or 2 current iPhone models in circulation.> on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.If you offer subscription service, like Netflix/HBO/Nest or whatever, your main goal is volume, not how wealthy your demographic is.> easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)Easier integration with what?> unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)That's like Android's moat from the start, not bolted on during some 10+ major versions like on iOS. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now? ).> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. > iOS is generally easier to develop for because of less device differentiationThat's nonsense. I've heard this like 10 years ago when there only 1 or 2 current iPhone models in circulation.> on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.If you offer subscription service, like Netflix/HBO/Nest or whatever, your main goal is volume, not how wealthy your demographic is.> easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)Easier integration with what?> unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)That's like Android's moat from the start, not bolted on during some 10+ major versions like on iOS. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now? ).> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. I've heard this like 10 years ago when there only 1 or 2 current iPhone models in circulation.> on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.If you offer subscription service, like Netflix/HBO/Nest or whatever, your main goal is volume, not how wealthy your demographic is.> easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)Easier integration with what?> unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)That's like Android's moat from the start, not bolted on during some 10+ major versions like on iOS. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now? ).> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. > on average iOS has significantly wealthier users who tend to be higher return or paying customers (seriously, look it up). This in turn leads companies to invest more heavily in iOS.If you offer subscription service, like Netflix/HBO/Nest or whatever, your main goal is volume, not how wealthy your demographic is.> easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)Easier integration with what?> unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)That's like Android's moat from the start, not bolted on during some 10+ major versions like on iOS. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now? ).> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. If you offer subscription service, like Netflix/HBO/Nest or whatever, your main goal is volume, not how wealthy your demographic is.> easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)Easier integration with what?> unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)That's like Android's moat from the start, not bolted on during some 10+ major versions like on iOS. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now? ).> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. > easier integration due to a narrow system services ecosystem (no Google vs Samsung slapfights)Easier integration with what?> unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)That's like Android's moat from the start, not bolted on during some 10+ major versions like on iOS. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now? ).> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. Easier integration with what?> unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)That's like Android's moat from the start, not bolted on during some 10+ major versions like on iOS. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now? ).> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. > unified platform advantage (apps written for iOS easily port to the watch and tablet, unlocking larger markets, and justifying greater spend in developing apps)That's like Android's moat from the start, not bolted on during some 10+ major versions like on iOS. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now? ).> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. Not gimped, cut off things like Instagram on iOS (is it even fixed now? ).> apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. > apples review process is significantly stricter (for better or for worse)Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. Both are shit these days due to volume of shovelware produced. The real problem is that Android vendors mess up with the OS in weird ways by adding custom ultra battery savers, removing APIs etc. which is much less predictable than dealing with a few Apple devices, that are more homogenous.Then many vendors ship their own apps which are buggy and you need to know that vendor's Z Calendar app has a weird bug to account for. Then many vendors ship their own apps which are buggy and you need to know that vendor's Z Calendar app has a weird bug to account for. And realistically, a $500 phone is pretty good these days.In Canada (where phones are subsidized and/or financed) there's very few budget Android phones too. Your BIO on HN is:> I HAVEN'T SHOWERED AT ALL! Android has a reputation for being unsafe precisely because of sideloading (as well as low Google Play fees, looser app review, accessibility services and remote access).This policy is bad for us HNers, but objectively good for the 95+% of people who will never sideload a legitimate Android app, but are extremely likely to get caught by scammers.The heavy US skew of HN really distorts the arguments here, as Android-based scams aren't as common in AMerica due to the prevalence of iOS in that region. This policy is bad for us HNers, but objectively good for the 95+% of people who will never sideload a legitimate Android app, but are extremely likely to get caught by scammers.The heavy US skew of HN really distorts the arguments here, as Android-based scams aren't as common in AMerica due to the prevalence of iOS in that region. To resolve the problem, scammers would deceive the victims into downloading a malicious app, in an Android Package Kit (APK) file format, sent through WhatsApp. Google could let users add their own signing keys (like browsers allow), and it might be they will let students or power users do this, or they could do what F-Droid does in packaging FOSS apps without developers having to provide extra PII information. If they do neither of these things, it de facto means they're only after control at the expense of normal users. In fact I don't know anyone among any of my friends or family that have ever had that issue.Every last one of my non-technical friends and family have been hit by spyware on their windows devices.To say I'm extremely skeptical that this has anything to do with protecting users is an understatement.In fact I'm willing to go out on a limb and say it's a nearly non-existent issue outside of people being targeted by nation states.Would love to see some numbers backing up the claim that sideloading is resulting in mass exploiting of Android devices because I can't find them. Every last one of my non-technical friends and family have been hit by spyware on their windows devices.To say I'm extremely skeptical that this has anything to do with protecting users is an understatement.In fact I'm willing to go out on a limb and say it's a nearly non-existent issue outside of people being targeted by nation states.Would love to see some numbers backing up the claim that sideloading is resulting in mass exploiting of Android devices because I can't find them. To say I'm extremely skeptical that this has anything to do with protecting users is an understatement.In fact I'm willing to go out on a limb and say it's a nearly non-existent issue outside of people being targeted by nation states.Would love to see some numbers backing up the claim that sideloading is resulting in mass exploiting of Android devices because I can't find them. In fact I'm willing to go out on a limb and say it's a nearly non-existent issue outside of people being targeted by nation states.Would love to see some numbers backing up the claim that sideloading is resulting in mass exploiting of Android devices because I can't find them. Would love to see some numbers backing up the claim that sideloading is resulting in mass exploiting of Android devices because I can't find them. If there's a reputation, that means it's reasonably widespread. 5% doesn't seem like much.Does this mean there are so many advanced users sideloading apps to compromise them?Except users aren't so advanced that they are getting scammed because of side loading?Or might it be the cascading delays in security updates that don't seem to reach devices between Google, manufacturers, and telcos? Does this mean there are so many advanced users sideloading apps to compromise them?Except users aren't so advanced that they are getting scammed because of side loading?Or might it be the cascading delays in security updates that don't seem to reach devices between Google, manufacturers, and telcos? Except users aren't so advanced that they are getting scammed because of side loading?Or might it be the cascading delays in security updates that don't seem to reach devices between Google, manufacturers, and telcos? Or might it be the cascading delays in security updates that don't seem to reach devices between Google, manufacturers, and telcos? Both phone users have no idea how to sideload, everything was installed from the Play store. > Apple has had better mobile hardware for years.I can't say I noticed a difference in quality when switching. Maybe some people can, but for me it was just a different, but still well-made phone.> Apple has higher consumer trust.I can't speak for consumers in general, but this is certainly no longer the case for me.I also used MacOS for 20 years, and switched to Linux about a year ago because I didn't like the direction Apple was headed. It may be my choice of reading material (HN), but I receive almost daily confirmation that this was a sound decision.> Apple has better app selection (for most people).Not selection, necessarily, but certainly quality.As a side note, my iPad (my sole remaining Apple device) quietly updated to iOS 26 a few days ago. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience. Maybe some people can, but for me it was just a different, but still well-made phone.> Apple has higher consumer trust.I can't speak for consumers in general, but this is certainly no longer the case for me.I also used MacOS for 20 years, and switched to Linux about a year ago because I didn't like the direction Apple was headed. It may be my choice of reading material (HN), but I receive almost daily confirmation that this was a sound decision.> Apple has better app selection (for most people).Not selection, necessarily, but certainly quality.As a side note, my iPad (my sole remaining Apple device) quietly updated to iOS 26 a few days ago. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience. > Apple has higher consumer trust.I can't speak for consumers in general, but this is certainly no longer the case for me.I also used MacOS for 20 years, and switched to Linux about a year ago because I didn't like the direction Apple was headed. It may be my choice of reading material (HN), but I receive almost daily confirmation that this was a sound decision.> Apple has better app selection (for most people).Not selection, necessarily, but certainly quality.As a side note, my iPad (my sole remaining Apple device) quietly updated to iOS 26 a few days ago. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience. I can't speak for consumers in general, but this is certainly no longer the case for me.I also used MacOS for 20 years, and switched to Linux about a year ago because I didn't like the direction Apple was headed. It may be my choice of reading material (HN), but I receive almost daily confirmation that this was a sound decision.> Apple has better app selection (for most people).Not selection, necessarily, but certainly quality.As a side note, my iPad (my sole remaining Apple device) quietly updated to iOS 26 a few days ago. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience. I also used MacOS for 20 years, and switched to Linux about a year ago because I didn't like the direction Apple was headed. It may be my choice of reading material (HN), but I receive almost daily confirmation that this was a sound decision.> Apple has better app selection (for most people).Not selection, necessarily, but certainly quality.As a side note, my iPad (my sole remaining Apple device) quietly updated to iOS 26 a few days ago. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience. > Apple has better app selection (for most people).Not selection, necessarily, but certainly quality.As a side note, my iPad (my sole remaining Apple device) quietly updated to iOS 26 a few days ago. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience. Not selection, necessarily, but certainly quality.As a side note, my iPad (my sole remaining Apple device) quietly updated to iOS 26 a few days ago. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience. Despite having spent months reading about how bad it is, I was still genuinely shocked.Again, I can't speak for "consumers", but for me Apple now has a far worse user experience. The consensus online appears to be “oh, yeah, that's the OIS module, you have to expect it, they all do that”. Well, iPhones also have OIS and they don't do this.Android might be “good enough” in hardware now but it's definitely still behind. Android might be “good enough” in hardware now but it's definitely still behind. Whether they did it out of the goodness of their heart or because a regulator forced them, it's still got usb-c When they introduced Lightning in 2012, they made a commitment to all of the third-party hardware developers that iPhones would support it for a decade. I'm sure the EU pressure helped but USB-C iPhones shipping in 2023 is right on that original timing. Oh right, because they collected license fees and royalties for Lightning, reportedly $4 per cable. Truth is, apple fought EU hard, we saw it from inside quite well. Backstabs, some cheap tricks trying to delay and evade this, even when it was clear how things will be. Not their best days to be polite.Why giving some heartless mega corporation free moral credits if they are not well deserved? Why giving some heartless mega corporation free moral credits if they are not well deserved? Google stopped being aware of their customer's needs a really long time ago, they are so arrogant they think the audience is now fully captive. And the UX on these sub 600 devices have definitely gotten worse over the last 5 years too... Likely because Google isn't really targeting that price point anymore, so Android isn't getting enough optimization to be viable on underpowered devices.That was different in 2010-2020 And the UX on these sub 600 devices have definitely gotten worse over the last 5 years too... Likely because Google isn't really targeting that price point anymore, so Android isn't getting enough optimization to be viable on underpowered devices.That was different in 2010-2020 The chinese are mostly adding skins on top, not developing the core of the operating system.There is however a chinese fork of android (state sponsored), but it has not gotten wide market adoption in china either to my knowledge, but i dont live in china so i'm open to be corrected.Finally, even if that OS has gotten widely adopted in china - it IS a fork. There is however a chinese fork of android (state sponsored), but it has not gotten wide market adoption in china either to my knowledge, but i dont live in china so i'm open to be corrected.Finally, even if that OS has gotten widely adopted in china - it IS a fork. Finally, even if that OS has gotten widely adopted in china - it IS a fork. If Google suddenly decided Play Store should be the only way to install apps, that doesn't affect Huawei and Xiaomi phones at all, they don't ship with Play Store and Play Services in the first place. Chinese telephones legally imported usually have them in most relevant big markets like Indonesia, India, Brazil, etc. But the same manufacturers sell Android phones with Play services in Europe, Japan, India, Indonesia, etc. Do you want to use a different search engine other than google? Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own). Is there another browser other than chrome (and dont say firefox or edge - because both don't compete)?Google behave in ways that they think makes them more profit. Google behave in ways that they think makes them more profit. Not wanting and not having a choice are two different things.> Do you want to use a different search engine other than google? Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own)My wife uses ddg and outlook, she's non-technical. I convinced her to use ddg but she's always used outlook/hotmail. > Do you want to use a different search engine other than google? Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own)My wife uses ddg and outlook, she's non-technical. I convinced her to use ddg but she's always used outlook/hotmail. I convinced her to use ddg but she's always used outlook/hotmail. But if we are talking about mobile phones this is a very privileged and unrealistic point of view.According to chatgpt, 70-80% of mobile phone sold worldwide every year cost less than the cheaper iPhone.Some people could probably stretch their budget and get the cheapest iPhone, but otherwise it seems safe to conclude that more than 50% of people simply have no choice. According to chatgpt, 70-80% of mobile phone sold worldwide every year cost less than the cheaper iPhone.Some people could probably stretch their budget and get the cheapest iPhone, but otherwise it seems safe to conclude that more than 50% of people simply have no choice. Some people could probably stretch their budget and get the cheapest iPhone, but otherwise it seems safe to conclude that more than 50% of people simply have no choice. People do stretch their budget when they really feel the need for it (and the poorest you are the more you'll want to prove you're not poor by buying a status symbol), also the second hand market is an easy way to get a cheap iPhone. The browsing experience without constant upselling some trash and proper adblockers are magnitudes better. I'd still choose Firefox over it for the reasons you've mentioned. Maps is the last hold they have on me. I haven't yet bothered to find an alternative. Can I run an ad blocker in Android's Chrome? Yes, type yahoo.com into your browser, or install an app. Non-technical people love installing apps on their phones.>Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own).Yes, there are hundreds of good e-mail providers to use instead of Gmail. >Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own).Yes, there are hundreds of good e-mail providers to use instead of Gmail. In Chrome on Android (and yeah, on desktop too) you just go into "Settings" and change your default search engine. I can choose between Google, Yahoo!, Bing, Yandex, or DuckDuckGo.There are also custom searches through Wikipedia and other resources. )Changing your browser, you can do, but it won't be comfortable. I have Edge installed on my Android, but it is not possible to run natively on Chromebook and the Android emulation is bad. I will not set Edge to my Default Browser because it messes things up. It is not a great experience to change your Default Browser on Android. I just go with Chrome and use Edge for specific tasks and topics.You can set up all kinds of email services in the Gmail app, or you can install a native app. I use Outlook in both of those ways, and it's fine. There are also custom searches through Wikipedia and other resources. )Changing your browser, you can do, but it won't be comfortable. I have Edge installed on my Android, but it is not possible to run natively on Chromebook and the Android emulation is bad. I will not set Edge to my Default Browser because it messes things up. It is not a great experience to change your Default Browser on Android. I just go with Chrome and use Edge for specific tasks and topics.You can set up all kinds of email services in the Gmail app, or you can install a native app. I use Outlook in both of those ways, and it's fine. )Changing your browser, you can do, but it won't be comfortable. I have Edge installed on my Android, but it is not possible to run natively on Chromebook and the Android emulation is bad. I will not set Edge to my Default Browser because it messes things up. It is not a great experience to change your Default Browser on Android. I just go with Chrome and use Edge for specific tasks and topics.You can set up all kinds of email services in the Gmail app, or you can install a native app. I use Outlook in both of those ways, and it's fine. Changing your browser, you can do, but it won't be comfortable. I have Edge installed on my Android, but it is not possible to run natively on Chromebook and the Android emulation is bad. I will not set Edge to my Default Browser because it messes things up. It is not a great experience to change your Default Browser on Android. I just go with Chrome and use Edge for specific tasks and topics.You can set up all kinds of email services in the Gmail app, or you can install a native app. I use Outlook in both of those ways, and it's fine. You can set up all kinds of email services in the Gmail app, or you can install a native app. I use Outlook in both of those ways, and it's fine. I think your issue is trying to switch off of Chrome while using a Chromebook. I poke Yahoo on the grid of suggested sites. I poke Yahoo on the grid of suggested sites. I poke Yahoo on the grid of suggested sites. I poke Yahoo on the grid of suggested sites. I poke Yahoo on the grid of suggested sites. I poke Yahoo on the grid of suggested sites. There are lots of non-technical users who navigate purely by doing a "google search" on whatever domain they're aiming for, too. I have no idea where they are getting their index from though.> Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own).There is microsoft/apple/yahoo mailboxes. However, I think most people should pay for their email especially that it's cheap and also critical (2FA).> Is there another browser other than chrome (and dont say firefox or edge - because both don't compete)?Firefox is a solid fallback and also webkit (Apple) is now basically a different browser (ported to Linux on GNOME Web). Not the best situation though it could be worse (given Firefox situation).For me personally, the only two things I still use Google for are chromium and maps. I am unlikely to move from Chromium anytime soon but might consider alternative for maps (though might still need maps for reviews/photos/street view).I am the most bullish I've ever been on Google losing its monopoly especially after they botched AI and hyper-scaling. > Is there another email provider than gmail (for the non-technical person - i know you can run your own).There is microsoft/apple/yahoo mailboxes. However, I think most people should pay for their email especially that it's cheap and also critical (2FA).> Is there another browser other than chrome (and dont say firefox or edge - because both don't compete)?Firefox is a solid fallback and also webkit (Apple) is now basically a different browser (ported to Linux on GNOME Web). Not the best situation though it could be worse (given Firefox situation).For me personally, the only two things I still use Google for are chromium and maps. I am unlikely to move from Chromium anytime soon but might consider alternative for maps (though might still need maps for reviews/photos/street view).I am the most bullish I've ever been on Google losing its monopoly especially after they botched AI and hyper-scaling. However, I think most people should pay for their email especially that it's cheap and also critical (2FA).> Is there another browser other than chrome (and dont say firefox or edge - because both don't compete)?Firefox is a solid fallback and also webkit (Apple) is now basically a different browser (ported to Linux on GNOME Web). Not the best situation though it could be worse (given Firefox situation).For me personally, the only two things I still use Google for are chromium and maps. I am unlikely to move from Chromium anytime soon but might consider alternative for maps (though might still need maps for reviews/photos/street view).I am the most bullish I've ever been on Google losing its monopoly especially after they botched AI and hyper-scaling. > Is there another browser other than chrome (and dont say firefox or edge - because both don't compete)?Firefox is a solid fallback and also webkit (Apple) is now basically a different browser (ported to Linux on GNOME Web). Not the best situation though it could be worse (given Firefox situation).For me personally, the only two things I still use Google for are chromium and maps. I am unlikely to move from Chromium anytime soon but might consider alternative for maps (though might still need maps for reviews/photos/street view).I am the most bullish I've ever been on Google losing its monopoly especially after they botched AI and hyper-scaling. Firefox is a solid fallback and also webkit (Apple) is now basically a different browser (ported to Linux on GNOME Web). Not the best situation though it could be worse (given Firefox situation).For me personally, the only two things I still use Google for are chromium and maps. I am unlikely to move from Chromium anytime soon but might consider alternative for maps (though might still need maps for reviews/photos/street view).I am the most bullish I've ever been on Google losing its monopoly especially after they botched AI and hyper-scaling. I am unlikely to move from Chromium anytime soon but might consider alternative for maps (though might still need maps for reviews/photos/street view).I am the most bullish I've ever been on Google losing its monopoly especially after they botched AI and hyper-scaling. I am the most bullish I've ever been on Google losing its monopoly especially after they botched AI and hyper-scaling. The strategy of doing everything you can to make sure your customers truly and utterly despise you and want to spit in your face is probably not productive. They only need to attract users with "free" and cheap services so that advertisers think their campaigns are reaching enough eyeballs. Whether or not that's the case, and whether or not the end user has a good experience, is hardly relevant. One area Android has a clear advantage is Android TV devices verified by Google, because there is a much wider array of streaming apps of all kinds available. However google doesn't seem to focus on this very much, and if you look for forum recommendations for google android streaming devices it's very often the NVIDIA shield pro from 2019. Hopefully that device will I'll be supported for a few more years because there seems to not be good easily available alternatives. If the rumors are true that the whole anti-sideloading thing is mostly because some governments complained, it might not have to do with a business strategy at all. That is quickly eroding and has never been justified other than by marketing.> Apple has better app selection (for most people).Android has always had a much better selection of open source software, which, at least to me, is the thing that matters most. > Apple has better app selection (for most people).Android has always had a much better selection of open source software, which, at least to me, is the thing that matters most. Android has always had a much better selection of open source software, which, at least to me, is the thing that matters most. Maybe by now there is some Android emulation for iOS that can do it? Personally, I would rather see Android only run signed and sanctioned apps to prevent the technologically illiterate from getting pwned. Sure, a small proportion might move to Linux Mobile.Most of the rest of the population will just stick to Google, because they don't have a choice.In many countries, your government or some other essential service demands that you have either an Apple or Google device. Most of the rest of the population will just stick to Google, because they don't have a choice.In many countries, your government or some other essential service demands that you have either an Apple or Google device. In many countries, your government or some other essential service demands that you have either an Apple or Google device. Apple has had better software support & integration for their hardware that has lead to e.g. strong camera quality advantages (iOS camera app has been able to use the hardware better to produce photos people want despite some Android OEMs having objectively better camera modules since those OEMs have to work through a lot of Google contracts & software extraction).The hardware has never been better - their holistic ecosystem has just made integrations with it smoother.> Apple has better app selection (for most people)This has been true but it's always been marginal, & the "for most people" qualifier has contracted significantly in recent years. Both Google's & Apple's 1P offerings have declined in quality & popularity, but Google have increased lock-in & reliance on theirs in ways Apple can't, while the 3P offerings on Android have improved significantly relative to iOS. Gone are the days of companies releasing exclusively on iOS, or the Android version being an afterthought with missing features - if anything it's swung in the other direction.To be clear, I think your points still stand: Google's recent strategy doesn't make sense for Google. I just don't think it's as glaringly clear cut as you make out.One aspect that's worth keeping in mind is the non-US market. Apple has a 58% market share in the US but it's 28% worldwide. Apple has had better software support & integration for their hardware that has lead to e.g. strong camera quality advantages (iOS camera app has been able to use the hardware better to produce photos people want despite some Android OEMs having objectively better camera modules since those OEMs have to work through a lot of Google contracts & software extraction).The hardware has never been better - their holistic ecosystem has just made integrations with it smoother.