first results on a quick search for phones that allow bootloader unlocking.

Hopefully, all of the devs, (or at the very least, most of the them) move over to help speed up and improve the alternative OS’s

It would be a beautiful kick in the face to Google if there a relatively quick mass migration from Android to any or all of those.

https://www.howtogeek.com/buy-these-brands-if-you-truly-want-to-own-your-phone/

It’s deliberately vague, even the politicians found it confusing. It’s bleeding corruption.

From HERE

“It is a temporary exception that lets U.S. tech firms scan direct messages on services such as Instagram, Discord, Snapchat, Gmail and iCloud without a warrant or prior suspicion.”

It basically allows any company to scan and read any of your messages that they are able to.

• https://www.politico.eu/article/child-abuse-bill-tweaked-by-parliament-sent-back-to-council/

Because of the unusual procedure, voting in Strasbourg was confused and chaotic. One member told Parliament Vice President Sophie Wilmès: “We don’t know what we are voting on.”

The vote means member countries must now decide whether to accept the Parliament’s changes. If they do not, and propose a different version, the law will go to a dreaded “conciliation” procedure. That procedure was used earlier this year to pass a long-stalled law on air passengers’ rights but, other than that, has not been used since 2013.

Wondering how and who voted what? (It’s mainly the EPP Party pushing it, but others are too)

HERE IS THE IMPORTANT BIT: (Because it is a “proposition de rejet”)

• 🟢 🟩 Green means AGAINST Chat Control 🟢 🟩

• 🔴 🟥 Red means FOR Chat Control 🔴 🟥

HOW THEY VOTED

Time has come for moving towards !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com Politicians be Politicing too much with themselves in mind.

Britain must now unite behind Count Binface

A court without fools is a dangerous place

By Will Dunn

Photo by Benjamin Cremel/AFP via Getty Images

Ten years ago last month, two rival flotillas of pleasure cruisers faced off on the Thames outside Westminster. A fleet of anti-EU demonstrators, led by Nigel Farage and Kate Hoey, went up against a pro-Remain armada commanded by Bob Geldof in what many people thought of as the nadir of British political dignity. Those people were wrong. Our country is always looking for a more embarrassing disagreement, and now it has found one. Nigel Farage has called a referendum on whether he should be allowed to accept millions of pounds from a secretive donor based in Thailand without declaring it properly, and it looks as if the only person who is prepared to have this argument with him is a man with a bin on his head.

The other political parties have all declined to contest the Clacton by-election because they see it as a publicity stunt designed to delay the investigation that the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards had been conducting into Farage’s failure to register a £5m gift – a gift which was reported to the National Crime Agency over money laundering concerns. This seems a reasonable complaint, both on a technical level – the Standards Commissioner’s procedural protocol states that if an MP “ceases to be a Member while an investigation is in progress, the Commissioner will suspend their investigation until the Member is re-elected” – and on a political level, in that this does look very much like an attempt by Farage to gain as much attention as possible, in order to make the story about him fighting a by-election and not about him fighting allegations of corruption. It’s not in the interests of other parties to help him do this. The only other candidate appropriate to participate in such a malodorous contest is a man with a bin on his head.

For most of his career, Nigel Farage has presented himself as the option for people who are disappointed in politics itself. Among the many risible claims in his resignation speech yesterday was the assertion that voting for him – a former commodities trader, a man with his own TV show, a promoter of gold bars, the multi-millionaire leader of the highest-polling political party in the UK – would be an opportunity to “stick two fingers up at the entire establishment”. This is obviously not true when there is another candidate who exists purely to register discontent with other candidates, and who is also literally a man with a bin on his head.

Count Binface belongs to a proud British tradition – much longer and prouder than any British tradition Nigel Farage can claim to represent – of candidates who exist solely to allow the electorate to express how inadequate they find the other options. Rather than not voting, or voting for someone they don’t actually believe should hold power, the people can send a message that they consider the other candidates so insufficient as representatives that they would rather vote for a man with a bin on his head.

This is a tradition that predates our democracy by at least nine centuries, since the days of Hitard (jester to the Anglo-Saxon king, Edmund Ironside) and his successors Roland the Farter (Henry II), Will Somers (Henry VIII) and Liz Truss (Elizabeth II/Charles III). England does not bow to its leviathan without smirking. Part of the deal that power makes with us is that the power structure will occasionally be exposed as a joke on everyone involved. This is not an affront to those in power, but a service: fools remind the powerful of their limits, of how flimsy their dignity is. Count Binface is not just a novelty candidate. He occupies an important political role, a role that can only be fulfilled by putting a bin on his head.

A court without fools is a dangerous place. In California in the 1980s, a drag artist who performed as Sister Boom Boom, in a nun’s habit, ran for office (giving the electorate the chance to vote for “nun of the above”). In response, a law was passed requiring candidates to use their real names. Clearly, however, this did not impose dignity upon American politics. Quite the opposite. Without fools, indignity in US politics went unregulated. Senators and presidents had no-one to show them what was ridiculous and what wasn’t, and so their politics became ever more ridiculous, until America descended into the madness we see today. The barring from office of Sister Boom Boom is the sole cause of American political madness, and that country would return to sanity if it had the chance to vote for – and was perhaps ruled, for a time – by a man with a bin on his head.

But Count Binface has a job to do here, first. He could simply decline to contest