> Apple has better app selection (for most people)This has been true but it's always been marginal, & the "for most people" qualifier has contracted significantly in recent years. Both Google's & Apple's 1P offerings have declined in quality & popularity, but Google have increased lock-in & reliance on theirs in ways Apple can't, while the 3P offerings on Android have improved significantly relative to iOS. Gone are the days of companies releasing exclusively on iOS, or the Android version being an afterthought with missing features - if anything it's swung in the other direction.To be clear, I think your points still stand: Google's recent strategy doesn't make sense for Google. I just don't think it's as glaringly clear cut as you make out.One aspect that's worth keeping in mind is the non-US market. Apple has a 58% market share in the US but it's 28% worldwide. Both Google's & Apple's 1P offerings have declined in quality & popularity, but Google have increased lock-in & reliance on theirs in ways Apple can't, while the 3P offerings on Android have improved significantly relative to iOS. Gone are the days of companies releasing exclusively on iOS, or the Android version being an afterthought with missing features - if anything it's swung in the other direction.To be clear, I think your points still stand: Google's recent strategy doesn't make sense for Google. I just don't think it's as glaringly clear cut as you make out.One aspect that's worth keeping in mind is the non-US market. Apple has a 58% market share in the US but it's 28% worldwide. Both Google's & Apple's 1P offerings have declined in quality & popularity, but Google have increased lock-in & reliance on theirs in ways Apple can't, while the 3P offerings on Android have improved significantly relative to iOS. Gone are the days of companies releasing exclusively on iOS, or the Android version being an afterthought with missing features - if anything it's swung in the other direction.To be clear, I think your points still stand: Google's recent strategy doesn't make sense for Google. I just don't think it's as glaringly clear cut as you make out.One aspect that's worth keeping in mind is the non-US market. Apple has a 58% market share in the US but it's 28% worldwide. This has been true but it's always been marginal, & the "for most people" qualifier has contracted significantly in recent years. Both Google's & Apple's 1P offerings have declined in quality & popularity, but Google have increased lock-in & reliance on theirs in ways Apple can't, while the 3P offerings on Android have improved significantly relative to iOS. Gone are the days of companies releasing exclusively on iOS, or the Android version being an afterthought with missing features - if anything it's swung in the other direction.To be clear, I think your points still stand: Google's recent strategy doesn't make sense for Google. I just don't think it's as glaringly clear cut as you make out.One aspect that's worth keeping in mind is the non-US market. Apple has a 58% market share in the US but it's 28% worldwide. I just don't think it's as glaringly clear cut as you make out.One aspect that's worth keeping in mind is the non-US market. Apple has a 58% market share in the US but it's 28% worldwide. One aspect that's worth keeping in mind is the non-US market. Apple has a 58% market share in the US but it's 28% worldwide. Qualcomm's current top of the line processors are about 3 years behind what you can get in Apple's cheapest product (that being the 16e), and the budget phones (and by "budget" I mean "the 600 dollar ones") are another 3 years behind that.iPhones don't generally become too slow to realistically use until their support lifetime expires. Androids are like that out of the box unless you spend over a thousand dollars, and those only last for about half the time (a combination of inferior hardware and inferior software). It doesn't matter if you have a 120Hz screen if the UI only updates at 20.This is why the only killer feature for Android (outside the cameras) is adblocking- which, of course, is what Google wants to prevent. They don't want you to run real Firefox (with the only effective adblock remaining), and they want you to pay for YouTube Premium rather than using NewPipe (or some other ReVanced successor) so you can't get out of paying 10 bucks to listen to a video with the screen off. iPhones don't generally become too slow to realistically use until their support lifetime expires. Androids are like that out of the box unless you spend over a thousand dollars, and those only last for about half the time (a combination of inferior hardware and inferior software). It doesn't matter if you have a 120Hz screen if the UI only updates at 20.This is why the only killer feature for Android (outside the cameras) is adblocking- which, of course, is what Google wants to prevent. They don't want you to run real Firefox (with the only effective adblock remaining), and they want you to pay for YouTube Premium rather than using NewPipe (or some other ReVanced successor) so you can't get out of paying 10 bucks to listen to a video with the screen off. They don't want you to run real Firefox (with the only effective adblock remaining), and they want you to pay for YouTube Premium rather than using NewPipe (or some other ReVanced successor) so you can't get out of paying 10 bucks to listen to a video with the screen off. > And Google's strategy is to continue removing differentiating features from Android personally, it makes me less enthusiastic about android as i don't need another iphone but n=1, so maybe it will work out for them.... Another reason it should have been broken apart years ago. You just don't want ads, and it is still possible to not see them. Google pays content creators so little they have all started including ads in their videos. Meanwhile, Google is more and more aggressive with their own ads interrupting videos and pushing you to subscribe to their expensive offer.Some people, like me, have just stopped watching YouTube. Other are turning to blocking ads.It's the usual tug of war between revenues and UX but I don't think consumers have to feel bad about not playing by Google's rules. Some people, like me, have just stopped watching YouTube. Other are turning to blocking ads.It's the usual tug of war between revenues and UX but I don't think consumers have to feel bad about not playing by Google's rules. It's the usual tug of war between revenues and UX but I don't think consumers have to feel bad about not playing by Google's rules. The actual data could be hosted p2p across all the users devices, and any missing data retrieved one-time-only from real youtube servers. The real challenge is delivering good enough performance that your site is better than waiting through 30 seconds of ads; and making it worth your time to run the site: there's hassle, legal risk, and it's not like you can run ads to make some cash. In Apple's case this has been the only Apple business to grow at all in several of the recent years. In fact there's quite a few Apple businesses that look like they are "revenue neutral", most famously iPads. )So not only are they enshittified, and you see them getting worse and worse over time, but the financial statements show: if you're expecting this to get any better either in the Apple or Google case, you're insane. Because clearly ads for scams are worth it for advertisers, and most other types of ads are not worth it. "Are governments/institutions that are totally dependent on these systems willing to pay to either improve phones or make an alternative available? ", again has boatloads of evidence that the answer is NO, in all caps. Top results are promoting Apple or Google themselves, everything else are ads, and very bad deals that trivially will neither accomplish the promised financial independence nor weight loss. Or should I put it like this: the credit card deals advertised are so bad they might achieve weight loss. By the way ads designed to mislead, which the top ads for either search obviously are, are what both Google and Apple promised time and again never to do. So not only are they enshittified, and you see them getting worse and worse over time, but the financial statements show: if you're expecting this to get any better either in the Apple or Google case, you're insane. Because clearly ads for scams are worth it for advertisers, and most other types of ads are not worth it. "Are governments/institutions that are totally dependent on these systems willing to pay to either improve phones or make an alternative available? ", again has boatloads of evidence that the answer is NO, in all caps. Top results are promoting Apple or Google themselves, everything else are ads, and very bad deals that trivially will neither accomplish the promised financial independence nor weight loss. Or should I put it like this: the credit card deals advertised are so bad they might achieve weight loss. By the way ads designed to mislead, which the top ads for either search obviously are, are what both Google and Apple promised time and again never to do. "Are governments/institutions that are totally dependent on these systems willing to pay to either improve phones or make an alternative available? ", again has boatloads of evidence that the answer is NO, in all caps. Top results are promoting Apple or Google themselves, everything else are ads, and very bad deals that trivially will neither accomplish the promised financial independence nor weight loss. Or should I put it like this: the credit card deals advertised are so bad they might achieve weight loss. By the way ads designed to mislead, which the top ads for either search obviously are, are what both Google and Apple promised time and again never to do. Top results are promoting Apple or Google themselves, everything else are ads, and very bad deals that trivially will neither accomplish the promised financial independence nor weight loss. Or should I put it like this: the credit card deals advertised are so bad they might achieve weight loss. By the way ads designed to mislead, which the top ads for either search obviously are, are what both Google and Apple promised time and again never to do. Fully apple's fault here, it could have been their standard as the one, but greed is greed.Screens were always better on Samsungs flagships (apple buys screens there too) - mildly higher resolution, refresh rate and contrasts but these are rather unimportant. As an non-apple tech user, apple phone hardware has very few things that interest me or put them above the others.Its better integration with software that did put them above, since it was optimized for a very narrow band of hardware so could get far even with subpar hardware (till M chips came but these days they are almost on par with Snapdragons). But that software has a list of issues much bigger than hardware above so no, thank you. Screens were always better on Samsungs flagships (apple buys screens there too) - mildly higher resolution, refresh rate and contrasts but these are rather unimportant. As an non-apple tech user, apple phone hardware has very few things that interest me or put them above the others.Its better integration with software that did put them above, since it was optimized for a very narrow band of hardware so could get far even with subpar hardware (till M chips came but these days they are almost on par with Snapdragons). But that software has a list of issues much bigger than hardware above so no, thank you. Its better integration with software that did put them above, since it was optimized for a very narrow band of hardware so could get far even with subpar hardware (till M chips came but these days they are almost on par with Snapdragons). But that software has a list of issues much bigger than hardware above so no, thank you. Where Google services are banned and Android phones come with local OS versions that cut them out? It won't be part of their experience at all. They already are distributed in China.Those phones won't come with the vendor OS installed; they'll come with an OS that works without a hitch in China.One of the modifications to the local OS will be to make sideloading trivial, since that's how you're expected to install apps.If you did start selling phones with a stock Android OS in China, those phones wouldn't work because their connections to Google services would all be blocked. There's nothing preventing Google's phones from being distributed in China. They already are distributed in China.Those phones won't come with the vendor OS installed; they'll come with an OS that works without a hitch in China.One of the modifications to the local OS will be to make sideloading trivial, since that's how you're expected to install apps.If you did start selling phones with a stock Android OS in China, those phones wouldn't work because their connections to Google services would all be blocked. Those phones won't come with the vendor OS installed; they'll come with an OS that works without a hitch in China.One of the modifications to the local OS will be to make sideloading trivial, since that's how you're expected to install apps.If you did start selling phones with a stock Android OS in China, those phones wouldn't work because their connections to Google services would all be blocked. One of the modifications to the local OS will be to make sideloading trivial, since that's how you're expected to install apps.If you did start selling phones with a stock Android OS in China, those phones wouldn't work because their connections to Google services would all be blocked. If you did start selling phones with a stock Android OS in China, those phones wouldn't work because their connections to Google services would all be blocked. Long time Pixel user here who has always believed the story that Apple has the closed, but refined, higher quality experience and Google has the slightly freer, but coarser UX.I was convinced to make the switch this year and the Apple iPhone 17 Pro + whatever iOS version is, by far the worst phone I've ever owned.Photos are worse, low light is worse, macros are worse, the UI is laggy, buggy and crashes.The keyboard and autosuggest is shockingly bad.Incredibly popular apps on iOS (YT, X, etc) are just as bad and often worse.iMessage is a psyop. The absolute worst messaging app in history with zero desktop access for non-Mac users? !If you're on Android, and especially pixel, please know that Apple has completely given up and no longer executes at the level you remember from 10-15 years ago. I was convinced to make the switch this year and the Apple iPhone 17 Pro + whatever iOS version is, by far the worst phone I've ever owned.Photos are worse, low light is worse, macros are worse, the UI is laggy, buggy and crashes.The keyboard and autosuggest is shockingly bad.Incredibly popular apps on iOS (YT, X, etc) are just as bad and often worse.iMessage is a psyop. The absolute worst messaging app in history with zero desktop access for non-Mac users? !If you're on Android, and especially pixel, please know that Apple has completely given up and no longer executes at the level you remember from 10-15 years ago. The absolute worst messaging app in history with zero desktop access for non-Mac users? !If you're on Android, and especially pixel, please know that Apple has completely given up and no longer executes at the level you remember from 10-15 years ago. The keyboard and autosuggest is shockingly bad.Incredibly popular apps on iOS (YT, X, etc) are just as bad and often worse.iMessage is a psyop. The absolute worst messaging app in history with zero desktop access for non-Mac users? !If you're on Android, and especially pixel, please know that Apple has completely given up and no longer executes at the level you remember from 10-15 years ago. Incredibly popular apps on iOS (YT, X, etc) are just as bad and often worse.iMessage is a psyop. The absolute worst messaging app in history with zero desktop access for non-Mac users? !If you're on Android, and especially pixel, please know that Apple has completely given up and no longer executes at the level you remember from 10-15 years ago. The absolute worst messaging app in history with zero desktop access for non-Mac users? !If you're on Android, and especially pixel, please know that Apple has completely given up and no longer executes at the level you remember from 10-15 years ago. If you're on Android, and especially pixel, please know that Apple has completely given up and no longer executes at the level you remember from 10-15 years ago. When will HN learn that the vast majority of customers dont see those as differentiating features.One of the key things separating humans from other animals is being able to put yourself in another's shoes. One of the key things separating humans from other animals is being able to put yourself in another's shoes. At least on my end the political knee bending by Tim Cook and their recent iOS and MacOS updates have me firmly on the side of not giving any more money to Apple. Speak with your wallets).And I will be considering alternatives when my machines which I will be running to their end stop working.It's really such a shame cause I really liked their privacy stances, accessibility work, and focus on user experience.Now I say, screw Apple, and encourage people to boycott and be wary of upgrades. And I will be considering alternatives when my machines which I will be running to their end stop working.It's really such a shame cause I really liked their privacy stances, accessibility work, and focus on user experience.Now I say, screw Apple, and encourage people to boycott and be wary of upgrades. It's really such a shame cause I really liked their privacy stances, accessibility work, and focus on user experience.Now I say, screw Apple, and encourage people to boycott and be wary of upgrades. I don't think Google is too concerned about that.https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/14/apple-gets-36percent-of-goog... While I can afford Apple, out of principle I am not buying anything above 300 euros, that requires me to also buy another computer for hobby coding, and a dev license.All my use of Apple hardware is via projects where pool devices are assigned to the delivery team. All my use of Apple hardware is via projects where pool devices are assigned to the delivery team. I tend to not use Apple not due to cost (I honestly believe it's OK to pay a premium for quality; I might disagree they offer it today though, as I do use a couple of their devices at work), but because of how closed their ecosystem is (and yes, all my personal devices are running some sort of Linux, and Android phones are rooted and with bootloader unlocked). Not everyone has the US culture of running their life on credit.Because when life changes, it isn't only their phone they lose.The only single time I had a contract, because it was the only way to get a Nokia N70, I learnt never to do another one ever again. Because when life changes, it isn't only their phone they lose.The only single time I had a contract, because it was the only way to get a Nokia N70, I learnt never to do another one ever again. The only single time I had a contract, because it was the only way to get a Nokia N70, I learnt never to do another one ever again. I mostly buy my phones outright too, but I am under no impression that everybody else does it as well. As a result, quite a lot of people use the "I can't believe they could make and sell an entire phone at this price" Xiaomi and similar phones. In many places the default is prepaid SIMs with separately purchased phones. Sometimes the prepaying can be automated (e.g. in Russia), sometimes it involves you physically going to a shop once a month or so (e.g. in Egypt). Faux luxury.Totally works in the US too on teens, moms, and lower middle class people. Totally works in the US too on teens, moms, and lower middle class people. They'll make fun of the kid who has a Galaxy S24 while proudly showing off their aging iPhone 12... If you are hired by a manufacturer of say cola, you cannot drink the competition cola.Those in google laugh when asked to show their phones - and then show iphones. I'm firmly in the Apple ecosystem and every one of those examples were not Apple's unilateral decisionI think seeing the noose circling around both Apple and Google's necks better explains the quagmire that Google is inApple was getting ahead of a European consumer protection ruling to switch to a single interoperable cable, USBC was thereApple and Google worked to make RCS better for years, as Apple was ignoring it and Google was using a non-standard RCS I think seeing the noose circling around both Apple and Google's necks better explains the quagmire that Google is inApple was getting ahead of a European consumer protection ruling to switch to a single interoperable cable, USBC was thereApple and Google worked to make RCS better for years, as Apple was ignoring it and Google was using a non-standard RCS Apple and Google worked to make RCS better for years, as Apple was ignoring it and Google was using a non-standard RCS No one cares that much about connector type, more the fact it's using an industry standard versus proprietary. No one cares about RCS, everyone uses WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Messenger, Line, etc...Core features are stuff like being able to search for a business through the phone app, Maps telling you where you parked your car, unprompted, compatibility with the casting protocol, the ability to make ANY app the default for a particular task, the ability to sideload, the fact you can switch phone brands and get whatever hardware you want but your core OS with all your accounts stays the same. Basically the ability to do what you want win your OS and no one restricting your phone's features.As for Google's strategy, it's the same as Valve's. Having a platform they can't be locked out of since both MS and Apple have shown they'll abuse their market power. Basically the ability to do what you want win your OS and no one restricting your phone's features.As for Google's strategy, it's the same as Valve's. Having a platform they can't be locked out of since both MS and Apple have shown they'll abuse their market power. Having a platform they can't be locked out of since both MS and Apple have shown they'll abuse their market power. That's what makes Google's strategy so baffling.> Apple has better app selection (for most people).It's entirely the same. I have gone back and forth regularly for the past 10 years. Apple might have a slight advantage on the pro segment with the iPad but I don't think it has a huge impact on phones.The really baffling thing to me is that while they lock down Android, they pay to put Gemini on iOS. Google has a real competitive advantage with IA and they just gave it to Apple.It's clear to me that they are two companies fighting each other inside Google: the ex-Motorola who wants to be Apple and the service side who wants to be Microsoft.I personally fear that they are making the bed of the regulators who will probably come for Play Protect at some point to open the door for alternative OS providers at least in Europe. But maybe they think it's coming anyway and are strengthening their position and trying to milk what they can in the meantime. > Apple has better app selection (for most people).It's entirely the same. I have gone back and forth regularly for the past 10 years. Apple might have a slight advantage on the pro segment with the iPad but I don't think it has a huge impact on phones.The really baffling thing to me is that while they lock down Android, they pay to put Gemini on iOS. Google has a real competitive advantage with IA and they just gave it to Apple.It's clear to me that they are two companies fighting each other inside Google: the ex-Motorola who wants to be Apple and the service side who wants to be Microsoft.I personally fear that they are making the bed of the regulators who will probably come for Play Protect at some point to open the door for alternative OS providers at least in Europe. But maybe they think it's coming anyway and are strengthening their position and trying to milk what they can in the meantime. I have gone back and forth regularly for the past 10 years. Apple might have a slight advantage on the pro segment with the iPad but I don't think it has a huge impact on phones.The really baffling thing to me is that while they lock down Android, they pay to put Gemini on iOS. Google has a real competitive advantage with IA and they just gave it to Apple.It's clear to me that they are two companies fighting each other inside Google: the ex-Motorola who wants to be Apple and the service side who wants to be Microsoft.I personally fear that they are making the bed of the regulators who will probably come for Play Protect at some point to open the door for alternative OS providers at least in Europe. But maybe they think it's coming anyway and are strengthening their position and trying to milk what they can in the meantime. The really baffling thing to me is that while they lock down Android, they pay to put Gemini on iOS. Google has a real competitive advantage with IA and they just gave it to Apple.It's clear to me that they are two companies fighting each other inside Google: the ex-Motorola who wants to be Apple and the service side who wants to be Microsoft.I personally fear that they are making the bed of the regulators who will probably come for Play Protect at some point to open the door for alternative OS providers at least in Europe. But maybe they think it's coming anyway and are strengthening their position and trying to milk what they can in the meantime. It's clear to me that they are two companies fighting each other inside Google: the ex-Motorola who wants to be Apple and the service side who wants to be Microsoft.I personally fear that they are making the bed of the regulators who will probably come for Play Protect at some point to open the door for alternative OS providers at least in Europe. But maybe they think it's coming anyway and are strengthening their position and trying to milk what they can in the meantime. I personally fear that they are making the bed of the regulators who will probably come for Play Protect at some point to open the door for alternative OS providers at least in Europe. But maybe they think it's coming anyway and are strengthening their position and trying to milk what they can in the meantime. Both Qualcomm and Mediatek have caught up on the phone SoC market.The Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 has a slightly better CPU than the A19 Pro but a slightly worse GPU. Apple has a very slight advantage in watt usage but that's more than offset by the battery gap. Same thing with the Dimensity 9500.The SoC market is now extremely competitive. Apple has a very slight advantage in watt usage but that's more than offset by the battery gap. Same thing with the Dimensity 9500.The SoC market is now extremely competitive. Being able to install stuff from fdroid is amazing.>Apple has been increasingly implementing the core features that differentiate Android devicesAs long as you are okay with waiting 4 years. >Apple has higher consumer trust.lmao, this is just a user error problem. Being able to install stuff from fdroid is amazing.>Apple has been increasingly implementing the core features that differentiate Android devicesAs long as you are okay with waiting 4 years. Being able to install stuff from fdroid is amazing.>Apple has been increasingly implementing the core features that differentiate Android devicesAs long as you are okay with waiting 4 years. >Apple has better app selection (for most people).Solid no here. Being able to install stuff from fdroid is amazing.>Apple has been increasingly implementing the core features that differentiate Android devicesAs long as you are okay with waiting 4 years. Being able to install stuff from fdroid is amazing.>Apple has been increasingly implementing the core features that differentiate Android devicesAs long as you are okay with waiting 4 years. >Apple has been increasingly implementing the core features that differentiate Android devicesAs long as you are okay with waiting 4 years. You forgot to mention how poor iPhone security is. Not surprised the same kind of person that buys an iphone also fell for samsung. Losing the ability to easily sideload apps is what we're talking about.How do iPhones have worse security than Android?? Not most placesI think it's weird you come at this from an antitrust angle when I would totally make the argument the other way.If there's pressure to remove this feature, then it's from companies that make apps that anyone can pull up in Revanced and they can patch it and can be running a version of a piece of software that shouldn't exist with "premium" features enabled. I don't think there's an argument against it really besides that. At least not an honest, intelligent argument....Ultimately, I doubt many would jump to Apple. Which is already occurring, people are keeping their devices longer, especially Apple users. And they wonder why their battery stops working... Oy vey! I think it's weird you come at this from an antitrust angle when I would totally make the argument the other way.If there's pressure to remove this feature, then it's from companies that make apps that anyone can pull up in Revanced and they can patch it and can be running a version of a piece of software that shouldn't exist with "premium" features enabled. I don't think there's an argument against it really besides that. At least not an honest, intelligent argument....Ultimately, I doubt many would jump to Apple. Which is already occurring, people are keeping their devices longer, especially Apple users. And they wonder why their battery stops working... Oy vey! If there's pressure to remove this feature, then it's from companies that make apps that anyone can pull up in Revanced and they can patch it and can be running a version of a piece of software that shouldn't exist with "premium" features enabled. I don't think there's an argument against it really besides that. At least not an honest, intelligent argument....Ultimately, I doubt many would jump to Apple. Which is already occurring, people are keeping their devices longer, especially Apple users. And they wonder why their battery stops working... Oy vey! Which is already occurring, people are keeping their devices longer, especially Apple users. And they wonder why their battery stops working... Oy vey! Much better camera sensors, much better silicon carbon batteries etc in Oppo, Vivo, Honor and Xiaomi devices than anything Apple produces. Form factors Apple still hasn't figured out, such as 7th gen Foldables, Flip foldable phones etc, Camera zoom lenses that can be attached... Look at the latest Xiaomi, Oppo and other Chinese manufacturers, Apple would love to have the hardware they are shipping right now. From batteries to cameras and screens, apple is way behind on hardware tech. Yeah they are better than Samsung - but Samsung has also massively fallen behind what's the state of the art.>>is another customer Google has to pay exorbitant fees to a competitor to access.Last time I checked, it's apple paying Google, billions of dollars a year? And it will be even more now that Apple announced they are going to use Gemini as their AI base model. And it will be even more now that Apple announced they are going to use Gemini as their AI base model. Last time I checked, it's apple paying Google, billions of dollars a year? And it will be even more now that Apple announced they are going to use Gemini as their AI base model. Google pays Apple on the order of $20 billion to be the default search on iOS - this is so significant it accounts for ~5% of Apple's annual revenue > Look at the latest Xiaomi, Oppo and other Chinese manufacturers, Apple would love to have the hardware they are shipping right now. If any of these manufacturers decide to include an EMR pen in the body of the phone, like Samsung's S-Pen, they'll have me as a customer. This is true, but their phones don't ship with Google services out of box (at least the last time I checked). So in reality, "Google's Android" is really mostly Samsungs and Pixels. Also software installation in Android has been high friction for a while. Installing an APK on my phone is at least 10 clicks. By all means let people curate and use safe lists of software, but let's not pretend that making the life harder for the few registries containing solely open source and vetted software is in any way about making people safer. If there's anyone people need to be protected against, it's Alphabet and Apple and the entities they let in intentionally, rather than specter of "growing trend of scammers". Google just wants a tighter grip on their software chain, which is understandable if they were Apple but they're not. The term originated far before this debacle, and carries a meaningful distinction than just "installing". Specifically it means installing from a non-first party source. You might not agree the restriction should exist, or that even the concept of first party source at all, but for communication purposes it's worth having a simple word to describe that concept, rather than something like "installing from a non-first party app store". >Specifically it means installing from a non-first party source.Just like 99% of software running on computers in the world today? Just like 99% of software running on computers in the world today? If you apply it to OP's headline of>Google confirms 'high-friction' sideloading flow is coming to AndroidYou get>Google confirms 'high-friction' installing software flow is coming to Androidwhich isn't at all accurate. You still need the distinct concept of "installing software not from first party sources", otherwise it sounds like google is making it a pain to install all apps, which isn't the case. You still need the distinct concept of "installing software not from first party sources", otherwise it sounds like google is making it a pain to install all apps, which isn't the case. You still need the distinct concept of "installing software not from first party sources", otherwise it sounds like google is making it a pain to install all apps, which isn't the case. You still need the distinct concept of "installing software not from first party sources", otherwise it sounds like google is making it a pain to install all apps, which isn't the case. You still need the distinct concept of "installing software not from first party sources", otherwise it sounds like google is making it a pain to install all apps, which isn't the case. Android chose the inverse framing and that choice isn't neutral. Right, which is why they used "sideload".>In other ecosystems the store path is described as "store install" not the other way around. No, this is just being non-neutral in the opposite direction. And neutrality here isn't about mirroring current usage frequency (which is unique to Android and recent relative to the history of computing), it's about continuity with prior computing norms. Even when one distribution path dominated in practice, it didn't get to redefine the base verb. Apple invented out of thin air the notion of a "first-party" software source or that computer users can only install software approved by a central authority. It's amazing how many confidently wrong people are springing up out of the wordwork to present revisionist history about the meaning of "install" like it's ancient wisdom. It's usage was varied, irregular, and not at any threshold of popular acceptance for one meaning or another.Windows, Dos, Linux, and online self-hosted services had no notion of "sideloading", or at least no usage of that vocabulary and did not use this notion of "install" that is now being retrospectively declared a longstanding historical norm. Even now, that's not a term used in Windows or Linux. Even Apple, who very much in practice utilize this controlled distribution model but even they don't use this sideloading/installing verbal distinction. In Apple's lexicon installing is neutral with respect to where an app comes from.So it's staggering to see a specific term of art that deviates from historical precedent that only is used in an Android context and only relatively recently in the history of computing be referred to as if its observing a longstanding precedent across all of computing. Windows, Dos, Linux, and online self-hosted services had no notion of "sideloading", or at least no usage of that vocabulary and did not use this notion of "install" that is now being retrospectively declared a longstanding historical norm. Even now, that's not a term used in Windows or Linux. Even Apple, who very much in practice utilize this controlled distribution model but even they don't use this sideloading/installing verbal distinction. In Apple's lexicon installing is neutral with respect to where an app comes from.So it's staggering to see a specific term of art that deviates from historical precedent that only is used in an Android context and only relatively recently in the history of computing be referred to as if its observing a longstanding precedent across all of computing. So it's staggering to see a specific term of art that deviates from historical precedent that only is used in an Android context and only relatively recently in the history of computing be referred to as if its observing a longstanding precedent across all of computing. No, it's existed in windows 10 (and probably windows 8.1) for over a decade.https://www.ghacks.net/2015/06/13/how-to-enable-developer-mo... (note the date)>So it's staggering to see a specific term of art that deviates from historical precedent that only is used in an Android context and only relatively recently in the history of computing be referred to as if its observing a longstanding precedent across all of computing. You're basically arguing "back in the good old days, all installs were not from first party source and there was no distinction", but that doesn't mean no such distinction exists right now. Otherwise it's like arguing "immigration" is some "neologism" because back before the advent of the nation state, people just moved wherever, there wasn't random lines that turned "moving" to "immigration", and the word "immigration" is coined by statists that want to impose their worldview on the populace. https://www.ghacks.net/2015/06/13/how-to-enable-developer-mo... (note the date)>So it's staggering to see a specific term of art that deviates from historical precedent that only is used in an Android context and only relatively recently in the history of computing be referred to as if its observing a longstanding precedent across all of computing. You're basically arguing "back in the good old days, all installs were not from first party source and there was no distinction", but that doesn't mean no such distinction exists right now. Otherwise it's like arguing "immigration" is some "neologism" because back before the advent of the nation state, people just moved wherever, there wasn't random lines that turned "moving" to "immigration", and the word "immigration" is coined by statists that want to impose their worldview on the populace. >So it's staggering to see a specific term of art that deviates from historical precedent that only is used in an Android context and only relatively recently in the history of computing be referred to as if its observing a longstanding precedent across all of computing. You're basically arguing "back in the good old days, all installs were not from first party source and there was no distinction", but that doesn't mean no such distinction exists right now. Otherwise it's like arguing "immigration" is some "neologism" because back before the advent of the nation state, people just moved wherever, there wasn't random lines that turned "moving" to "immigration", and the word "immigration" is coined by statists that want to impose their worldview on the populace. You're basically arguing "back in the good old days, all installs were not from first party source and there was no distinction", but that doesn't mean no such distinction exists right now. Otherwise it's like arguing "immigration" is some "neologism" because back before the advent of the nation state, people just moved wherever, there wasn't random lines that turned "moving" to "immigration", and the word "immigration" is coined by statists that want to impose their worldview on the populace. A distinction only exists if people parrot the verbiage coined by corporations with a business interest in creating artificial moats. Because when you install software that isn't from the app store, it's unvetted and untrusted.There is a whole different structure of trust when you download and install an app from your provider's app store.No, it's not perfect. I have never needed to do this for any app on any Android device, and I've owned them since KitKat.In fact, I will probably enable S-mode on my next Windows machine, because it's that easy to just avoid 3rd party apps and crapware.So I don't know why people want to muddy the waters. You literally want to stamp out a differentiating term "because it's scary". Don't users and vendors have a right to call a thing what it is, or use different terms for different procedures?It seems absolutely nuts to try and censor this word, because y'all believe it was foisted on you by "lawmakers". There is a whole different structure of trust when you download and install an app from your provider's app store.No, it's not perfect. I have never needed to do this for any app on any Android device, and I've owned them since KitKat.In fact, I will probably enable S-mode on my next Windows machine, because it's that easy to just avoid 3rd party apps and crapware.So I don't know why people want to muddy the waters. You literally want to stamp out a differentiating term "because it's scary". Don't users and vendors have a right to call a thing what it is, or use different terms for different procedures?It seems absolutely nuts to try and censor this word, because y'all believe it was foisted on you by "lawmakers". I have never needed to do this for any app on any Android device, and I've owned them since KitKat.In fact, I will probably enable S-mode on my next Windows machine, because it's that easy to just avoid 3rd party apps and crapware.So I don't know why people want to muddy the waters. You literally want to stamp out a differentiating term "because it's scary". Don't users and vendors have a right to call a thing what it is, or use different terms for different procedures?It seems absolutely nuts to try and censor this word, because y'all believe it was foisted on you by "lawmakers". Sideloading, or "simply installing" from an APK, is a different procedure that involves mostly disabling the trust and certification features that your app store was providing. I have never needed to do this for any app on any Android device, and I've owned them since KitKat.In fact, I will probably enable S-mode on my next Windows machine, because it's that easy to just avoid 3rd party apps and crapware.So I don't know why people want to muddy the waters. You literally want to stamp out a differentiating term "because it's scary". Don't users and vendors have a right to call a thing what it is, or use different terms for different procedures?It seems absolutely nuts to try and censor this word, because y'all believe it was foisted on you by "lawmakers". In fact, I will probably enable S-mode on my next Windows machine, because it's that easy to just avoid 3rd party apps and crapware.So I don't know why people want to muddy the waters. You literally want to stamp out a differentiating term "because it's scary". Don't users and vendors have a right to call a thing what it is, or use different terms for different procedures?It seems absolutely nuts to try and censor this word, because y'all believe it was foisted on you by "lawmakers". So I don't know why people want to muddy the waters. You literally want to stamp out a differentiating term "because it's scary". Don't users and vendors have a right to call a thing what it is, or use different terms for different procedures?It seems absolutely nuts to try and censor this word, because y'all believe it was foisted on you by "lawmakers". It seems absolutely nuts to try and censor this word, because y'all believe it was foisted on you by "lawmakers". Note that the term sideloading is exclusively used by mobile OSes. On Windows MacOS and Linux you can install anything. Windows SmartScreen will also give you trouble by blocking unsigned apps.So yeah, you can bypass these protective measures and "install whatever you want" ultimately, but it is basically the same process as sideloading on Android, isn't it? You don't got jack shit with your "trust" of Termux and Kodi. It means nothing to the end-user.We do not work in "trust me bro" territory when it comes to signing software, anymore. It is very important to have a chain of trust that goes up somewhere above "goldenarm @ HN". So yeah, you can bypass these protective measures and "install whatever you want" ultimately, but it is basically the same process as sideloading on Android, isn't it? You don't got jack shit with your "trust" of Termux and Kodi. It means nothing to the end-user.We do not work in "trust me bro" territory when it comes to signing software, anymore. It is very important to have a chain of trust that goes up somewhere above "goldenarm @ HN". Your trust, honestly, doesn't mean jack shit. You don't got jack shit with your "trust" of Termux and Kodi. It means nothing to the end-user.We do not work in "trust me bro" territory when it comes to signing software, anymore. It is very important to have a chain of trust that goes up somewhere above "goldenarm @ HN". We do not work in "trust me bro" territory when it comes to signing software, anymore. It is very important to have a chain of trust that goes up somewhere above "goldenarm @ HN". Now you understand that actual trust comes in degrees, right? There are plenty of different types of trust relationships between me and the Play Store and the devs who put their apps on it.But cryptographically, cybersecurity-wise, we need that CIA triad, and we need to authenticate that developers are who they say they are. And that authentication is the crux of cryptographic code signing. That's how cryptographic signing establishes trust relationships for computers.If your computer doesn't trust an app or a driver, it won't download, install or run it. Since you cannot teach a computer "actual trust" there must be an analogue to this. I don't know what you're on about "opposite to actual trust". But cryptographically, cybersecurity-wise, we need that CIA triad, and we need to authenticate that developers are who they say they are. And that authentication is the crux of cryptographic code signing. That's how cryptographic signing establishes trust relationships for computers.If your computer doesn't trust an app or a driver, it won't download, install or run it. Since you cannot teach a computer "actual trust" there must be an analogue to this. I don't know what you're on about "opposite to actual trust". If your computer doesn't trust an app or a driver, it won't download, install or run it. Since you cannot teach a computer "actual trust" there must be an analogue to this. I don't know what you're on about "opposite to actual trust". > If you don't trust Google Play, that's a you problem.When your lack of understanding is called out you devolve into rambling self-contradiction.Two me, should I trust this app, that has “cryptography “ “security vetting “ “authentication” “scans” “code signing” etc on an App Store that you are praising ?https://apps.apple.com/us/app/termux/id6738933789 When your lack of understanding is called out you devolve into rambling self-contradiction.Two me, should I trust this app, that has “cryptography “ “security vetting “ “authentication” “scans” “code signing” etc on an App Store that you are praising ?https://apps.apple.com/us/app/termux/id6738933789 Two me, should I trust this app, that has “cryptography “ “security vetting “ “authentication” “scans” “code signing” etc on an App Store that you are praising ?https://apps.apple.com/us/app/termux/id6738933789 If you so deeply believe in giving up user freedom and delegating control to authority maybe you are at the wrong place here, check the title of this website: "Hacker News".... Like, I have no idea why "sideloading" is supposed to be scary. It's no more scary than "uploading" or "downloading" really. Is user awareness and preparedness a problem for y'all? Is user awareness and preparedness a problem for y'all? Is user awareness and preparedness a problem for y'all? So if you want to have a conversation about trusting curl and bash and random gists...Like I said, I installed software in many ways back in the day. One common denominator was loading from trusted sources. This is still a good way to get infected.When I get on a friend's computer, I often have occasion to congratulate them for being uninfected, and it's nearly always because they "practiced good hygiene" in terms of loading only trusted software from trusted sources.So you're correct, in that really nothing has changed. Back in 1983 you could certainly "sideload" crap from a pirate BBS and then suffer the consequences. And we all had choice words for people like that. This is still a good way to get infected.When I get on a friend's computer, I often have occasion to congratulate them for being uninfected, and it's nearly always because they "practiced good hygiene" in terms of loading only trusted software from trusted sources.So you're correct, in that really nothing has changed. Back in 1983 you could certainly "sideload" crap from a pirate BBS and then suffer the consequences. And we all had choice words for people like that. This is still a good way to get infected.When I get on a friend's computer, I often have occasion to congratulate them for being uninfected, and it's nearly always because they "practiced good hygiene" in terms of loading only trusted software from trusted sources.So you're correct, in that really nothing has changed. Back in 1983 you could certainly "sideload" crap from a pirate BBS and then suffer the consequences. And we all had choice words for people like that. When I get on a friend's computer, I often have occasion to congratulate them for being uninfected, and it's nearly always because they "practiced good hygiene" in terms of loading only trusted software from trusted sources.So you're correct, in that really nothing has changed. Back in 1983 you could certainly "sideload" crap from a pirate BBS and then suffer the consequences. And we all had choice words for people like that. So you're correct, in that really nothing has changed. Back in 1983 you could certainly "sideload" crap from a pirate BBS and then suffer the consequences. And we all had choice words for people like that. If there are Android apps which you can't do without, they can be emulated and used anyway. Imagine switching to Linux and then using Wine for the apps you really still need.Yes, it's not perfect but Linux isn't either. Find a cheap second hand supported device and play around, make some fun apps. (devices currently supported: https://devices.ubuntu-touch.io/ )To me it's like being back when there was only Windows and Macs as viable home computer OS, and people were getting their feet wet with Linux and all its flavours. If there are Android apps which you can't do without, they can be emulated and used anyway. Imagine switching to Linux and then using Wine for the apps you really still need.Yes, it's not perfect but Linux isn't either. Find a cheap second hand supported device and play around, make some fun apps. (devices currently supported: https://devices.ubuntu-touch.io/ )To me it's like being back when there was only Windows and Macs as viable home computer OS, and people were getting their feet wet with Linux and all its flavours. Yes, it's not perfect but Linux isn't either. Find a cheap second hand supported device and play around, make some fun apps. (devices currently supported: https://devices.ubuntu-touch.io/ )To me it's like being back when there was only Windows and Macs as viable home computer OS, and people were getting their feet wet with Linux and all its flavours. It already has a built in Android VM that allows seamless FDroid and Aurora Store usage.Since FuriOS is a based Debian distro, it should be reduced friction to use PostmarketOS or UbuntuTouch. Since FuriOS is a based Debian distro, it should be reduced friction to use PostmarketOS or UbuntuTouch. PinePhone is abandoned, Purism just isn't a finished product, Planet Computers doesn't even build a phone with Linux support anymore.The only thing that's current and active I've seen is a Hong Kong startup https://furilabs.com/. I've got one on my desk to try, hoping it will be something usable as a daily driver. The only thing that's current and active I've seen is a Hong Kong startup https://furilabs.com/. I've got one on my desk to try, hoping it will be something usable as a daily driver. So you need some way to run Android apps... which is totally possible, but at that point why not just use Android? > So you need some way to run Android apps... which is totally possible, but at that point why not just use Android?Perhaps for reasons like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26639261 Rinse and repeat.This is how Windows Phone was wiped out, despite them spending *a lot* of money trying to attract companies and developers to write stuff for their OS. This is how Windows Phone was wiped out, despite them spending *a lot* of money trying to attract companies and developers to write stuff for their OS. No experience, but if they lock out Android I probably will. Were it not for that, I would never have stopped using Huawei, IMO the best phone brand by a mile. Then keep a "real" second device for everything else. Up to you which one gets the SIM card and provides connectivity for the other (and ordinary phone services).I'd rather go back to old-fashioned hardware dongles from banks – but hey, lacking that, maybe I'll just think of the first of those two devices as a clunky, overly expensive one of those. I'd rather go back to old-fashioned hardware dongles from banks – but hey, lacking that, maybe I'll just think of the first of those two devices as a clunky, overly expensive one of those. (I do get the odd look when I take out my second phone to do something else in public and questions about it :)) It make some things that should be easy on Linux harder. I.e., there's no Firefox + mobile tweaks like other linux mobile OSes, in part because it wants you to use Morphic.But other linux mobile OSes dropped support for Halium/libhybris and even the very few that still have it don't seem to match Ubuntu Touch's level of hardware support. But other linux mobile OSes dropped support for Halium/libhybris and even the very few that still have it don't seem to match Ubuntu Touch's level of hardware support. Unlike Ubuntu Touch, they allow you to run ordinary Linux desktop apps. But to your point specifically, Play store and App Store have APIs to rate from within the app: when the pop up shows, app author does not have an option to avoid getting a 1-star rating (they are also time-restricted, eg. at most once every 180 days for Apple IIRC).What devs do though, is to preempt it with "Are you enjoying our app? What devs do though, is to preempt it with "Are you enjoying our app? It's OK now that Epic can have a one-click download for Fortnite to shove all the friction back into the sideloading experience. I think one of the reasons they want to lockdown the system is to prevent guys like me from locking THEM out of my home/ecosystems, as and example, I build my own launchers, specifically for TCL TV's, which runs Android TV and has Developer Mode + adb. Which means I remove all the bloat & ad garbage, which they want to prevent.We will get to the point where google will remove your ability to set custom dns servers and only use theirs.. just wait & see friends.Anywhoo, when this side loading fence materializes, I will jump ship to apple. We will get to the point where google will remove your ability to set custom dns servers and only use theirs.. just wait & see friends.Anywhoo, when this side loading fence materializes, I will jump ship to apple. Anywhoo, when this side loading fence materializes, I will jump ship to apple. I don't see Apple as the obvious next step; the obvious step, when one is pissed off with abuse of power is open source, not Apple. There are five options in my country, 3 of which require app push based 2FA to log into the web interface and 2 of which only have an app interfere.Maybe I could get a EU bank from another EU country but my employer will not accept an out of country account for salary deposits because it makes their tax life difficult and my mortgage provider doesn't trust foreign accounts either.> It's called a debit/credit cardSince about two years ago, activating a card requires the app. Maybe I could get a EU bank from another EU country but my employer will not accept an out of country account for salary deposits because it makes their tax life difficult and my mortgage provider doesn't trust foreign accounts either.> It's called a debit/credit cardSince about two years ago, activating a card requires the app. Since about two years ago, activating a card requires the app. All IBANs, no matter from which member country, must be treated equally. The European commission recommends filing a complaint with your national governing body. (I had a Credit Union account in the past, could send/receive online but no payment card)(I don't know their suitability, but there are more than 5 options in your country) (I don't know their suitability, but there are more than 5 options in your country) Also on that Wikipedia page are Dell's private bank, Danske Bank (closed their Irish retail business in 2013), Klarna (sort of banking-adjacent, but they're not giving you a current account), etc.The 5 banks offering retail consumer accounts nationwide are AIB, permanent TSB, Bank of Ireland, Revolut and N26. The one credit union who's catchment area I'm in also requires app based 2FA. Most people will also accept Republic of Ireland if you need to distinguish from Northern Ireland, even though that's technically not the name) The 5 banks offering retail consumer accounts nationwide are AIB, permanent TSB, Bank of Ireland, Revolut and N26. The one credit union who's catchment area I'm in also requires app based 2FA. Most people will also accept Republic of Ireland if you need to distinguish from Northern Ireland, even though that's technically not the name) Credit unions are limited to serving customers in their local area. The one credit union who's catchment area I'm in also requires app based 2FA. Most people will also accept Republic of Ireland if you need to distinguish from Northern Ireland, even though that's technically not the name) Most people will also accept Republic of Ireland if you need to distinguish from Northern Ireland, even though that's technically not the name) Most people will also accept Republic of Ireland if you need to distinguish from Northern Ireland, even though that's technically not the name) iOS doesn't have the F-Droid ecosystem equivalent, but she F-Droid dies because of Google, there's a chance AltStore will be able to take its place. Who on earth wants popup ads in Chrome installing shit? Designing a product so that almost all of it's intended users can operate it safely seems like the right decision. I guess if you take the old saying extremely literally, you could conclude that every fool is guaranteed to be parted with 100% of their lifetime available money regardless of what anyone else tries to do to stop that, but that's not true – and why old sayings (with a respectable 75% of the words right) taken literally aren't a good basis for decision-making. I'm sick and tired of all the apps/websites that mandate 2fa. All of that adds friction when I'm a big boy who knows how to choose secure passwords. For that matter, why even invest resources into fraud detection or law enforcement? All of that money is coming out of somewhere, and why should my tax dollars go toward catching fake nigerian princes when it's just helping idiots anyways?/s > That explanation broadly matches what we're seeing in recent versions of Google Play, where new warning messages emphasize developer verification, internet requirements, and potential risks, while still allowing users to proceed. And... What about accountability for hosting distributing spyware, malware loaded apps from Google Playstore and hundreds of copy cat, misleading apps?Why can't they pose a question when the phone is setup?- Yes, I want to sideload- No I dont wantIf the user says NO then to later enable it to allow sideload Yes, the user needs to factory reset phone. The rules don't apply to billion dollar corporations. The Playstore is filled with malware that pretend to be a different app. I have twice now had to recover the devices of family members when they installed malware on Samsung phones running up to date firmware.That malware to this level is even possible is another matter. I decided to Google the company after a few days. I was immediately confronted by thousands of reports by angry users, complaining about how after they tried the app, they got locked into a yearly subscription at exorbitant prices and it was impossible to cancel. The company itself is registered in some offshore tax haven.They used to scare us, that if we went to those shady pirate websites, somebody would steal our credit cards and steal our money. They used to scare us, that if we went to those shady pirate websites, somebody would steal our credit cards and steal our money. For Google everything is about protecting revenue, even when doing so exposes their users to real harm, and that's why they will not address the issue of copycat apps, poor practices on play store security or anything else that lowers the number of downloads on apps on play store. But, heaven forbid, I want to download an app that doesn't create revenue for them onto a phone I OWN, Google spends money lavishly.The Internet cranks are right. Like if it was "you need to do the developer 7-tap of the version label in settings", it'd be like "whatever". But given how long this process has taken, I suspect that is not what they've planned - it wouldn't take this long to develop, it certainly wouldn't take this long to explain.So I suspect that we're actually in the "Maybe Later" phase of "Google wants to control which apps you install: [ ] Yes [ ] Maybe Later". And I mean, if their proposed solution turns out to be "Me and 25 of my closest friends can install apps I make by phoning home to Google servers", then like, I can do that on iOS too. And if I'm not going to have meaningfully more control of my Android device, I may as well just go to iOS where Apple at least have a better privacy record and don't seem to have have an all-encompassing goal of "where can we put AI features to drive AI usage metrics up the most?" So I suspect that we're actually in the "Maybe Later" phase of "Google wants to control which apps you install: [ ] Yes [ ] Maybe Later". And I mean, if their proposed solution turns out to be "Me and 25 of my closest friends can install apps I make by phoning home to Google servers", then like, I can do that on iOS too. And if I'm not going to have meaningfully more control of my Android device, I may as well just go to iOS where Apple at least have a better privacy record and don't seem to have have an all-encompassing goal of "where can we put AI features to drive AI usage metrics up the most?" I am hoping that in about 6-8 years (when I realistically need to update) the landscape might be a bit better. Apps the rely on attestation do not work, but honestly it's only two applications out of hundreds so I can live with it.I also financially support GrapheneOS on a monthly basis (15$). This is just too important of an project not to. So far I have not had a single issues with it. Apps the rely on attestation do not work, but honestly it's only two applications out of hundreds so I can live with it.I also financially support GrapheneOS on a monthly basis (15$). This is just too important of an project not to. I also financially support GrapheneOS on a monthly basis (15$). This is just too important of an project not to. This is only an issue for Google compliant Android so projects like LineageOS will be fine. Depending on their implementation, this may even just be restricted to AOSP with Samsung and others just ignoring the extra restrictions.But, if they make compliance a requirement for being part of their parent programme, GrapheneOS will be in a tough spot. But, if they make compliance a requirement for being part of their parent programme, GrapheneOS will be in a tough spot. However, it all makes sense from the perspective of Graphene not attempting to be a general purpose OS like Lineage, but explicitly a security focused OS. Security is often in conflict with what the average consumer wants, and they can go use Lineage or whatever.It's like writing lots of comments complaining about OpenBSD devs coming across as grumpy and refusing to support Bluetooth. You're just not the target audience and that is okay. It's like writing lots of comments complaining about OpenBSD devs coming across as grumpy and refusing to support Bluetooth. You're just not the target audience and that is okay. Nothing is open about GrapheneOS aside from the source code. We officially know nothing about the leadership, their current plans, what their finances look like or even who this new mysterious OEM is.It's weird. Europe is a continent, with many disparate nations and cultures. This continent is not hostile towards Graphene users.In Europe there is the European Union (EU), which also is comprised of many disparate nations and cultures but a subset of those comprising Europe.I say the following as a staunch supporter of European integration and cooperation:The EU is actively hostile towards any software with the stated goal of safeguarding users right to privacy and security. That means GrapheneOS but also Signal, Matrix and more.edit: spelling & grammar In Europe there is the European Union (EU), which also is comprised of many disparate nations and cultures but a subset of those comprising Europe.I say the following as a staunch supporter of European integration and cooperation:The EU is actively hostile towards any software with the stated goal of safeguarding users right to privacy and security. That means GrapheneOS but also Signal, Matrix and more.edit: spelling & grammar I say the following as a staunch supporter of European integration and cooperation:The EU is actively hostile towards any software with the stated goal of safeguarding users right to privacy and security. That means GrapheneOS but also Signal, Matrix and more.edit: spelling & grammar The EU is actively hostile towards any software with the stated goal of safeguarding users right to privacy and security. That means GrapheneOS but also Signal, Matrix and more.edit: spelling & grammar I imagine the text of the article is fine, but I'm a little bit disappointed that Android Authority chose to lead with that image and caption and make it seem that this is what the future flow would look like. These polities are prime targets for Android cyber fraud of this sort due to Android penetration, and seemingly (to me) also cultural proximity to scam operators, and tech-illiteracy among the vulnerable demographic. (And anticipating a reply I got from a previous article on my comment on this feature---no, it's just not feasible to comprehensively educate retirees against evolving tactics by scam operators and expect that to be a sufficient sole countermeasure.) These polities are prime targets for Android cyber fraud of this sort due to Android penetration, and seemingly (to me) also cultural proximity to scam operators, and tech-illiteracy among the vulnerable demographic. (And anticipating a reply I got from a previous article on my comment on this feature---no, it's just not feasible to comprehensively educate retirees against evolving tactics by scam operators and expect that to be a sufficient sole countermeasure.) https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/google-android-dev...Of course, HN reaction has always been skeptical about this including in earlier news. These polities are prime targets for Android cyber fraud of this sort due to Android penetration, and seemingly (to me) also cultural proximity to scam operators, and tech-illiteracy among the vulnerable demographic. (And anticipating a reply I got from a previous article on my comment on this feature---no, it's just not feasible to comprehensively educate retirees against evolving tactics by scam operators and expect that to be a sufficient sole countermeasure.) Of course, HN reaction has always been skeptical about this including in earlier news. These polities are prime targets for Android cyber fraud of this sort due to Android penetration, and seemingly (to me) also cultural proximity to scam operators, and tech-illiteracy among the vulnerable demographic. (And anticipating a reply I got from a previous article on my comment on this feature---no, it's just not feasible to comprehensively educate retirees against evolving tactics by scam operators and expect that to be a sufficient sole countermeasure.) It's also not a surprise that banks/industry that's accountable to recover the losses for tricked customers is looking to someone else to solve it for them.However, if this was "piloted", do we have the numbers of how much has it decreased the number of scams or their impact?I wouldn't go as far as to say that it is impossible to "educate the public", but it is indeed extremely hard. However, if this was "piloted", do we have the numbers of how much has it decreased the number of scams or their impact?I wouldn't go as far as to say that it is impossible to "educate the public", but it is indeed extremely hard. I wouldn't go as far as to say that it is impossible to "educate the public", but it is indeed extremely hard. However, Google is choosing to extend these changes worldwide. People in Asia and Brazil may vote for idiots who will shift the blame for their citizens' lack of basic digital education onto others, but that doesn't mean that countries where this type of fraud barely exists should also be subject to these extreme measures. But of course, I have that in a separate Android box, so I'm not forced to update to a new OS when replacing a TV (as I just did this week). When Google inquired in court how that could be if Apple doesn't even allow any form of side-loading, including other app stores (which Google does allow)The judge said, I shit you not, Apple doesn't have any competitors on their platform, therefore they can't be anti-competitive.Probably one of the worst most off the rails rulings ever. Or maybe the risks of monopolies and monocultures in computing. The same reason I use Linux for 25 years (not ideological, but it just makes most sense by far). The Apple/Google OS duopoly exists by design, they view bootloader unlocking and sideloading as threats because they break that controlThey want to be able to define and/or revoke your existence in the systemNo escape, because no alternative 1) a .apk that was not developer-verified2) without informing Google of this Apple already offers digital ID in some states. Google needs to be able to do the same thing.Age verification laws for online services will actually require something like a digital ID and Apple and Google want to be the providers. Age verification laws for online services will actually require something like a digital ID and Apple and Google want to be the providers. During the APK install, however, you do see the ugly Android prompt about how this app may be dangerous.Rustore has its own app payment system, which obviously circumvents Google Play fees.This works on regular Android phones.Are there other examples of such stores? Rustore has its own app payment system, which obviously circumvents Google Play fees.This works on regular Android phones.Are there other examples of such stores? This works on regular Android phones.Are there other examples of such stores? But one difference is Rustore actually has payments and subscriptions, which hurts Google more. If a company has a way to pay (by having another business entity in another country), then it probably works. In general, though, "sideloading" also refers to any "non-app-store" installation. "Sideloading" refers to data transfer between two local, peer devices. That's not really "sideloading" if you think about it, because it's just "loading" from peripheral storage.Later, when people dialed up on a PC, they could "download" software and then install it or do whatever with other data or media. This was not, at the time, called "sideloading" but just transfer, or "null modem", or "sneakernet", or "a station wagon full of backup tapes".If we're going to use "sideloading" in the strictest sense, then we cannot actually refer to the process of downloading APK files separately and then installing them, because that's literally downloading. But that is the colloquial meaning now.Hey, if you want to coin a new term or neologism for it, by all means do so. You've got to look past the hype and F.U.D.Remember, there was a time when people considered FTP and torrenting to be dangerous or subversive. That's not really "sideloading" if you think about it, because it's just "loading" from peripheral storage.Later, when people dialed up on a PC, they could "download" software and then install it or do whatever with other data or media. This was not, at the time, called "sideloading" but just transfer, or "null modem", or "sneakernet", or "a station wagon full of backup tapes".If we're going to use "sideloading" in the strictest sense, then we cannot actually refer to the process of downloading APK files separately and then installing them, because that's literally downloading. But that is the colloquial meaning now.Hey, if you want to coin a new term or neologism for it, by all means do so. You've got to look past the hype and F.U.D.Remember, there was a time when people considered FTP and torrenting to be dangerous or subversive. Later, when people dialed up on a PC, they could "download" software and then install it or do whatever with other data or media. This was not, at the time, called "sideloading" but just transfer, or "null modem", or "sneakernet", or "a station wagon full of backup tapes".If we're going to use "sideloading" in the strictest sense, then we cannot actually refer to the process of downloading APK files separately and then installing them, because that's literally downloading. But that is the colloquial meaning now.Hey, if you want to coin a new term or neologism for it, by all means do so. You've got to look past the hype and F.U.D.Remember, there was a time when people considered FTP and torrenting to be dangerous or subversive. If we're going to use "sideloading" in the strictest sense, then we cannot actually refer to the process of downloading APK files separately and then installing them, because that's literally downloading. But that is the colloquial meaning now.Hey, if you want to coin a new term or neologism for it, by all means do so. You've got to look past the hype and F.U.D.Remember, there was a time when people considered FTP and torrenting to be dangerous or subversive. Hey, if you want to coin a new term or neologism for it, by all means do so. You've got to look past the hype and F.U.D.Remember, there was a time when people considered FTP and torrenting to be dangerous or subversive. Remember, there was a time when people considered FTP and torrenting to be dangerous or subversive. As someone from Germany, I don't want Google to nanny family members computing devices. It is completely absurd for an ad company in a surveillance state an ocean away to play IT services for everyone. This has already gone to far.Rather, there should be tools for value-aligned IT services and technically minded family members to help. Rather, there should be tools for value-aligned IT services and technically minded family members to help. All applications must be signed with a valid store key.2. Anyone can import a store key after rebooting into the bootloader (similar flow as custom roms)3. Google can maintain a list of malicious keys and reject themWhy is this better? Anyone can import a store key after rebooting into the bootloader (similar flow as custom roms)3. Google can maintain a list of malicious keys and reject themWhy is this better? Google can maintain a list of malicious keys and reject themWhy is this better? Like the amazing malicious crapware from PlayStore that they allow. Still not a big fan of it... though admittedly mostly just install stuff via brew/cask more than direct downloads as a result. ...which is so much of a complicated nuisance that most people simply give up. If this will go the way I think it will prepare to have to skip 10 things, write 3 ADB commands and submit a video of you spinning around for 30 seconds just to install your pirated game. Turning a possibility to install software outside of the app store should be about as normal as the fact you're using a laptop or desktop to install your pirated games.Yeah, you.If someone having access to "side load" an app has it to install a pirated game, then you have your OS, where you are not limited only to Apple/Amazon/Google store, simply for installing pirated software.QED :) Yeah, you.If someone having access to "side load" an app has it to install a pirated game, then you have your OS, where you are not limited only to Apple/Amazon/Google store, simply for installing pirated software.QED :) If someone having access to "side load" an app has it to install a pirated game, then you have your OS, where you are not limited only to Apple/Amazon/Google store, simply for installing pirated software.QED :) Most people should give up.The number of legitimate unsigned apps for MacOS that your grandparents should frictionlessly one-click-to-install is essentially nil.Meanwhile, they're receiving countless bullying demands a day to install keyloggers and drain their bank accounts.The threat model tradeoffs are clear. The number of legitimate unsigned apps for MacOS that your grandparents should frictionlessly one-click-to-install is essentially nil.Meanwhile, they're receiving countless bullying demands a day to install keyloggers and drain their bank accounts.The threat model tradeoffs are clear. Meanwhile, they're receiving countless bullying demands a day to install keyloggers and drain their bank accounts.The threat model tradeoffs are clear.

Several years ago I was at one of the Berkley AMP Lab retreats at Asilomar, and as I was hanging out, I couldn't figure how I know this person in front of me, until an hour later when I saw his name during a panel :)).It was always the network. And David Patterson, after RISC, started working on iRAM, that was tackling a related problem.NVIDIA bought Mellanox/Infiniband, but Google has historically excelled at networking, and the TPU seems to be designed to scale out in the best possible way. And David Patterson, after RISC, started working on iRAM, that was tackling a related problem.NVIDIA bought Mellanox/Infiniband, but Google has historically excelled at networking, and the TPU seems to be designed to scale out in the best possible way. NVIDIA bought Mellanox/Infiniband, but Google has historically excelled at networking, and the TPU seems to be designed to scale out in the best possible way. Or is it not possible to make the algorithms parallel to this degree?Edit: apparently this is called "compute-in-memory" High Bandwidth Flash (HBF) got submitted 6 hours ago! The idea of having Processing Near HBF, spread out, perhaps in mixed 3d design, would be not at all surprising to me. One of the main challenges for HBF is building improved vias, improved stacking, and if that tech advanced the idea of more mixed NAND and compute layers rather than just NAND stacks perhaps opens up too.This is all really exciting possible next steps. The idea of having Processing Near HBF, spread out, perhaps in mixed 3d design, would be not at all surprising to me. One of the main challenges for HBF is building improved vias, improved stacking, and if that tech advanced the idea of more mixed NAND and compute layers rather than just NAND stacks perhaps opens up too.This is all really exciting possible next steps. This is all really exciting possible next steps. Or maybe that is not an issue in some applications? Development systems for AI inference tend to be smaller by necessity. There's just nothing bigger than what you'd actually deploy to.

Pretti was an American citizen and a registered nurse who worked in the Department of Veterans Affairs, according to a colleague who spoke to the Guardian. Pretti's killing comes 17 days after Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Jonathan Ross shot Renee Nicole Good, a mother of three. Minneapolis police chief Brian O'Hara said during a press conference on Saturday that information about what had led up to Pretti's fatal confrontation was limited, but at a separate press conference, Greg Bovino, the Border Patrol commander overseeing federal operations in Minneapolis, claimed to have a full assessment of what had taken place. He claimed the man had two loaded magazines and lacked identification, and alleged that Pretti intended to “massacre law enforcement,” while the Border Patrol agent who killed Pretti, he said, had extensive training. The Department of Homeland Security reiterated Bovino's claims in a post on X that has been viewed over 17 million times at the time of publication, and the narrative was carried unquestioningly by right-wing outlets, like the Post Millenial, which published a story headlined: “Armed agitator Alex Pretti appeared to want 'maximum damage' and to 'massacre' law enforcement when shot by BP in Minnesota.” Key portions of these claims are contradicted by publicly available evidence. On Truth Social, President Donald Trump weighed in to blame Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. Vice President JD Vance backed up Trump's criticism of local leadership, sharing a screenshot of the president's Truth Social post and writing on X: “When I visited Minnesota, what the ICE agents wanted more than anything was to work with local law enforcement so that situations on the ground didn't get out of hand. The local leadership in Minnesota has so far refused to answer those requests.” Walz, in a press conference, referred to the federal narrative as “nonsense.” Nick Sortor, one of a group of right-wing influencers camped out in Minneapolis to cover ICE's campaign there, falsely referred to Pretti as an “illegal alien” and added that he “was armed with a gun and attempted to PULL IT on agents as he was being apprehended.” Pretti was a US citizen and born in Illinois, according to family members, who had no criminal record. Quoting a video of the shooting, Jack Posobiec, a right-wing influencer with close ties to the White House, wrote on X: “It is most certainly illegal to disrupt federal law enforcement operations and doing so while armed is not only unlawful, it is a good way to get shot.” While right-wing podcaster Tim Pool labeled Pretti “a radicalized leftist” in a post on X without providing any evidence, he also disagreed with Bovino's claim about killing multiple law enforcement officers: “There's no reason to think he was trying to massacre LEOs,” Pool wrote, referring to law enforcement officers. I believe that we have the right to remove any and all people who entered our country illegally,” Smith wrote. A bunch of pussies, drunk on power going around intentionally escalating violent interactions and intimidating US citizens.” In your inbox: Maxwell Zeff's dispatch from the heart of AI

No matter how we look at it, EVs are much friendlier and safer to the environment. Some people argue the source of electricty can be contested against because that involves fossil fuel burning again, but in today's world we are rapidly moving away from it and towards nuclear/hydel/wind methods for generating power.I hope ICE cars completely become a thing of the past in the next couple of decades to come. Some putting off soot clouds, white smoke, nothing visible but clearly not doing complete combustion. Sometimes I wonder if half the cylinders are even working.I've heard one car like that is the equivalent of a surprisingly large number of modern ICE cars is in good shape.I love EVs. But I think the “are new EVs worse than new ICE” discussions so often miss a fact.The pollution from ICE isn't just from very modern well tuned vehicles, things vary wildly. But all EVs use the same power supply (assuming local grid only), so no individual vehicles put off 10x the pollution per kWh. I've heard one car like that is the equivalent of a surprisingly large number of modern ICE cars is in good shape.I love EVs. But I think the “are new EVs worse than new ICE” discussions so often miss a fact.The pollution from ICE isn't just from very modern well tuned vehicles, things vary wildly. But all EVs use the same power supply (assuming local grid only), so no individual vehicles put off 10x the pollution per kWh. But I think the “are new EVs worse than new ICE” discussions so often miss a fact.The pollution from ICE isn't just from very modern well tuned vehicles, things vary wildly. But all EVs use the same power supply (assuming local grid only), so no individual vehicles put off 10x the pollution per kWh. But all EVs use the same power supply (assuming local grid only), so no individual vehicles put off 10x the pollution per kWh. Reminds me of how I didn't really notice cigarettes until they were banned from public spaces and the base level of normal was recalibrated. You can smell these cars from halfway up the road sometimes, when they're 100 metres ahead. One good thing about driving an EV is that weird oil or hot coolant smells are from someone else's car (and not a problem with your car)(although yes technically many EVs have coolant loops) (although yes technically many EVs have coolant loops) "They were driving with a 10 gallon coolant tank on the roof, presumably because the coolant loop had a big leak and needed continuous topping up". There just simply aren't that many things to burn or leak and still have a functioning vehicle. There are also lower ongoing costs for maintenance and fuel.There is still the secondary wealth filter of having a place to park and charge, of course. Second, places with high touch governments already lose out on business due to registration arbitrage. In the neighbourhood I live, there's a guy who visits someone here several times per week. Some day that guy is going to rear-end my car and break my neck because his brake lines finally gave out.Also, the compulsory car inspections only work for honest people. Some day that guy is going to rear-end my car and break my neck because his brake lines finally gave out.Also, the compulsory car inspections only work for honest people. Also, the compulsory car inspections only work for honest people. EDIT to add: They made a law recently that the inspector has to take a photo of the car inside the inspection centre, because there was so much fraud happening with vehicles just being "inspected" on paper. all GM cars, or all cars with a Bosche ECU - there won't be awful lot of work making it compatible with hundreds of models of car.Such devices already exist for faking data for engine tuning, and for faking 'zero faults, all monitors pass' to pass government tests. all GM cars, or all cars with a Bosche ECU - there won't be awful lot of work making it compatible with hundreds of models of car.Such devices already exist for faking data for engine tuning, and for faking 'zero faults, all monitors pass' to pass government tests. And then things like battery temperature warnings will quickly turn into real failures.And then the next generation or 2 of stuff is going to at least attempt to implement cybersecurity features that greatly complicate tampering at the message level. And then the next generation or 2 of stuff is going to at least attempt to implement cybersecurity features that greatly complicate tampering at the message level. It's more ‘I could have replaced a few cells in my battery pack, but the car bricked itself when I opened the pack! Notably many recent ICE cars aren't much better. Regardless, there's nothing cleaner than no combustion, and I can't wait until EV‘s have replaced them all Here's a bunch of those surveys: https://evcentral.com.au/which-is-best-for-the-environment-e...Keen to hear your expert opinion on what (eg) the International Energy Agency got wrong. Keen to hear your expert opinion on what (eg) the International Energy Agency got wrong. Most start stop systems will disable themselves when the heater of the car is turned ON and the car engine not hot enough yet.As a cyclist (or motorbike owner), it is pretty usual in city to have >50% cars with engines ON at traffic light in cities when temperature are low. As a cyclist (or motorbike owner), it is pretty usual in city to have >50% cars with engines ON at traffic light in cities when temperature are low. Also at some point they will start their engines again. You've got the added bonus that you don't need to strip-mine huge chunks of Africa for precious metals, too. Could be coolant, but "coolant into engine" failure modes are generally rare and are usually the kind of thing that needs to get fixed promptly. I should note the power increase may not have a major impact on newer cars where the cat has been optimized to reduce it's negative power impact.Infact a popular tuner company, APR, that provides flashes tested the recent Volkswagen GTI and R generation with their most common tune and determined that with their tune removing the cat had a nominal impact. There are cars where it still has some impact and of course, different from power ,"straight piping" a car can offer a subjective sound change. Infact a popular tuner company, APR, that provides flashes tested the recent Volkswagen GTI and R generation with their most common tune and determined that with their tune removing the cat had a nominal impact. There are cars where it still has some impact and of course, different from power ,"straight piping" a car can offer a subjective sound change. There are cars where it still has some impact and of course, different from power ,"straight piping" a car can offer a subjective sound change. > Blown gaskets on ICE engines like E25s leak both oil AND coolant, no?This is way, way too broad of a statement. When they have head gasket problems it tends to be combustion gas into coolant which blows the coolant out the expansion tank until equilibrium is reached. Many V engines have intake gaskets that can leak coolant into the intake or oil or both.Regardless, if you can taste coolant in the exhaust the car is basically at the point of "fix it now"> I might be mixing up blown heads with cracked manifolds which often go hand in hand since temp extremes in engines fissure cast parts like the manifold.A sizable minority of cars don't even use cast manifolds anymore. While it's possible for cast manifolds to crack in a way that makes them leak that's rare and it's more common for them to crack their mounting tabs off. Steel exhaust tubing can and does sometimes break after many years of vibration, say nothing of rust.While cylinder heads can crack it usually takes the kind of overheating that requires major work to fix in order to make it happen so just about nobody is driving around with a cracked head. When they have head gasket problems it tends to be combustion gas into coolant which blows the coolant out the expansion tank until equilibrium is reached. Many V engines have intake gaskets that can leak coolant into the intake or oil or both.Regardless, if you can taste coolant in the exhaust the car is basically at the point of "fix it now"> I might be mixing up blown heads with cracked manifolds which often go hand in hand since temp extremes in engines fissure cast parts like the manifold.A sizable minority of cars don't even use cast manifolds anymore. While it's possible for cast manifolds to crack in a way that makes them leak that's rare and it's more common for them to crack their mounting tabs off. Steel exhaust tubing can and does sometimes break after many years of vibration, say nothing of rust.While cylinder heads can crack it usually takes the kind of overheating that requires major work to fix in order to make it happen so just about nobody is driving around with a cracked head. Regardless, if you can taste coolant in the exhaust the car is basically at the point of "fix it now"> I might be mixing up blown heads with cracked manifolds which often go hand in hand since temp extremes in engines fissure cast parts like the manifold.A sizable minority of cars don't even use cast manifolds anymore. While it's possible for cast manifolds to crack in a way that makes them leak that's rare and it's more common for them to crack their mounting tabs off. Steel exhaust tubing can and does sometimes break after many years of vibration, say nothing of rust.While cylinder heads can crack it usually takes the kind of overheating that requires major work to fix in order to make it happen so just about nobody is driving around with a cracked head. > I might be mixing up blown heads with cracked manifolds which often go hand in hand since temp extremes in engines fissure cast parts like the manifold.A sizable minority of cars don't even use cast manifolds anymore. While it's possible for cast manifolds to crack in a way that makes them leak that's rare and it's more common for them to crack their mounting tabs off. Steel exhaust tubing can and does sometimes break after many years of vibration, say nothing of rust.While cylinder heads can crack it usually takes the kind of overheating that requires major work to fix in order to make it happen so just about nobody is driving around with a cracked head. A sizable minority of cars don't even use cast manifolds anymore. While it's possible for cast manifolds to crack in a way that makes them leak that's rare and it's more common for them to crack their mounting tabs off. Steel exhaust tubing can and does sometimes break after many years of vibration, say nothing of rust.While cylinder heads can crack it usually takes the kind of overheating that requires major work to fix in order to make it happen so just about nobody is driving around with a cracked head. While cylinder heads can crack it usually takes the kind of overheating that requires major work to fix in order to make it happen so just about nobody is driving around with a cracked head. All in all, a well tuned ICE is better for everyone than a poorly tuned one, if you had to pick between the two. How do we even allow selling cars without HEPA filters. One of the reasons I wrote the comment above is because my filter has worn out and needs replacing, so all of a sudden I can smell all this nonsense again.1000% with the money. This is why forklift trucks and Zambonis run on propane instead of petrol or diesel. If you burn gas, you get no carbon monoxide or unburnt fuel because it runs ever so slightly lean and all the fuel is burnt.This means keeping the air clear is just a case of getting rid of carbon dioxide and water, so you can open some vents (warehouses have great big vents, big enough for trucks to drive in and out...) and let the place air out. This means keeping the air clear is just a case of getting rid of carbon dioxide and water, so you can open some vents (warehouses have great big vents, big enough for trucks to drive in and out...) and let the place air out. (Edited to add) Hmm actually people are already doing LPG conversions today as it's cheaper. Not sure if all LPGs are as pollution free, though. You can get ones with a complete set of LPG injectors and an ECU that takes its timing from the petrol injectors, and these are incredibly efficient. They're a bit harder to install (you need to drill holes in the intake manifold, it's a faff) but the engine can be mapped for even more power than on petrol and a tiny amount of pollution.There's still a lot of CO2 and water vapour, but as previously discussed you're burning all this shit anyway so you might as well extract useful work from it.The time to have done this was 25 or 30 years ago, when it was ridiculously cheap to buy gas and there were a lot of old-fashioned carburettor-fed cars that were incredibly badly polluting. There's still a lot of CO2 and water vapour, but as previously discussed you're burning all this shit anyway so you might as well extract useful work from it.The time to have done this was 25 or 30 years ago, when it was ridiculously cheap to buy gas and there were a lot of old-fashioned carburettor-fed cars that were incredibly badly polluting. The time to have done this was 25 or 30 years ago, when it was ridiculously cheap to buy gas and there were a lot of old-fashioned carburettor-fed cars that were incredibly badly polluting. They are not the legal ones: somehow people smuggle out the rockets and the flying airburst ones, and set them off in our parking lot, or very nearby.I am fairly sure that I heard authentic gunfire on NYE.My hypothesis is that the cars are deliberately making "rat-a-tat-tat" noises that sound sorta like gunfire, in order to cover or mask real gunfire, should it ever occur. That the motorists with those cars are probably gangstas who are assigned to just lay down aural cover for whatever hijinks may or may not transpire that night. There are also fireworks going off fairly often now. They are not the legal ones: somehow people smuggle out the rockets and the flying airburst ones, and set them off in our parking lot, or very nearby.I am fairly sure that I heard authentic gunfire on NYE.My hypothesis is that the cars are deliberately making "rat-a-tat-tat" noises that sound sorta like gunfire, in order to cover or mask real gunfire, should it ever occur. That the motorists with those cars are probably gangstas who are assigned to just lay down aural cover for whatever hijinks may or may not transpire that night. I am fairly sure that I heard authentic gunfire on NYE.My hypothesis is that the cars are deliberately making "rat-a-tat-tat" noises that sound sorta like gunfire, in order to cover or mask real gunfire, should it ever occur. That the motorists with those cars are probably gangstas who are assigned to just lay down aural cover for whatever hijinks may or may not transpire that night. My hypothesis is that the cars are deliberately making "rat-a-tat-tat" noises that sound sorta like gunfire, in order to cover or mask real gunfire, should it ever occur. That the motorists with those cars are probably gangstas who are assigned to just lay down aural cover for whatever hijinks may or may not transpire that night. Otherwise you may be smelling cars who have had the cats stolen. Even if it means they're burning a 1/3 of their fuel, that's still less in the short term than the $1500 it may cost to fix it.It's insanely rare I get the sense that the person is running really dirty on purpose.I don't know what a realistic fairway to fix it is. Seems like the kind of thing where a little government group to find the worst 0.1% of cars on the road and just get them back to reasonable levels would be a huge help.But that's not how we do things. Even if it means they're burning a 1/3 of their fuel, that's still less in the short term than the $1500 it may cost to fix it.It's insanely rare I get the sense that the person is running really dirty on purpose.I don't know what a realistic fairway to fix it is. Seems like the kind of thing where a little government group to find the worst 0.1% of cars on the road and just get them back to reasonable levels would be a huge help.But that's not how we do things. It's insanely rare I get the sense that the person is running really dirty on purpose.I don't know what a realistic fairway to fix it is. Seems like the kind of thing where a little government group to find the worst 0.1% of cars on the road and just get them back to reasonable levels would be a huge help.But that's not how we do things. I don't know what a realistic fairway to fix it is. Seems like the kind of thing where a little government group to find the worst 0.1% of cars on the road and just get them back to reasonable levels would be a huge help.But that's not how we do things. It's not whatever tiny bit of oil gets burned in a healthy engine. Additionally, a lot of conservatives love to "Roll coal", and literally will shit up the environment on purpose just because they feel schadenfreude from pissing of an environmentalist. Some people remove catalytic converters when they install a performance exhaust. Nobody is doing it for louder noises because the muffler portion is what dampens the sound.Also I wouldn't say it's “a lot of Americans”. We have emissions inspections in most major cities and your car won't pass if you remove the catalytic converter. Also I wouldn't say it's “a lot of Americans”. We have emissions inspections in most major cities and your car won't pass if you remove the catalytic converter. Trust me, people aren't removing the cat just to make their car annoyingly loud. > HNs lack of knowledge around cars is sort of frightening.I actually have a lot of knowledge and experience in the automotive space, including with exhaust systems!Catalytic converter removal alone doesn't have a big change exhaust tone. I have seen it first hand, and also with 100-cell and 200-cell race cats as an intermediary step.Your posts are full of condescending assumptions about Americans and HN's comments about cars, but you're ignoring the actual facts others are trying to share. I actually have a lot of knowledge and experience in the automotive space, including with exhaust systems!Catalytic converter removal alone doesn't have a big change exhaust tone. I have seen it first hand, and also with 100-cell and 200-cell race cats as an intermediary step.Your posts are full of condescending assumptions about Americans and HN's comments about cars, but you're ignoring the actual facts others are trying to share. Catalytic converter removal alone doesn't have a big change exhaust tone. I have seen it first hand, and also with 100-cell and 200-cell race cats as an intermediary step.Your posts are full of condescending assumptions about Americans and HN's comments about cars, but you're ignoring the actual facts others are trying to share. Your posts are full of condescending assumptions about Americans and HN's comments about cars, but you're ignoring the actual facts others are trying to share. You're describing your small friend group, not Americans in general. However, I do agree that there aren't enough folks "rolling coal" in aggregate to really move any needles on planet-scale environmental impacts though. I haven't noticed people removing the catalytic converters just for noise. The rare time I see a car that wants to be loud it usually just seems to be the exhaust end they changed, or maybe removed the muffler.The kind of stuff I'm complaining about mostly seems to be older cars, or those in poor mechanical shape. The kind of stuff I'm complaining about mostly seems to be older cars, or those in poor mechanical shape. Running EVs in densely populated regions is probably a lot better for the population on the whole even if the net pollution would stay the same, IMO.Still no EV is even better, but we've created a world where transport is often required so, one step at a time I guess. Still no EV is even better, but we've created a world where transport is often required so, one step at a time I guess. Further, particle emission from brake dust is mitigated in EV's that use regen braking. One of my ev's can go days without phycical brake usage, and another uses the brake pads so infrequently it has an automatic mode to touch the discs occasionally just to keep them from building up rust.tire particles --- different compounds can effect that, but will always be a side effect of tires on vehicles. Though I suppose that EVs and hybrids are heavier than similar gas powered counterparts, so tire wear is worse. But we won't, because then capitalists will make less money. So 1 out of 20 cars in California is an EV. Less commut and more collective transportation is going to be far more significant in term of global impact, whatever the engine type. "When California neighborhoods increased their number of zero-emissions vehicles"Obviously neighborhoods/cities/states didn't increase anything. It was just rich people living there buying fancy cars. Of course, this needs to be described as a great accomplishment of local government.And nowhere in the article is the obvious solution even suggested: advancing electric car technology so they're cheaper than ICE cars. And I don't mean charging extra tax while cutting public transport to make sure poor people don't go anywhere anymore, I mean fixing the technology so everyone has transport, for less money. It was just rich people living there buying fancy cars. Of course, this needs to be described as a great accomplishment of local government.And nowhere in the article is the obvious solution even suggested: advancing electric car technology so they're cheaper than ICE cars. And I don't mean charging extra tax while cutting public transport to make sure poor people don't go anywhere anymore, I mean fixing the technology so everyone has transport, for less money. And nowhere in the article is the obvious solution even suggested: advancing electric car technology so they're cheaper than ICE cars. And I don't mean charging extra tax while cutting public transport to make sure poor people don't go anywhere anymore, I mean fixing the technology so everyone has transport, for less money. Some people credit Tesla with kick starting the EV revolution. Californian governance kick started Tesla.Their EV efforts go back to the ZEV mandate in 1990. Their EV efforts go back to the ZEV mandate in 1990. Shouldn't the obvious solution be based on observable reality? I mean, this isn't even a very hard thing to model. Smart connectivity essentially comes "for free" if the manufacturer wants to hit 5 safety stars, so its not going away, and will come to ICE cars as they modernize the vehicle architectures. Yes, there are some security threats, but solving them is more valuable than trying to design a car around true firewalls. I hear people on this site complain about these things all the time. It's important to realize the reason for that.Crashes by human drivers are hugely disproportionately by people who are driving drunk or with insufficient sleep or significant distractions etc. Waymo can beat a drunk driver, and therefore can beat the human driver arithmetic mean which has the drunk drivers averaged in.That doesn't mean it's any safer than driving an ordinary car when you're not drunk. Crashes by human drivers are hugely disproportionately by people who are driving drunk or with insufficient sleep or significant distractions etc. Waymo can beat a drunk driver, and therefore can beat the human driver arithmetic mean which has the drunk drivers averaged in.That doesn't mean it's any safer than driving an ordinary car when you're not drunk. That doesn't mean it's any safer than driving an ordinary car when you're not drunk. The computerization of formerly mechanical features making it harder to DIY repair is a separate but also valid concern, though I'm not sure how it applies to EVs.Added: see https://x.com/IntCyberDigest/status/2011758140510142890 for exactly the kind of thing that nobody wants. Added: see https://x.com/IntCyberDigest/status/2011758140510142890 for exactly the kind of thing that nobody wants. Though it means connected charging via API stuff doesn't work. I was under the impression most EVs cut off the connection to the high voltage battery almost all the time they're not in use.They rely on a 12 V battery or a 48 V battery like a normal car.The only thing I'm aware of that special is that if that low voltage battery gets low enough the car will detect it and recharge it from the high voltage battery, temporarily connecting it for that purpose. They rely on a 12 V battery or a 48 V battery like a normal car.The only thing I'm aware of that special is that if that low voltage battery gets low enough the car will detect it and recharge it from the high voltage battery, temporarily connecting it for that purpose. Which leads to "fun" situations when that battery runs out, like not being able to get into your car or start it. However not much power is needed, so a tiny portable jump pack is enough to get things going.Both me and my sister has experienced this, me a Nissan Leaf and her a VW ID.4, good times. It could also result in a noticeable "vampire" drain on the high voltage battery which looks bad and could put you at a disadvantage vs. competitors. All it's connected features appear to come from Android Auto or Apple Car Play. AKA from a connection to your phone.I like the looks of it because it appears to be a serious EV unlike too many which are just some company getting their toes wet. I like the looks of it because it appears to be a serious EV unlike too many which are just some company getting their toes wet. Even a carbureted motorcycle I owned from the early 2000s had "analog" gauges with values given to it from a computer! For sure, and even earlier -- I had a 1995 Mustang with faux analog gauges, it has definitely been a Thing for decades now. Sure, however....> Plus touchscreens are much cheaper than buttons and knobs.And how much LESS safe is using a touchscreen while operating a motor vehicle? > Plus touchscreens are much cheaper than buttons and knobs.And how much LESS safe is using a touchscreen while operating a motor vehicle? You know that a backup camera can be added to practically any car right? My ~2002 Toyota has a Pioneer deck from around 2007 (I guess?) My wifes 2012 Toyota hybrid has a reversing camera using some POS cheap Chinese deck that's so shit it doesn't even support Bluetooth audio.No part of reversing cameras are dependent on any of the "modern" trends in cars that are being discussed here. No part of reversing cameras are dependent on any of the "modern" trends in cars that are being discussed here. (Battery heating is inexplicably an extra $300 option, and not available on the base trim AFAICS?) How on earth did we survive as a species before our cars could make automated phone calls? That's extreme of course but there are probably a lot of accidents that happen in low-density rural country areas or late at night when there aren't many people around. Would you also question why we have mandatory airbags and traction control? Would you also question why we have mandatory airbags and traction control? I reluctantly bought an LG with webOS (least bad option available) a couple of years ago. For some reason they weren't content to let the TV menu/remote work with up/down/left/right buttons.That's too fucking predictable, and anyone who's used a tv in the last 2 decades could use it....Let's give it a fucking nipple, just like those horrific fucking IBM/Lenovo laptops.Then of course it also tries to "help" by detecting HDR content and change view mode... while something is playing.... which makes the screen go black for several seconds. That's too fucking predictable, and anyone who's used a tv in the last 2 decades could use it....Let's give it a fucking nipple, just like those horrific fucking IBM/Lenovo laptops.Then of course it also tries to "help" by detecting HDR content and change view mode... while something is playing.... which makes the screen go black for several seconds. Let's give it a fucking nipple, just like those horrific fucking IBM/Lenovo laptops.Then of course it also tries to "help" by detecting HDR content and change view mode... while something is playing.... which makes the screen go black for several seconds. Then of course it also tries to "help" by detecting HDR content and change view mode... while something is playing.... which makes the screen go black for several seconds. What business case is there for a "dumb" EV?By using touchscreens and software for most functionality, you dramatically reduce your supply chain overhead and better enhance margins (instead of managing the supply chain for dozens of extruded buttons, now you manage the supply chain of a single LCD touchscreen).This was a major optimization that Chinese automotive manufacturers (ICE and EV) found and took advantage of all the way back in 2019 [0] - treat cars as consumer electronics instead of as "cars".Edit: Any answer that does not take COGS or Magins into account is moot. By using touchscreens and software for most functionality, you dramatically reduce your supply chain overhead and better enhance margins (instead of managing the supply chain for dozens of extruded buttons, now you manage the supply chain of a single LCD touchscreen).This was a major optimization that Chinese automotive manufacturers (ICE and EV) found and took advantage of all the way back in 2019 [0] - treat cars as consumer electronics instead of as "cars".Edit: Any answer that does not take COGS or Magins into account is moot. This was a major optimization that Chinese automotive manufacturers (ICE and EV) found and took advantage of all the way back in 2019 [0] - treat cars as consumer electronics instead of as "cars".Edit: Any answer that does not take COGS or Magins into account is moot. Edit: Any answer that does not take COGS or Magins into account is moot. I agree that was an idiotic trend.But if someone wants a car without connectivity, it's too late. The market is not strong enough to get rid of that. Most people either like it or don't care enough to avoid it.Just like most people liked or didn't care enough to avoid smart TVs.So that's all you can buy. But if someone wants a car without connectivity, it's too late. The market is not strong enough to get rid of that. Most people either like it or don't care enough to avoid it.Just like most people liked or didn't care enough to avoid smart TVs.So that's all you can buy. Just like most people liked or didn't care enough to avoid smart TVs.So that's all you can buy. I suppose they could still remote kill the car though, and have no idea what would happen if I hit the emergency button. A high quality switch/button assembly is still cheaper for a give lifetime (100k, 200k, whatever), which is why it's what the 3rd world compact cars all use. The switches start losing when you start having a ton of different sets of features the car needs to support. Sell and product with enough margin to make money. Don't sell it at or below cost, then spy on your users and sell them to the real customers, the advertisers.“Dumb” stuff has a very simple and honest business model. Market the cars by exposing what every other car brand is actually doing. “Dumb” stuff has a very simple and honest business model. Market the cars by exposing what every other car brand is actually doing. You only want „dumb” bc the other car companies fk'd it all up. when was the last time you saw a Tesla and went “oh cool car!”? We could have been running cars on that for decades, but getting people to make their dirty polluting inefficient old petrol cars run on fuel that emits carbon dioxide and water with no HC, CO, SOx, NOx, or particulates was nowhere near as profitable as selling them lots of debt to buy cleaner greener diesels.And we're burning the fuel they'd run on anyway. And we're burning the fuel they'd run on anyway. If a petrol-fuelled car goes on fire, the fuel tank will explode. The tanks are usually thin plastic and will split open in an accident, spilling fuel everywhere.By contrast, the LPG tanks are pretty much indestructible and if you remove a tank from a car that's been on fire (a lot of taxis are LPG-powered and seem to go on fire late at night for some reason, especially if they're parked in the wrong part of town) you'll find the tank is still about as full as it was before the car got burnt. By contrast, the LPG tanks are pretty much indestructible and if you remove a tank from a car that's been on fire (a lot of taxis are LPG-powered and seem to go on fire late at night for some reason, especially if they're parked in the wrong part of town) you'll find the tank is still about as full as it was before the car got burnt. FYI, if you want to search for this, it is called "The long tailpipe" theory (1) or "long tailpipe fallacy".1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipeAnd it is a fallacy for obvious reasons, includinga) electricity generation is more flexible, and rapidly shifting to solar and other non-polluting sources.b) Moving pollution away from people is better. Cars are inherently around people, streets, residences etc.c) One centralised plant with no weight restrictions is easier to control for emissions and efficiency than many thousands of mobile, weight-constrained power plants.d) Wikipedia: "The extraction and refining of carbon based fuels and its distribution is in itself an energy intensive industry contributing to CO2 emissions." Cars are inherently around people, streets, residences etc.c) One centralised plant with no weight restrictions is easier to control for emissions and efficiency than many thousands of mobile, weight-constrained power plants.d) Wikipedia: "The extraction and refining of carbon based fuels and its distribution is in itself an energy intensive industry contributing to CO2 emissions." Cars are inherently around people, streets, residences etc.c) One centralised plant with no weight restrictions is easier to control for emissions and efficiency than many thousands of mobile, weight-constrained power plants.d) Wikipedia: "The extraction and refining of carbon based fuels and its distribution is in itself an energy intensive industry contributing to CO2 emissions." a) electricity generation is more flexible, and rapidly shifting to solar and other non-polluting sources.b) Moving pollution away from people is better. Cars are inherently around people, streets, residences etc.c) One centralised plant with no weight restrictions is easier to control for emissions and efficiency than many thousands of mobile, weight-constrained power plants.d) Wikipedia: "The extraction and refining of carbon based fuels and its distribution is in itself an energy intensive industry contributing to CO2 emissions." Cars are inherently around people, streets, residences etc.c) One centralised plant with no weight restrictions is easier to control for emissions and efficiency than many thousands of mobile, weight-constrained power plants.d) Wikipedia: "The extraction and refining of carbon based fuels and its distribution is in itself an energy intensive industry contributing to CO2 emissions." c) One centralised plant with no weight restrictions is easier to control for emissions and efficiency than many thousands of mobile, weight-constrained power plants.d) Wikipedia: "The extraction and refining of carbon based fuels and its distribution is in itself an energy intensive industry contributing to CO2 emissions." d) Wikipedia: "The extraction and refining of carbon based fuels and its distribution is in itself an energy intensive industry contributing to CO2 emissions." I would argue that this provides us the possibility of energy flexibility, which is a good thing given the current global geopolitical situation You think we need 800-1200 mile batteries?As for charge speed, the twice a year someone needs more than 400 miles isn't as significant in real world EV usage...I plug in on a dopey 1.3kW (~115V, ~12A) outlet and my car is at 80% charge in the morning. As for charge speed, the twice a year someone needs more than 400 miles isn't as significant in real world EV usage...I plug in on a dopey 1.3kW (~115V, ~12A) outlet and my car is at 80% charge in the morning. More like, more people should understand how EVs can easily work for them, and then try to shoehorn gas-powered vehicles into the few niche they need to be in.How often does someone need a 400 mile range again? When is the last time you towed something 400 miles? But why in a rational purchasing decision would I need an 800 mile EV battery for a car just because sometimes it's cold out? How often does someone need a 400 mile range again? When is the last time you towed something 400 miles? But why in a rational purchasing decision would I need an 800 mile EV battery for a car just because sometimes it's cold out? On top of this EVs tend to push ideas from Software/Tech companies, such as recurring revenues (because the underlying technology lends itself to it better).Personally I'm unsure that this will be accepted by all consumers as much as is needed. After all the automotive marketing has since Ford insisted that driving was about "freedom". So some pivot needs to happen in the messaging. Suppose decades is a lot of time to change it. Personally I think EVs are nonsense, and a better utopia would be making sure public transport is abundant, high-quality and free. After all the automotive marketing has since Ford insisted that driving was about "freedom". So some pivot needs to happen in the messaging. Suppose decades is a lot of time to change it. Personally I think EVs are nonsense, and a better utopia would be making sure public transport is abundant, high-quality and free. Define "improve" ?One way for "ICE cars completely become a thing of the past" is for there to be lots of cheap, reliable, second-hand EVs. If you can buy a good used EV for less then yes, a barrier to quitting ICE cars has been removed.That's an improvement. The car doesn't have to be an asset, it could be more like a utility.EV depreciation seems to be driven by1) rapidly advancing state of the art, which should eventually stabilise and2) Fears of battery lifespan, which in current vehicles is largely unfoundedhttps://www.wired.com/story/electric-cars-could-last-much-lo...https://insideevs.com/news/763231/ev-battery-degradation-lif... One way for "ICE cars completely become a thing of the past" is for there to be lots of cheap, reliable, second-hand EVs. If you can buy a good used EV for less then yes, a barrier to quitting ICE cars has been removed.That's an improvement. The car doesn't have to be an asset, it could be more like a utility.EV depreciation seems to be driven by1) rapidly advancing state of the art, which should eventually stabilise and2) Fears of battery lifespan, which in current vehicles is largely unfoundedhttps://www.wired.com/story/electric-cars-could-last-much-lo...https://insideevs.com/news/763231/ev-battery-degradation-lif... The car doesn't have to be an asset, it could be more like a utility.EV depreciation seems to be driven by1) rapidly advancing state of the art, which should eventually stabilise and2) Fears of battery lifespan, which in current vehicles is largely unfoundedhttps://www.wired.com/story/electric-cars-could-last-much-lo...https://insideevs.com/news/763231/ev-battery-degradation-lif... EV depreciation seems to be driven by1) rapidly advancing state of the art, which should eventually stabilise and2) Fears of battery lifespan, which in current vehicles is largely unfoundedhttps://www.wired.com/story/electric-cars-could-last-much-lo...https://insideevs.com/news/763231/ev-battery-degradation-lif... 1) rapidly advancing state of the art, which should eventually stabilise and2) Fears of battery lifespan, which in current vehicles is largely unfoundedhttps://www.wired.com/story/electric-cars-could-last-much-lo...https://insideevs.com/news/763231/ev-battery-degradation-lif... 2) Fears of battery lifespan, which in current vehicles is largely unfoundedhttps://www.wired.com/story/electric-cars-could-last-much-lo...https://insideevs.com/news/763231/ev-battery-degradation-lif... You know what would make my kids more free? If they could just play outside without the giant death machines flying by with their operators looking at their phones well over the speed limit.I'm trapped in a world where I need to spend a good chunk of my life in a cage just to work and eat, and you call that "freedom". Can't change direction (one lane no junctions), can't change speed (vehicles in front and behind), can't stop (flow of traffic), can't break concentration (driving), can't change body position (car cabin is tiny, seats and hand/feet controls are fixed, no space to stand), can't look away for more than a moment (responsibility of driving).And the only places to go are on the predetermined road, from a car park, to a car park, following a lot of strict prescribed rules about how.This meme of “freedom” is brainwashing and marketing (which has been picked up as an identity thing by the right wing recently).There's nothing free about having to use a $20,000 vehicle to buy bread because no other options are available. And the only places to go are on the predetermined road, from a car park, to a car park, following a lot of strict prescribed rules about how.This meme of “freedom” is brainwashing and marketing (which has been picked up as an identity thing by the right wing recently).There's nothing free about having to use a $20,000 vehicle to buy bread because no other options are available. This meme of “freedom” is brainwashing and marketing (which has been picked up as an identity thing by the right wing recently).There's nothing free about having to use a $20,000 vehicle to buy bread because no other options are available. Also, the USB connection was flaky, so sometimes my phone didn't charge, and whether or not, it was directly exposed to the Sun and overheating.By the second day, my legs hurt a lot. I had spent an unexpected amount of time on my feet and walking around, despite the vehicle. Do you know how big parking lots are these days? I have a running gag/dispute at my bank to see whether they will allow me to "sit down" at the "ADA/Disabled" teller window.Driving home at night on the last night, my leg cramped up really bad. And it was not a stick-shift; it was an automatic transmission.Next time I'm going to be really sure that the USB and A/C work. It was the most excruciating pain I could have. Also, the USB connection was flaky, so sometimes my phone didn't charge, and whether or not, it was directly exposed to the Sun and overheating.By the second day, my legs hurt a lot. I had spent an unexpected amount of time on my feet and walking around, despite the vehicle. Do you know how big parking lots are these days? I have a running gag/dispute at my bank to see whether they will allow me to "sit down" at the "ADA/Disabled" teller window.Driving home at night on the last night, my leg cramped up really bad. And it was not a stick-shift; it was an automatic transmission.Next time I'm going to be really sure that the USB and A/C work. By the second day, my legs hurt a lot. I had spent an unexpected amount of time on my feet and walking around, despite the vehicle. Do you know how big parking lots are these days? I have a running gag/dispute at my bank to see whether they will allow me to "sit down" at the "ADA/Disabled" teller window.Driving home at night on the last night, my leg cramped up really bad. And it was not a stick-shift; it was an automatic transmission.Next time I'm going to be really sure that the USB and A/C work. I have a running gag/dispute at my bank to see whether they will allow me to "sit down" at the "ADA/Disabled" teller window.Driving home at night on the last night, my leg cramped up really bad. And it was not a stick-shift; it was an automatic transmission.Next time I'm going to be really sure that the USB and A/C work. And it was not a stick-shift; it was an automatic transmission.Next time I'm going to be really sure that the USB and A/C work. Thankfully I was able to hold it together, and returned the car the next day, but boy I did not want such a vehicle ever again. And it was not a stick-shift; it was an automatic transmission.Next time I'm going to be really sure that the USB and A/C work. Next time I'm going to be really sure that the USB and A/C work. How do you plan on visiting without entering one of these claustrophobic compartments, be it plane, train or automobile? > “Buddy, the world is a bigger place than the 4 square miles around your downtown studio.”4 square miles at the density of Manchester UK is enough for 50,000 people; if every one of them has to drive everywhere for everything, that's a nightmare of traffic.Not to mention that I can bike, bus, tram, a lot further than 4 miles in an hour. If that isn't enough to do the tasks of everyday life then something has gone wrong. (car obsession).> “The fact that you think you're "free" because you can walk around a little bit...well that's as brainwashed as it gets.”The fact that you think having to drive everywhere is freedom, but being able to (walk, bus, bike, tram, drive), everywhere isn't freedom, is nonsense. 4 square miles at the density of Manchester UK is enough for 50,000 people; if every one of them has to drive everywhere for everything, that's a nightmare of traffic.Not to mention that I can bike, bus, tram, a lot further than 4 miles in an hour. If that isn't enough to do the tasks of everyday life then something has gone wrong. (car obsession).> “The fact that you think you're "free" because you can walk around a little bit...well that's as brainwashed as it gets.”The fact that you think having to drive everywhere is freedom, but being able to (walk, bus, bike, tram, drive), everywhere isn't freedom, is nonsense. Not to mention that I can bike, bus, tram, a lot further than 4 miles in an hour. If that isn't enough to do the tasks of everyday life then something has gone wrong. (car obsession).> “The fact that you think you're "free" because you can walk around a little bit...well that's as brainwashed as it gets.”The fact that you think having to drive everywhere is freedom, but being able to (walk, bus, bike, tram, drive), everywhere isn't freedom, is nonsense. > “The fact that you think you're "free" because you can walk around a little bit...well that's as brainwashed as it gets.”The fact that you think having to drive everywhere is freedom, but being able to (walk, bus, bike, tram, drive), everywhere isn't freedom, is nonsense. It connects me to 1,100 square miles of service area. It connects me to multiple international airports with one offering non-stop flights all around the world.I could be on the other side of the planet in a day without having to get in my car. I could be on the other side of the planet in a day without having to get in my car. While there are no alternatives with similar funding and societal support to driving, car dependency forces many people to drive even for trivial things. Most car journeys are less than three miles. That's a bonkers state of affairs for the planet and for human history.All 110 billion humans who ever lived couldn't possibly be considered “not free” because they didn't have cars to get to the nearest stream or nut tree. All 110 billion humans who ever lived couldn't possibly be considered “not free” because they didn't have cars to get to the nearest stream or nut tree. Electric cars are heavier and produce more tire grime. My EV bought in 2021 still runs on original tires and they're fine (although I do change from winter to summer tires, so that's 2 sets technically).I suspect black PR, and there is always a grain of truth in black PR: emissions are indeed likely to be higher. I suspect black PR, and there is always a grain of truth in black PR: emissions are indeed likely to be higher. There are engine emissions (none for EVs) and braking (EVs have regen braking)2) There is a trend for larger, heavier ICE vehicles in the USA as well. 2) There is a trend for larger, heavier ICE vehicles in the USA as well. So that means less particle emission from brakes, compared to ICE. I don't understand why people have to lie and say they are worse nowhere.https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2024-us-orig... I don't understand why people have to lie and say they are worse nowhere.https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2024-us-orig... No I'm sure fracking and pipelines and all the crap the oil industry needs just to exist does not have any pfas or micro plastics Asphalt/concrete production is also accompanied with substantial emission, although progress is made to reduce it [1].Is there a break-even for weight vs emission reduction? And if so, is it somewhere between personal and cargo vehicles or is it 'EV always better'?Are we trading 'well-known and bad for global environment'-emission for 'poorly-understood and possibly very bad for local environment on a global scale'-emission?Of course, with the available information EVs seem to be the better solution, but it should not prevent us from researching/solving unknown effects or being careful choosing a single solution on such a large scale. Is there a break-even for weight vs emission reduction? And if so, is it somewhere between personal and cargo vehicles or is it 'EV always better'?Are we trading 'well-known and bad for global environment'-emission for 'poorly-understood and possibly very bad for local environment on a global scale'-emission?Of course, with the available information EVs seem to be the better solution, but it should not prevent us from researching/solving unknown effects or being careful choosing a single solution on such a large scale. Are we trading 'well-known and bad for global environment'-emission for 'poorly-understood and possibly very bad for local environment on a global scale'-emission?Of course, with the available information EVs seem to be the better solution, but it should not prevent us from researching/solving unknown effects or being careful choosing a single solution on such a large scale. Of course, with the available information EVs seem to be the better solution, but it should not prevent us from researching/solving unknown effects or being careful choosing a single solution on such a large scale. it's 2026 now, you barely see bad days in Beijing, most people wear mask only for the flu, not for the air pollutions. and just wait for the wind, it all goes away.shutdown factory and move them to other places sure helps, but nobody will deny that adopt ev contributes a lot. i'm sure the number will go up and reach nearly 100%. shutdown factory and move them to other places sure helps, but nobody will deny that adopt ev contributes a lot. i'm sure the number will go up and reach nearly 100%. For example EVs depend on charging, so we're seeing more public charge points, as well as more home chargers, work chargers and so on.ICE depends on gas stations (which is the tip of the gasoline distribution industry.) As demand for those services drop off, so they'll become harder to find. (To be clear, that's not happening soon, there are a LOT of ICE cars out there...)But 50 years from now most of that ICE infrastructure will have disappeared. As demand for those services drop off, so they'll become harder to find. (To be clear, that's not happening soon, there are a LOT of ICE cars out there...)But 50 years from now most of that ICE infrastructure will have disappeared. But 50 years from now most of that ICE infrastructure will have disappeared. I'm guessing it will be already in 20-30 years from now. In 5-10 years from now, no-one will buy an ICE vehicle. So 20-30 years from today there will not be many ICE cars rolling on the streets and most gas stations and other needed infrastructure will be gone as it is not economical to stay in business. I imagine we'll see a similar thing with other brands. Imagine a national network of exchange stations (co-located with existing petrol infrastructure, you can use the overhead canopy for solar). Their profit depends on keeping packs in service for 20+ years, not selling you a new car.Suddenly the R&D money flows towards batteries that last, obsolescence now costs them money, and isn't a happy accident that keeps you hooked on buying more cars.You'd still have the option to buy your own packs outright if you only ever charge at home, but the network creates the economic pressure for genuine improvement of longevity in battery tech that's completely missing today.I'm aware that a company called “Better Place” failed. But they were a startup trying to strong-arm the automotive industry. A nationally coordinated infrastructure concern is different, and the air quality data from this study suggests we can't afford to keep muddling through - and I really think that peoples concerns about batteries are not misplaced.Perfect is the enemy of good, but damned if we can't at least align incentives for better. Whoever owns these battery packs now has skin in the game for longevity. Their profit depends on keeping packs in service for 20+ years, not selling you a new car.Suddenly the R&D money flows towards batteries that last, obsolescence now costs them money, and isn't a happy accident that keeps you hooked on buying more cars.You'd still have the option to buy your own packs outright if you only ever charge at home, but the network creates the economic pressure for genuine improvement of longevity in battery tech that's completely missing today.I'm aware that a company called “Better Place” failed. But they were a startup trying to strong-arm the automotive industry. A nationally coordinated infrastructure concern is different, and the air quality data from this study suggests we can't afford to keep muddling through - and I really think that peoples concerns about batteries are not misplaced.Perfect is the enemy of good, but damned if we can't at least align incentives for better. Suddenly the R&D money flows towards batteries that last, obsolescence now costs them money, and isn't a happy accident that keeps you hooked on buying more cars.You'd still have the option to buy your own packs outright if you only ever charge at home, but the network creates the economic pressure for genuine improvement of longevity in battery tech that's completely missing today.I'm aware that a company called “Better Place” failed. But they were a startup trying to strong-arm the automotive industry. A nationally coordinated infrastructure concern is different, and the air quality data from this study suggests we can't afford to keep muddling through - and I really think that peoples concerns about batteries are not misplaced.Perfect is the enemy of good, but damned if we can't at least align incentives for better. You'd still have the option to buy your own packs outright if you only ever charge at home, but the network creates the economic pressure for genuine improvement of longevity in battery tech that's completely missing today.I'm aware that a company called “Better Place” failed. But they were a startup trying to strong-arm the automotive industry. A nationally coordinated infrastructure concern is different, and the air quality data from this study suggests we can't afford to keep muddling through - and I really think that peoples concerns about batteries are not misplaced.Perfect is the enemy of good, but damned if we can't at least align incentives for better. I'm aware that a company called “Better Place” failed. But they were a startup trying to strong-arm the automotive industry. A nationally coordinated infrastructure concern is different, and the air quality data from this study suggests we can't afford to keep muddling through - and I really think that peoples concerns about batteries are not misplaced.Perfect is the enemy of good, but damned if we can't at least align incentives for better. Perfect is the enemy of good, but damned if we can't at least align incentives for better. At this point, components like the motor likely fail before the battery does.Given the much lower failure rate of everything else in an EV, TCO is dramatically better than ICE cars even with degradation[3].Manufacturers like Mercedes even guarantee 70% health after 8 years (a worst-case estimate).There is a significant commercial incentive for aftermarket battery repair shops. EVClinic[2] is very successful and a glimpse into the future. Given the much lower failure rate of everything else in an EV, TCO is dramatically better than ICE cars even with degradation[3].Manufacturers like Mercedes even guarantee 70% health after 8 years (a worst-case estimate).There is a significant commercial incentive for aftermarket battery repair shops. EVClinic[2] is very successful and a glimpse into the future. Manufacturers like Mercedes even guarantee 70% health after 8 years (a worst-case estimate).There is a significant commercial incentive for aftermarket battery repair shops. EVClinic[2] is very successful and a glimpse into the future. There is a significant commercial incentive for aftermarket battery repair shops. EVClinic[2] is very successful and a glimpse into the future. Your phone doesn't have liquid cooling temp management and is probably recharged daily. Heres one such source but theres hundreds if you care to look: https://min.news/en/auto/2a2636e0ac962b5d94ee68babcd09a3d.ht... 13 years old dead luxury cars are worthless, yes, especially when the tech is quickly evolving. That doesn't say anything about how long it takes for them to die or how reliable the tech is. There aren't many 10+ year old EVs yet, and demand is limited. This is changing, and EVClinic will be the first of many aftermarket EV repair shops. They've been aiming for the same or worse in regular cars for over a decade now.That being said, there is an incentive for EVs: competition from China:https://www.electrive.com/2026/01/19/byd-extends-battery-war...Very much like when Japanese cars first got a foothold in the US. That being said, there is an incentive for EVs: competition from China:https://www.electrive.com/2026/01/19/byd-extends-battery-war...Very much like when Japanese cars first got a foothold in the US. https://www.electrive.com/2026/01/19/byd-extends-battery-war...Very much like when Japanese cars first got a foothold in the US. Very much like when Japanese cars first got a foothold in the US. The Nissan Leaf 15 years ago came with a 5-year/100,000km battery warranty, now Toyota are at 10-year/1,000,000km. As it stands the Nissan Leaf is an outlier only in Norway, where it was practically a free car due to subsidies, otherwise their growth is pretty much in line with other EVs. I'm a bit EV obsessed so spend a lot of time answering questions about them online, the longer warranty is 100% impacting buying choices. It needs to be fixed, because aside from someone being left with the economic bag of disposing of the vehicle, it is actually an environmental issue to build these batteries.Just not as bad of an issue as running ICE cars for the same period of time.People tend not to think more than a certain amount of time away for some reason. People tend not to think more than a certain amount of time away for some reason. And typically for little money.Now everything is glued and messy to swap so the manufacturer can sell you a battery swap for much much more money than it used to cost.I believe cars should have swappable somewhat standardized batteries. Or maybe Tesla has the best batteries right now, so you get that. And once you have to swap the battery, you again just pick the best manufacturer at the time - who might not even be a car manufacturer at all but rather someone specialized in batteries exclusively.And since hopefully 10 years have passed since you bought the last battery, chemistry has improved so you pick from options that are all (hopefully a lot) better than the battery you had initially.We could have some proper competition where manufacturers would have to compete on pricing and performance.But car manufacturers don't care. And opening their cars to third party batteries and not keeping up as many walls as they can is the opposite of that.So until forced by regulation every manufacturer will continue to put batteries in their cars that only they themselves will sell and put a slightly different one in every car. Because the newer stuff is for new cars only and compatible with your car. Now everything is glued and messy to swap so the manufacturer can sell you a battery swap for much much more money than it used to cost.I believe cars should have swappable somewhat standardized batteries. Or maybe Tesla has the best batteries right now, so you get that. And once you have to swap the battery, you again just pick the best manufacturer at the time - who might not even be a car manufacturer at all but rather someone specialized in batteries exclusively.And since hopefully 10 years have passed since you bought the last battery, chemistry has improved so you pick from options that are all (hopefully a lot) better than the battery you had initially.We could have some proper competition where manufacturers would have to compete on pricing and performance.But car manufacturers don't care. And opening their cars to third party batteries and not keeping up as many walls as they can is the opposite of that.So until forced by regulation every manufacturer will continue to put batteries in their cars that only they themselves will sell and put a slightly different one in every car. Because the newer stuff is for new cars only and compatible with your car. I believe cars should have swappable somewhat standardized batteries. Or maybe Tesla has the best batteries right now, so you get that. And once you have to swap the battery, you again just pick the best manufacturer at the time - who might not even be a car manufacturer at all but rather someone specialized in batteries exclusively.And since hopefully 10 years have passed since you bought the last battery, chemistry has improved so you pick from options that are all (hopefully a lot) better than the battery you had initially.We could have some proper competition where manufacturers would have to compete on pricing and performance.But car manufacturers don't care. And opening their cars to third party batteries and not keeping up as many walls as they can is the opposite of that.So until forced by regulation every manufacturer will continue to put batteries in their cars that only they themselves will sell and put a slightly different one in every car. Because the newer stuff is for new cars only and compatible with your car. Imagine picking a car and not caring about battery at all. Or maybe Tesla has the best batteries right now, so you get that. And once you have to swap the battery, you again just pick the best manufacturer at the time - who might not even be a car manufacturer at all but rather someone specialized in batteries exclusively.And since hopefully 10 years have passed since you bought the last battery, chemistry has improved so you pick from options that are all (hopefully a lot) better than the battery you had initially.We could have some proper competition where manufacturers would have to compete on pricing and performance.But car manufacturers don't care. And opening their cars to third party batteries and not keeping up as many walls as they can is the opposite of that.So until forced by regulation every manufacturer will continue to put batteries in their cars that only they themselves will sell and put a slightly different one in every car. Because the newer stuff is for new cars only and compatible with your car. And since hopefully 10 years have passed since you bought the last battery, chemistry has improved so you pick from options that are all (hopefully a lot) better than the battery you had initially.We could have some proper competition where manufacturers would have to compete on pricing and performance.But car manufacturers don't care. And opening their cars to third party batteries and not keeping up as many walls as they can is the opposite of that.So until forced by regulation every manufacturer will continue to put batteries in their cars that only they themselves will sell and put a slightly different one in every car. Because the newer stuff is for new cars only and compatible with your car. We could have some proper competition where manufacturers would have to compete on pricing and performance.But car manufacturers don't care. And opening their cars to third party batteries and not keeping up as many walls as they can is the opposite of that.So until forced by regulation every manufacturer will continue to put batteries in their cars that only they themselves will sell and put a slightly different one in every car. Because the newer stuff is for new cars only and compatible with your car. And opening their cars to third party batteries and not keeping up as many walls as they can is the opposite of that.So until forced by regulation every manufacturer will continue to put batteries in their cars that only they themselves will sell and put a slightly different one in every car. Because the newer stuff is for new cars only and compatible with your car. So until forced by regulation every manufacturer will continue to put batteries in their cars that only they themselves will sell and put a slightly different one in every car. Because the newer stuff is for new cars only and compatible with your car. Show me a million mile gas/diesel engine.Also let's not forget that Toyota has a well funded corporate program rewarding employees to spread anti-EV propaganda. Also let's not forget that Toyota has a well funded corporate program rewarding employees to spread anti-EV propaganda. A theoretical battery that is not actively produced, let alone actually gone the distance…?On the other side I can tell you at least SaaB has had a million mile ICE car, from 1989. On the other side I can tell you at least SaaB has had a million mile ICE car, from 1989. Tesla lets you use it all, which gets bigger range numbers (for a time) but at the cost of degradation, if you use it. If you get maximum profit from the maximum social good, people will do that (or find a way to cheat); but as it stands, theres money to be made in not doing this and the consumer won't care too much if its 9 years or 10 years that their car lasts, so its not hurting sales to not fix this (even if fixed perfectly, it would take 10 years to prove after all! Who will convince manufacturers to integrate standardised batter packs instead of the more profitable “built-in phone style” that is used today, and the automotive marketing machine is really strong and will (correctly) lean on the idea that by having the battery replaceable would require less rigid car bodies, so their current incentive would be to fight this initiative and they would probably lead with the safety angle.The anti-EV propaganda already works pretty well with the very little it has to work with (farming batteries is harmful), so, imagine what they could do with something of actual substance. I think I'm dreaming, the investment would have to be enormous, who wants to hold stock of so many batteries? Who will convince manufacturers to integrate standardised batter packs instead of the more profitable “built-in phone style” that is used today, and the automotive marketing machine is really strong and will (correctly) lean on the idea that by having the battery replaceable would require less rigid car bodies, so their current incentive would be to fight this initiative and they would probably lead with the safety angle.The anti-EV propaganda already works pretty well with the very little it has to work with (farming batteries is harmful), so, imagine what they could do with something of actual substance. Is that why EV sales have absolutely sky rocketed? Overall, EVs are likely a net win on the combination of these two things, and a big win on exhaust emissions, but it would be nice if we could shift to lighter and smaller vehicles and increase the mix of non-cars such as e-bikes and mass transit.Source: https://www.eiturbanmobility.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/4... We know it is disingenuous because no one cares about this when discussing overweight trucks and SUVs. Good news about a reduction in pollution from EVs? It's like the "At what price" meme around headlines about China.Going forward, I will downvote any comment about "brake pollution" and "tire pollution" that does not begin with - specifically - "This is a bigger issue for large, gas-powered trucks and SUVs", and invite you all to do so to. Going forward, I will downvote any comment about "brake pollution" and "tire pollution" that does not begin with - specifically - "This is a bigger issue for large, gas-powered trucks and SUVs", and invite you all to do so to. Whenever I see people alone in either, I'm pretty annoyed.Semis for long haul are also annoying and we should substantially increase rail infra in the US Semis for long haul are also annoying and we should substantially increase rail infra in the US I agree that discussing weight with regard to EVs, without acknowledging that (in the US) the fashion is for big heavy ICE cars is just as polluting is disingenuous.That said, outside the US the trend is for smaller cars, and equally the weight of a small EV is not hugely dissimilar to a common ICE car.Frankly I'm not sure there's a whole lot to say about tire dust- cars need tires. That said, outside the US the trend is for smaller cars, and equally the weight of a small EV is not hugely dissimilar to a common ICE car.Frankly I'm not sure there's a whole lot to say about tire dust- cars need tires. Frankly I'm not sure there's a whole lot to say about tire dust- cars need tires. It's all well and good to have high-minded ideals of pure intellectual discussion, but in the real world, there are many people who are coming into the comments with a strong political agenda in mind, and are both willing and able to make disingenuous and bad-faith comments to support that agenda.Presenting the increased tire dust of heavier vehicles as being an exclusive property of EVs—a bright-line differentiator between them and ICE cars—is disingenuous and misrepresents the facts. Presenting the increased tire dust of heavier vehicles as being an exclusive property of EVs—a bright-line differentiator between them and ICE cars—is disingenuous and misrepresents the facts. Out in the world there are common misconceptions which are propagated by vested interests and believed by many at first glance.Having the opportunity to see those arguments, and rebuff them , (over and over again) is key to balancing the public discourse.I agree, some argue in bad faith, that's going to be true in some cases. Having the opportunity to see those arguments, and rebuff them , (over and over again) is key to balancing the public discourse.I agree, some argue in bad faith, that's going to be true in some cases. If you demand that everyone coming there in good faith treat everyone else as also operating in good faith, even when they open with arguments that are very common when sealioning people, you are telling every troll, every bad actor, everyone paid by a massive corporation or a foreign government to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about particular political or economic positions that this site is ripe for their use.I've seen far too many people even on here "just asking questions", or using the Gish Gallop, or other techniques of bad faith debate, to believe that it can possibly be a good idea to treat everyone as if they are good-faith rational actors seeking open debate for the sake of finding the truth.If you're still not convinced, do some research on Brandolini's Law [0], also known as the Bullshit Asymmetry Principle. It really does take massively more effort to refute bullshit with truth than it does to spin bullshit everywhere. I've seen far too many people even on here "just asking questions", or using the Gish Gallop, or other techniques of bad faith debate, to believe that it can possibly be a good idea to treat everyone as if they are good-faith rational actors seeking open debate for the sake of finding the truth.If you're still not convinced, do some research on Brandolini's Law [0], also known as the Bullshit Asymmetry Principle. It really does take massively more effort to refute bullshit with truth than it does to spin bullshit everywhere. If you're still not convinced, do some research on Brandolini's Law [0], also known as the Bullshit Asymmetry Principle. It really does take massively more effort to refute bullshit with truth than it does to spin bullshit everywhere. So your day-to-day driving is all electric, then you still have an engine for harsh winter days, power outages, and you have 600 miles EPA range on gas for sudden road trips.People are really sleeping on hybrids. Even a used non-plug-in Prius will get 50 city and 50 highway MPG. So your day-to-day driving is all electric, then you still have an engine for harsh winter days, power outages, and you have 600 miles EPA range on gas for sudden road trips.People are really sleeping on hybrids. Even a used non-plug-in Prius will get 50 city and 50 highway MPG. Even a used non-plug-in Prius will get 50 city and 50 highway MPG. Yes, EVs have a weight penalty of ~250-500kg of battery currently.Battery technology is rapidly advancing, when Na-ion batteries are introduced more widely, the whole range anxiety issue will become moot, because a recharge will take as long as refueling an ICE vehicle.The weight difference will also start to reduce, both due to newer batteries, but also moving to lighter weight construction and increased use of alternatives to steel.Arguing for ICE technology in 2025 is like Blackberry/Nokia users complaining about the loss of keyboards & T9 texting. Battery technology is rapidly advancing, when Na-ion batteries are introduced more widely, the whole range anxiety issue will become moot, because a recharge will take as long as refueling an ICE vehicle.The weight difference will also start to reduce, both due to newer batteries, but also moving to lighter weight construction and increased use of alternatives to steel.Arguing for ICE technology in 2025 is like Blackberry/Nokia users complaining about the loss of keyboards & T9 texting. Arguing for ICE technology in 2025 is like Blackberry/Nokia users complaining about the loss of keyboards & T9 texting. PHEVs require keeping the gas engine up, and getting it emissions-tested.A whole category of cost just straight-up disappeared, for cheaper than I could get a RAV4 Prime too. This is not news to anyone who drives an EV and keeps an eye on the readout showing current power usage/regen. In practice, when letting off the accelerator, existing EVs will instead regen brake. It's true though that using this mode will extend the life of your tires. Next time you do this keep an eye on the actual power readout. The point I'm making is that EVs apply more braking than ICE vehicles do, due to the specifics of the implementation of regen braking that all manufacturers have chosen.> You can coast in EV as wellNot without literally putting it in neutral. If you just take your foot off the accelerator, any modern EV will apply some amount of regenerative braking. It's not really possible to hold the accelerator pedal at the exact position where you are not applying motor power but also have 0kW of regen braking, certainly for any extended period of time.If your point is that someone could make an EV to which regen braking contributes no more to tire wear than an ICE vehicle, you're correct. Even the ones that allow you to "turn off" regen braking will generally apply 1-2kW of regen if your foot is off the accelerator. If you just take your foot off the accelerator, any modern EV will apply some amount of regenerative braking. It's not really possible to hold the accelerator pedal at the exact position where you are not applying motor power but also have 0kW of regen braking, certainly for any extended period of time.If your point is that someone could make an EV to which regen braking contributes no more to tire wear than an ICE vehicle, you're correct. Even the ones that allow you to "turn off" regen braking will generally apply 1-2kW of regen if your foot is off the accelerator. If you just take your foot off the accelerator, any modern EV will apply some amount of regenerative braking. It's not really possible to hold the accelerator pedal at the exact position where you are not applying motor power but also have 0kW of regen braking, certainly for any extended period of time.If your point is that someone could make an EV to which regen braking contributes no more to tire wear than an ICE vehicle, you're correct. Even the ones that allow you to "turn off" regen braking will generally apply 1-2kW of regen if your foot is off the accelerator. If your point is that someone could make an EV to which regen braking contributes no more to tire wear than an ICE vehicle, you're correct. Even the ones that allow you to "turn off" regen braking will generally apply 1-2kW of regen if your foot is off the accelerator. The regenerative braking and smooth acceleration are much more pleasant. Hyundai and Kia EVs have a 5 level setting for what happens when you lift up on the accelerator, either partially or fully.At level 0 the regeneration is so low that I don't notice a difference between that and being in neutral. It slows down way less than an ICE does when not in neutral.> If you just take your foot off the accelerator, any modern EV will apply some amount of regenerative braking. It's not really possible to hold the accelerator pedal at the exact position where you are not applying motor power but also have 0kW of regen braking, certainly for any extended period of time.Tire wear is not a linear function of acceleration. Is there any reason to believe that variations from not being able to hold your foot perfectly steady, assuming you aren't have spasms, will be big enough and/or last long enough to make a non-trivial difference? At level 0 the regeneration is so low that I don't notice a difference between that and being in neutral. It slows down way less than an ICE does when not in neutral.> If you just take your foot off the accelerator, any modern EV will apply some amount of regenerative braking. It's not really possible to hold the accelerator pedal at the exact position where you are not applying motor power but also have 0kW of regen braking, certainly for any extended period of time.Tire wear is not a linear function of acceleration. Is there any reason to believe that variations from not being able to hold your foot perfectly steady, assuming you aren't have spasms, will be big enough and/or last long enough to make a non-trivial difference? > If you just take your foot off the accelerator, any modern EV will apply some amount of regenerative braking. It's not really possible to hold the accelerator pedal at the exact position where you are not applying motor power but also have 0kW of regen braking, certainly for any extended period of time.Tire wear is not a linear function of acceleration. Is there any reason to believe that variations from not being able to hold your foot perfectly steady, assuming you aren't have spasms, will be big enough and/or last long enough to make a non-trivial difference? Tire wear is not a linear function of acceleration. Is there any reason to believe that variations from not being able to hold your foot perfectly steady, assuming you aren't have spasms, will be big enough and/or last long enough to make a non-trivial difference? You can reduce the total braking force needed by extending the time, in which case aerodynamic forces and rolling resistance will contribute some more to the reduction in speed.In an EV with one-pedal driving you can still stop quickly or slowly. In an ICE car you can stop slowly with more coasting or quickly with more braking force.I don't see how the drivetrain is going to make a difference to the amount of braking needed to stop and thus force exerted on the tire. In an EV with one-pedal driving you can still stop quickly or slowly. In an ICE car you can stop slowly with more coasting or quickly with more braking force.I don't see how the drivetrain is going to make a difference to the amount of braking needed to stop and thus force exerted on the tire. Generally they do not allow you to turn it off. My main point is that most people don't turn it off. Regen is lossy, so there's no incentive in slowing down to capture 1W just to speed up and spend 1.1WPorsche has modes for coast and regen. Applying brakes in coast mode will use regen up to a threshold and then use conventional pad/rotor.So I am sorry to inform you that you're just wrong.There are EVs that can coast.EVs are not braking more.Whether you use conventional brakes, engine braking, or regen braking, it's all the same to the tires. Applying brakes in coast mode will use regen up to a threshold and then use conventional pad/rotor.So I am sorry to inform you that you're just wrong.There are EVs that can coast.EVs are not braking more.Whether you use conventional brakes, engine braking, or regen braking, it's all the same to the tires. So I am sorry to inform you that you're just wrong.There are EVs that can coast.EVs are not braking more.Whether you use conventional brakes, engine braking, or regen braking, it's all the same to the tires. The reason to capture 1W and then spend 1.1W is it keeps you at a consistent speed. That's why manufacturers do it.Lots of people in these comments who have never actually driven an EV while looking at the energy usage readout.Personally I've never driven a Porsche but I've driven EVs from Nissan, Tesla, VW, Chevrolet, Kia, and Hyundai and they all do this.So I am here to inform you that you are just wrong. There's no need to be sorry about educating someone, though, don't apologise next time :-) Lots of people in these comments who have never actually driven an EV while looking at the energy usage readout.Personally I've never driven a Porsche but I've driven EVs from Nissan, Tesla, VW, Chevrolet, Kia, and Hyundai and they all do this.So I am here to inform you that you are just wrong. There's no need to be sorry about educating someone, though, don't apologise next time :-) Personally I've never driven a Porsche but I've driven EVs from Nissan, Tesla, VW, Chevrolet, Kia, and Hyundai and they all do this.So I am here to inform you that you are just wrong. There's no need to be sorry about educating someone, though, don't apologise next time :-) There's no need to be sorry about educating someone, though, don't apologise next time :-) The responses tend to be either "actually regen braking wears tires just as much as using brake rotors" by people who didn't actually read, or "surely manufacturers wouldn't do that, it doesn't match the mental model in my head" by people who've never paid close attention to the power readouts while driving an EV.Your own response was "actually one manufacturer does have a setting that will avoid the effect if someone sets it, therefore the whole concept must be wrong". Your own response was "actually one manufacturer does have a setting that will avoid the effect if someone sets it, therefore the whole concept must be wrong". Tire dust has been studied for decades and the most recent research I've seen suggests the issues are less concerning than previously estimated.https://www.ch.cam.ac.uk/news/illusion-truth-surrounds-inacc...Brake dust is significantly reduced by EVs:https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/electric-cars/running/do-electri... Brake dust is significantly reduced by EVs:https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/electric-cars/running/do-electri... This was discussed before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43672779(saving a click)We need to start taxing vehicles based on the damage they are responsible for. The 4th Power Law is a principle in road engineering that states that the damage a vehicle causes to a road surface is proportional to the fourth power of its axle load. This means that even small increases in axle load can cause exponentially greater damage to the road.A Prius causes about 50,000 times more damage than a bicycle.A truck causes 16 billion times more damage than a bicycle.A truck causes 31,000 times more damage than a Prius.The solution is to tax trucks 31,000 times more than cars. (saving a click)We need to start taxing vehicles based on the damage they are responsible for. The 4th Power Law is a principle in road engineering that states that the damage a vehicle causes to a road surface is proportional to the fourth power of its axle load. This means that even small increases in axle load can cause exponentially greater damage to the road.A Prius causes about 50,000 times more damage than a bicycle.A truck causes 16 billion times more damage than a bicycle.A truck causes 31,000 times more damage than a Prius.The solution is to tax trucks 31,000 times more than cars. We need to start taxing vehicles based on the damage they are responsible for. The 4th Power Law is a principle in road engineering that states that the damage a vehicle causes to a road surface is proportional to the fourth power of its axle load. This means that even small increases in axle load can cause exponentially greater damage to the road.A Prius causes about 50,000 times more damage than a bicycle.A truck causes 16 billion times more damage than a bicycle.A truck causes 31,000 times more damage than a Prius.The solution is to tax trucks 31,000 times more than cars. The solution is to tax trucks 31,000 times more than cars. If instead those 80 passengers each drove alone in a Kia Niro EV it would be about 4 000 pounds each, so an axle weight of 2000, so the damage would be proportional to 160 x 2000^4 = 2.56 x 10^15.That's 125 times less road damage than the bus!Another interesting 4th power calculation is EV vs ICE. Tanker trucks, especially when they are traveling between wherever they load and wherever they unload, are very heavy.I calculated what would happen in a hypothetical city where everyone drove the ICE version and then all switched to the EV version, and how many tanker truck gas deliveries that would eliminate. I don't remember the exact numbers but it was something like if mid sized tankers were used for gas delivery then if they had to drive more than a few miles from wherever they loaded up to wherever they unloaded the elimination of those trips by everyone switching to EV would reduce road damage by more than the damage caused by the EVs being heavier than the ICE cars. That's 125 times less road damage than the bus!Another interesting 4th power calculation is EV vs ICE. Tanker trucks, especially when they are traveling between wherever they load and wherever they unload, are very heavy.I calculated what would happen in a hypothetical city where everyone drove the ICE version and then all switched to the EV version, and how many tanker truck gas deliveries that would eliminate. I don't remember the exact numbers but it was something like if mid sized tankers were used for gas delivery then if they had to drive more than a few miles from wherever they loaded up to wherever they unloaded the elimination of those trips by everyone switching to EV would reduce road damage by more than the damage caused by the EVs being heavier than the ICE cars. Tanker trucks, especially when they are traveling between wherever they load and wherever they unload, are very heavy.I calculated what would happen in a hypothetical city where everyone drove the ICE version and then all switched to the EV version, and how many tanker truck gas deliveries that would eliminate. I don't remember the exact numbers but it was something like if mid sized tankers were used for gas delivery then if they had to drive more than a few miles from wherever they loaded up to wherever they unloaded the elimination of those trips by everyone switching to EV would reduce road damage by more than the damage caused by the EVs being heavier than the ICE cars. Tanker trucks, especially when they are traveling between wherever they load and wherever they unload, are very heavy.I calculated what would happen in a hypothetical city where everyone drove the ICE version and then all switched to the EV version, and how many tanker truck gas deliveries that would eliminate. I don't remember the exact numbers but it was something like if mid sized tankers were used for gas delivery then if they had to drive more than a few miles from wherever they loaded up to wherever they unloaded the elimination of those trips by everyone switching to EV would reduce road damage by more than the damage caused by the EVs being heavier than the ICE cars. Tanker trucks, especially when they are traveling between wherever they load and wherever they unload, are very heavy.I calculated what would happen in a hypothetical city where everyone drove the ICE version and then all switched to the EV version, and how many tanker truck gas deliveries that would eliminate. I don't remember the exact numbers but it was something like if mid sized tankers were used for gas delivery then if they had to drive more than a few miles from wherever they loaded up to wherever they unloaded the elimination of those trips by everyone switching to EV would reduce road damage by more than the damage caused by the EVs being heavier than the ICE cars. I calculated what would happen in a hypothetical city where everyone drove the ICE version and then all switched to the EV version, and how many tanker truck gas deliveries that would eliminate. I don't remember the exact numbers but it was something like if mid sized tankers were used for gas delivery then if they had to drive more than a few miles from wherever they loaded up to wherever they unloaded the elimination of those trips by everyone switching to EV would reduce road damage by more than the damage caused by the EVs being heavier than the ICE cars. I wasn't talking about passenger buses, because thats unlikely going to happen in US. Everytime a discussion comes on ICE vs EV, the fossil fuel proponents immediately jump to but EVs weigh more (debatable) and cause more damage. The damage they cause is insignificant compared to 18-wheelers. I'm not entirely sure if EVs weigh more either, maybe the earlier models did, but energy density keeps increasing. Also, there is no compelling reason to have 300+ mile range batteries when most of the trips are under 3 - 5 miles. Instead I've heard many arguments that bike lanes and pedestrianization are forms of gentrification, but resulting "ghettoes?" I'm curious to know why these things in particular (brake dust and rubber tires) are on the radar. (And a quick search shows that people do study this.) I'm curious to know why these things in particular (brake dust and rubber tires) are on the radar. (And a quick search shows that people do study this.) (And a quick search shows that people do study this.) The auto industry seems to have ran out of early adopters already. Now they need a kick in the privates to make cheap EVs. Also, someone who doesn't think in SV lattes may not afford to buy a car with unknown reliability. Compare the same category of car in gasoline and EV versions. Not much by silicon valley latte standards of course. Compare the same category of car in gasoline and EV versions. Have you looked at the bulk of cars people are buying new? Plus how much is the EV version of a 60k usd truck? EVs tend to do better, because they can do most of their breaking through the motor and recuperate a part of the energy2) Tire abrasion. EVs tend to do worse here, because they tend to be heavier.So yes, EVs aren't a panacea, but overall on the topic of air pollution, they score much better than ICEs. EVs tend to do better, because they can do most of their breaking through the motor and recuperate a part of the energy2) Tire abrasion. EVs tend to do worse here, because they tend to be heavier.So yes, EVs aren't a panacea, but overall on the topic of air pollution, they score much better than ICEs. EVs tend to do worse here, because they tend to be heavier.So yes, EVs aren't a panacea, but overall on the topic of air pollution, they score much better than ICEs. So yes, EVs aren't a panacea, but overall on the topic of air pollution, they score much better than ICEs. Still in favor of EVs, just a curiosity that this is so negative for you. Plenty of people like cigarettes and opium too, that doesn't mean you want your kid exposed to the smoke. BUT I don't think switching to EVs will help reduce CO2 in any way - not even if all the EVs are charged using 100% solar/wind. The narrative usually is "I get an EV instead of an ICE, charge it with regenerative energy and have 0 emissions, thus not burning oil and saving on CO2".But that is not how a globalized world with free markets works. In order to save on CO2, we would need to keep that oil not burned by the EV underground, but that does not take place. The market reality is that oil price will just drop with less demand from ICE vehicles. But with falling prices, other business models that require refined oil will become viable and the oil is still burned - just somewhere else. No one so far has made a good argument why the Saudis or Russians would leave their ressources underground, just because demand from ICE vehicles drop. But that is not how a globalized world with free markets works. In order to save on CO2, we would need to keep that oil not burned by the EV underground, but that does not take place. The market reality is that oil price will just drop with less demand from ICE vehicles. But with falling prices, other business models that require refined oil will become viable and the oil is still burned - just somewhere else. No one so far has made a good argument why the Saudis or Russians would leave their ressources underground, just because demand from ICE vehicles drop. This is economics 101.> The price drops and hardware to extract oil stops being producedOil extraction costs differ vastly amongst countries, and there is a lot of potential for increased productivity and efficencies when the margins become lower - price pressure is a driver for innovation. > The price drops and hardware to extract oil stops being producedOil extraction costs differ vastly amongst countries, and there is a lot of potential for increased productivity and efficencies when the margins become lower - price pressure is a driver for innovation. Oil extraction costs differ vastly amongst countries, and there is a lot of potential for increased productivity and efficencies when the margins become lower - price pressure is a driver for innovation. OK.And did you go to Economics 201?Because there, you might have learned that the basic economic principles you describe as "economics 101" are the equivalent of the "spherical cow in a frictionless vacuum"-type examples you get in introductory physics classes.In the real world, demand is affected by all kinds of things, and sometimes, a product or service is just no longer desired by the population. Of course not, because people don't need them. You'd barely sell any, and those purely as a novelty.While there's still a lot of work to do to make it fully possible, and certain political groups are actively working against it, the world at large recognizes that getting off of fossil fuels is an important goal. And did you go to Economics 201?Because there, you might have learned that the basic economic principles you describe as "economics 101" are the equivalent of the "spherical cow in a frictionless vacuum"-type examples you get in introductory physics classes.In the real world, demand is affected by all kinds of things, and sometimes, a product or service is just no longer desired by the population. Of course not, because people don't need them. You'd barely sell any, and those purely as a novelty.While there's still a lot of work to do to make it fully possible, and certain political groups are actively working against it, the world at large recognizes that getting off of fossil fuels is an important goal. Because there, you might have learned that the basic economic principles you describe as "economics 101" are the equivalent of the "spherical cow in a frictionless vacuum"-type examples you get in introductory physics classes.In the real world, demand is affected by all kinds of things, and sometimes, a product or service is just no longer desired by the population. Of course not, because people don't need them. You'd barely sell any, and those purely as a novelty.While there's still a lot of work to do to make it fully possible, and certain political groups are actively working against it, the world at large recognizes that getting off of fossil fuels is an important goal. In the real world, demand is affected by all kinds of things, and sometimes, a product or service is just no longer desired by the population. Of course not, because people don't need them. You'd barely sell any, and those purely as a novelty.While there's still a lot of work to do to make it fully possible, and certain political groups are actively working against it, the world at large recognizes that getting off of fossil fuels is an important goal. While there's still a lot of work to do to make it fully possible, and certain political groups are actively working against it, the world at large recognizes that getting off of fossil fuels is an important goal. Even if the pollution is identical, moving it from where everyone lives and works over to more isolated areas where power plants are would still be a big benefit.We know EVs are cleaner than that. And when the pollution is centralized in one power plant it's also more economically feasible to apply filtration or particle capture isn't it? And when the pollution is centralized in one power plant it's also more economically feasible to apply filtration or particle capture isn't it? Nitrogen pollution is usually reasonably local to the plant but also can be srubbed. Its not practical to scrub moving objects, but it is for stationary generators.Same with particulates, you can capture quite a lot with electrostatic scrubbers. The only downside is that traffic creates a lot of pollution, and the engine noise (not honking, there's very little of that) is so bad that you need to yell to a person standing next to you to have a conversation.As a visitor, I can't claim to know how to fix the problems facing locals, however I can't help but feel that urban centers would be 1000x better with mass adoption of EVs (bikes, cars). As a visitor, I can't claim to know how to fix the problems facing locals, however I can't help but feel that urban centers would be 1000x better with mass adoption of EVs (bikes, cars). Shanghai's French concession is so quiet and peaceful now that most cars are EVs. I think tier 1 Chinese cities are in a league of their own though. Thailand strikes a good balance of accessibility and development - that said I certainly agree that there are noticeable signs of it being a developing country. There will be no new fast subway in San Francisco and there will be no maglev in NYC. There will be no autonomous buses in Sydney and London will be entirely devoid of skyways.This is the nature of growth. I agree it seems hard in NYC, SF, etc but other cities have added transit Really step back and imagine a world where the modern EV [1] was first to market and a gasoline combustion engine was second.Who would actually decide to switch from a modern EV to gasoline on purpose of their own choice?The downsides of gasoline cars are actually pretty crazy: complicated engines and transmissions with heavy maintenance schedules, emissions, more NVH, worse interior space and packaging, need to wait for HVAC rather than it being ready ahead of time, need to go to a special gas station to add fuel, worse/slower performance.You would have this laundry list of downsides and your only potential plus sides are faster fueling on road trips over 4 hours long, lower curb weight, and lower cost.And those three minor down sides are very likely to be resolved sometime within the next 10-20 years. Who would actually decide to switch from a modern EV to gasoline on purpose of their own choice?The downsides of gasoline cars are actually pretty crazy: complicated engines and transmissions with heavy maintenance schedules, emissions, more NVH, worse interior space and packaging, need to wait for HVAC rather than it being ready ahead of time, need to go to a special gas station to add fuel, worse/slower performance.You would have this laundry list of downsides and your only potential plus sides are faster fueling on road trips over 4 hours long, lower curb weight, and lower cost.And those three minor down sides are very likely to be resolved sometime within the next 10-20 years. The downsides of gasoline cars are actually pretty crazy: complicated engines and transmissions with heavy maintenance schedules, emissions, more NVH, worse interior space and packaging, need to wait for HVAC rather than it being ready ahead of time, need to go to a special gas station to add fuel, worse/slower performance.You would have this laundry list of downsides and your only potential plus sides are faster fueling on road trips over 4 hours long, lower curb weight, and lower cost.And those three minor down sides are very likely to be resolved sometime within the next 10-20 years. You would have this laundry list of downsides and your only potential plus sides are faster fueling on road trips over 4 hours long, lower curb weight, and lower cost.And those three minor down sides are very likely to be resolved sometime within the next 10-20 years. And those three minor down sides are very likely to be resolved sometime within the next 10-20 years. And I said, no that's a Mazda 3 hatchback... 6-speed manual. And one requires standing outside in 10° F days like today pumping gas, while the other one is charging in my garage (and warms up the cabin from the press of a button on my phone. )The Mazda 3 was more of a driver's car, and if I had bought either new, it would be a very different equation. (I just hope more "driver's car" electric options come to our shores.) And one requires standing outside in 10° F days like today pumping gas, while the other one is charging in my garage (and warms up the cabin from the press of a button on my phone. )The Mazda 3 was more of a driver's car, and if I had bought either new, it would be a very different equation. (I just hope more "driver's car" electric options come to our shores.) And one requires standing outside in 10° F days like today pumping gas, while the other one is charging in my garage (and warms up the cabin from the press of a button on my phone. )The Mazda 3 was more of a driver's car, and if I had bought either new, it would be a very different equation. (I just hope more "driver's car" electric options come to our shores.) The Mazda 3 was more of a driver's car, and if I had bought either new, it would be a very different equation. (I just hope more "driver's car" electric options come to our shores.) (I just hope more "driver's car" electric options come to our shores.) I periodically have to stop and think about how annoying it might be in city driving with the constant stop and go.But someday I might buy myself a little shitbox with a manual that I can park on the street, maybe a Fiat 500 or something. Then they got crushed by Henry Ford's and GM's production lines. And then the depression.The Model T was a farm car. 50% of the population lived in rural areas, and they didn't have electricity. There was a market for an urban electric short-range car, it just didn't hit the economy of scale at the right time. 50% of the population lived in rural areas, and they didn't have electricity. There was a market for an urban electric short-range car, it just didn't hit the economy of scale at the right time. I travel monthly through rural parts of the US where EVs really don't make sense. Yes the population of people out there is much smaller, but if you've ever spent serious times in these parts of the country you'd realize petroleum runs everything.Even in a world where electric vehicles came first this would still be the case. Even in a world where electric vehicles came first this would still be the case. But today we've got basically the opposite.I would disagree with the idea that petroleum would run everything out there if EVs came first but I won't argue that point super hard with you. I can see and understand how petroleum is a lifeline for things like oil heat, generators, etc.Still, batteries are very well-suited to off-grid usage, and EV batteries can even power your house for a week or more in the event of a power outage. Let's not forget that solar panels exist.There are entire islands that have switched from imported diesel fuel power generation to grid scale solar+battery and they have had a great deal of cost savings and reliability benefits. I would disagree with the idea that petroleum would run everything out there if EVs came first but I won't argue that point super hard with you. I can see and understand how petroleum is a lifeline for things like oil heat, generators, etc.Still, batteries are very well-suited to off-grid usage, and EV batteries can even power your house for a week or more in the event of a power outage. Let's not forget that solar panels exist.There are entire islands that have switched from imported diesel fuel power generation to grid scale solar+battery and they have had a great deal of cost savings and reliability benefits. Still, batteries are very well-suited to off-grid usage, and EV batteries can even power your house for a week or more in the event of a power outage. Let's not forget that solar panels exist.There are entire islands that have switched from imported diesel fuel power generation to grid scale solar+battery and they have had a great deal of cost savings and reliability benefits. There are entire islands that have switched from imported diesel fuel power generation to grid scale solar+battery and they have had a great deal of cost savings and reliability benefits. Plus now you have problems moving tonnes of food, water, ammunition on BEV vehicles that no longer have reliable charging access. Being unable to supply your military is more or less a death knell for any fighting force.Even setting aviation aside, a lot of the reason why gas engines were adopted was because agriculture was among the first to do so, they were less finicky then ox and horses. Rural areas didn't have access to electricity like cities did at the time though; It was a lot easier to have a tin of whatever liquid fuel (gasoline was a byproduct of kerosone production at the time). Even setting aviation aside, a lot of the reason why gas engines were adopted was because agriculture was among the first to do so, they were less finicky then ox and horses. Rural areas didn't have access to electricity like cities did at the time though; It was a lot easier to have a tin of whatever liquid fuel (gasoline was a byproduct of kerosone production at the time). Many Chinese car buyers' first vehicles are electric, and many of those people buying cars are quite used to electric scooters as their transportation method.Speaking of wars, how many wars for oil would be avoided if there wasn't a widespread dependency on cheap oil? If the gas price ever goes above $5-7/gallon in America it basically triggers a recession. Many Chinese car buyers' first vehicles are electric, and many of those people buying cars are quite used to electric scooters as their transportation method.Speaking of wars, how many wars for oil would be avoided if there wasn't a widespread dependency on cheap oil? If the gas price ever goes above $5-7/gallon in America it basically triggers a recession. Speaking of wars, how many wars for oil would be avoided if there wasn't a widespread dependency on cheap oil? If the gas price ever goes above $5-7/gallon in America it basically triggers a recession. Gas engines were far more polluting but way less complex in 1910. Anyone who likes the sensations of driving and not just going fast in a straight line. When you show me the equivalent of an EV Lotus Elise, I'll be properly swayed. Where are the Mitsubishi Eclipse, Toyota Celica, Toyota MR2, Chevrolet Camaro, Z4/Supra getting discontinued, Focus RS, Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, the list goes on? The Nissan Z was just updated but sales have been abysmal. There are a number of electric supercars and hypercars on the market: https://www.roadandtrack.com/rankings/g45639363/best-electri... Chinese cars are a "better deal" because they give more bang for the buck. Japanese cars, on the other hand, are very "stingy" due to decades of near monopoly. Although to be fair new ICE cars are also a luxury item. Most people can only buy used ICE cars these days A few cars from Stellantis that are available in ICE and EV variants are now actually cheaper in the EV variant. This reflects the reality that batteries are now cheap and EVs don't have a lot of moving parts. So, they should be easier and cheaper to assemble. Driven by component and cheap battery availability.Used EVs are widely available now as well. You can get some amazing deals on cars that mostly still have their drive trains + batteries under warranty. These are mostly still the relatively expensive models from a few years ago.The cheap EVs that are now on the market will inevitably start penetrating the second hand market in larger and larger numbers. Cheap ICE cars are disappearing rapidly from the market as models are being discontinued by manufacturers and as the market shares for ICE vehicles keep on shrinking. You'll still be able to get your Ford Fiesta. Or the new electric model that they are rumored to launch soonish. You can get some amazing deals on cars that mostly still have their drive trains + batteries under warranty. These are mostly still the relatively expensive models from a few years ago.The cheap EVs that are now on the market will inevitably start penetrating the second hand market in larger and larger numbers. Cheap ICE cars are disappearing rapidly from the market as models are being discontinued by manufacturers and as the market shares for ICE vehicles keep on shrinking. You'll still be able to get your Ford Fiesta. Or the new electric model that they are rumored to launch soonish. Cheap ICE cars are disappearing rapidly from the market as models are being discontinued by manufacturers and as the market shares for ICE vehicles keep on shrinking. You'll still be able to get your Ford Fiesta. Or the new electric model that they are rumored to launch soonish. This is still a net positive even in poorer countries. So those better off are slowly being pushed towards EVs (or at least hybrids), and the vast majority of others still relies on importing like 15 years old second-hand cars (EURO 5 standard) to replace their 25yo cars (EURO 3 standard). In the capital, cars below EURO 4 are even banned when air pollution gets really bad, but the vast majority doesn't even realise this rule exists because their cars are now EURO 4 or above. I live in one of those poorer ones where most people can't afford new cars, but even if you can, the percentage of brand-new ICE cars that are even available for purchasing is going down pretty fast in recent years. So those better off are slowly being pushed towards EVs (or at least hybrids), and the vast majority of others still relies on importing like 15 years old second-hand cars (EURO 5 standard) to replace their 25yo cars (EURO 3 standard). In the capital, cars below EURO 4 are even banned when air pollution gets really bad, but the vast majority doesn't even realise this rule exists because their cars are now EURO 4 or above. You also don't have a gas station inside your apartment. From an air pollution perspective you are much better off a half mile from 10 jets taking off, than you are surrounded by a hundred idling gasoline cars. And the semi is such vaporware that I forgot it was even a thing. Standing near the average car isn't that bad at all. EVs are way better, but it's not that bad.But stand near a car that has some sort of exhaust problem or isn't burning fuel correctly and it's bad. Just horrible to breathe.I've found cabin air filters either activated carbon help immensely. I started buying them on someone's recommendation but I had no idea how much they affected things.I've driven on brand new asphalt and not noticed the smell. But stand near a car that has some sort of exhaust problem or isn't burning fuel correctly and it's bad. Just horrible to breathe.I've found cabin air filters either activated carbon help immensely. I started buying them on someone's recommendation but I had no idea how much they affected things.I've driven on brand new asphalt and not noticed the smell. I've found cabin air filters either activated carbon help immensely. I started buying them on someone's recommendation but I had no idea how much they affected things.I've driven on brand new asphalt and not noticed the smell. I've driven on brand new asphalt and not noticed the smell. All of a sudden lately I'm smelling the terrible cars again. That won't happen until they design a normal truck. It would help to have 400+ kWh batteries and megawatt chargers. At current prices, the standard range battery in a Lightning (which is nominally about 107kWh or so) should cost under $10K. They will not be able to shrink the battery enough to offset the cost of putting in an engine and generator. For one, they have to stay competitive with the Dodge EREV pickup, which will have a ~90kWh battery.My guess is they leave out one or two modules from the standard range pack and price the truck starting at $70K. They won't make a ton of money, but they might be able to get a nice boost in volume to make up for it. My guess is they leave out one or two modules from the standard range pack and price the truck starting at $70K. They won't make a ton of money, but they might be able to get a nice boost in volume to make up for it. One problem they are experiencing is rust and glazing on the pads from disuse.They are heavier than the equivalent sized ICE so have more tire wear, but dont have to be that large in an absolute sense. They are heavier than the equivalent sized ICE so have more tire wear, but dont have to be that large in an absolute sense. One pedal drive can still use the brake pads, regen braking is what saves brake usage regardless of one pedal drive being on or not. It's not a hard sell: no more oil changes, no more annual emissions-testing bill, no transmission to ever worry about, and a massive chunk of storage under the hood where the gas engine would be – plus a bunch of outlets all over for powering or charging tools. When I then tell them that I spend about $30/month on charging the thing (at home) compared to my former gas budget of ~$150-200/month, it becomes even more of a no-brainer.And none of this has anything to do with climate change. It's just plain and simple practicality.They tend to ask about range. I get around 300 miles on a full charge when road-tripping, and Buc-ees has some pretty cheap chargers (still cheaper than gas would be) that get me back on the road in about the time it takes me to use the bathroom, grab and eat some brisket, and change the baby's diaper. I've done some shortish road-trips a few times now, and not had any problems. And none of this has anything to do with climate change. It's just plain and simple practicality.They tend to ask about range. I get around 300 miles on a full charge when road-tripping, and Buc-ees has some pretty cheap chargers (still cheaper than gas would be) that get me back on the road in about the time it takes me to use the bathroom, grab and eat some brisket, and change the baby's diaper. I've done some shortish road-trips a few times now, and not had any problems. I get around 300 miles on a full charge when road-tripping, and Buc-ees has some pretty cheap chargers (still cheaper than gas would be) that get me back on the road in about the time it takes me to use the bathroom, grab and eat some brisket, and change the baby's diaper. I've done some shortish road-trips a few times now, and not had any problems. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_lawIt also simply moves the pollution to places like Africa where the extremely dirty lithium mining is externalized away from wealthy westerners.Environmental externalization. It also simply moves the pollution to places like Africa where the extremely dirty lithium mining is externalized away from wealthy westerners.Environmental externalization. Most cars are far too heavy and should be made lighter. Only Mazda seems to understand this and that's why the Mazda SUVs/sedans are by far the best driving vehicles in their class. As your wikipedia link indicates, any road that is designed for lorry use should be able to take heavy sedans all day and not be worse for wear:> Therefore, the resulting stress difference between truck and car is 15,000 to 1. > Therefore, the resulting stress difference between truck and car is 15,000 to 1. > Next, the research team obtained data from the Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI), a high-resolution satellite sensor that provides daily, global measurements of NO₂ and other pollutants. They used this data to calculate annual average NO₂ levels in each California neighborhood from 2019 to 2023.> Over the study period, a typical neighborhood gained 272 ZEVs, with most neighborhoods adding between 18 and 839. For every 200 new ZEVs registered, NO₂ levels dropped 1.1%, a measurable improvement in air quality.Seems pretty clear to me that that's controlled for. > Over the study period, a typical neighborhood gained 272 ZEVs, with most neighborhoods adding between 18 and 839. For every 200 new ZEVs registered, NO₂ levels dropped 1.1%, a measurable improvement in air quality.Seems pretty clear to me that that's controlled for. One that doesn't support a neo-Nazi trying to wreck America's economy and political system for his own gains.I hear the Hyundai Ioniq is supposed to be pretty good. I hear the Hyundai Ioniq is supposed to be pretty good. 1: Yes, let's stick with ICE cars and die of preventable illnesses because EVs are only a massive improvement, rather than absolute perfection2: Hey let's take this massive improvement and enjoy enormously cleaner airI meet way too many people from group 1 unfortunately. 2: Hey let's take this massive improvement and enjoy enormously cleaner airI meet way too many people from group 1 unfortunately. I meet way too many people from group 1 unfortunately. Oil not used in ICE cars is just used someplace else.Electric cars are great for the city/suburbs but don't really make a dent in the larger resource usage issues facing us. Electric cars are great for the city/suburbs but don't really make a dent in the larger resource usage issues facing us. You're missing that the supply drops as well since it is not economical to produce the same amount of oil as before at a lower price.As long as the supply curve does not change (and nothing about EV usage changes the supply side here), a reduction in demand leads to lower consumption.Edit: And in addition, your chart doesn't show anything like you purport it to show. By your claim, oil consumption by non-Western countries should have been drastically higher in 2000-2007 when oil prices were lower than they are today. Switching to EVs would act as a reduction in demand and therefore reduce overall oil usage, at least as compared to a world where vehicle transport required ICE vehicles. As long as the supply curve does not change (and nothing about EV usage changes the supply side here), a reduction in demand leads to lower consumption.Edit: And in addition, your chart doesn't show anything like you purport it to show. By your claim, oil consumption by non-Western countries should have been drastically higher in 2000-2007 when oil prices were lower than they are today. Switching to EVs would act as a reduction in demand and therefore reduce overall oil usage, at least as compared to a world where vehicle transport required ICE vehicles. By your claim, oil consumption by non-Western countries should have been drastically higher in 2000-2007 when oil prices were lower than they are today. Switching to EVs would act as a reduction in demand and therefore reduce overall oil usage, at least as compared to a world where vehicle transport required ICE vehicles. Switching to EVs would act as a reduction in demand and therefore reduce overall oil usage, at least as compared to a world where vehicle transport required ICE vehicles. I'd like to see the same attention being given to plastics (so much single-use crap and how much of it can be recycled? ), synthetic clothing, and all kinds of other chemicals including the ones we put in ourselves (pharma, food) and the environment, like fertilizers or the byproducts of mining today's fashionable minerals like lithium. Not to mention the explosion in electromagnetic frequencies activity, which somehow is taken as normal and ok by the same scientific establishment which accepts thousands(?) You just have to love the irony when something like Science is deemed 'settled'-- in that regard, it's almost as if we went back a few centuries.There's certainly a lot to be said for humans needing to take better care of the planet. Co2 just gets a little too much attention for my taste. And don't take from this that I love oil. Co2 just gets a little too much attention for my taste. And don't take from this that I love oil. GHG are a matter of life or death for hundreds of millions living in poverty in coastal areas or living from their own agriculture.Of course you live in a 1st world country and it likely won't kill you, just cost you tons of moneyIt's not about "take better care of the planet", whatever you think that means It's not about "take better care of the planet", whatever you think that means That's what I hear from mainstream media all the time. Do you have some information or argument that will help me see things differently?>Of course you live in a 1st world country and it likely won't kill you, just cost you tons of moneyA little presumptuous to assume my living conditions>It's not about "take better care of the planet", whatever you think that meansNow that's just snarky and done in bad faith. If I didn't care would I have posted it, already antecipating the downvotes?We humans got where we are much due to technology, but we have to start thinking seriously where we go from here or there won't be land or water (or air?) >Of course you live in a 1st world country and it likely won't kill you, just cost you tons of moneyA little presumptuous to assume my living conditions>It's not about "take better care of the planet", whatever you think that meansNow that's just snarky and done in bad faith. If I didn't care would I have posted it, already antecipating the downvotes?We humans got where we are much due to technology, but we have to start thinking seriously where we go from here or there won't be land or water (or air?) A little presumptuous to assume my living conditions>It's not about "take better care of the planet", whatever you think that meansNow that's just snarky and done in bad faith. If I didn't care would I have posted it, already antecipating the downvotes?We humans got where we are much due to technology, but we have to start thinking seriously where we go from here or there won't be land or water (or air?) >It's not about "take better care of the planet", whatever you think that meansNow that's just snarky and done in bad faith. If I didn't care would I have posted it, already antecipating the downvotes?We humans got where we are much due to technology, but we have to start thinking seriously where we go from here or there won't be land or water (or air?) Now that's just snarky and done in bad faith. If I didn't care would I have posted it, already antecipating the downvotes?We humans got where we are much due to technology, but we have to start thinking seriously where we go from here or there won't be land or water (or air?) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_surface_temperature#Glo...On this page can be found the following graphic https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ca/EP...On that graphic -- under the heading 'Ice cores (from 800,000 years before present)' in case the link gets truncated -- one can observe regular peaks in temperature that took place before the current one. I'm open to dialogue but won't entertain any more lazy dismissals and unfair characterization. I'm open to dialogue but won't entertain any more lazy dismissals and unfair characterization. On that graphic -- under the heading 'Ice cores (from 800,000 years before present)' in case the link gets truncated -- one can observe regular peaks in temperature that took place before the current one. I'm open to dialogue but won't entertain any more lazy dismissals and unfair characterization. I'm open to dialogue but won't entertain any more lazy dismissals and unfair characterization.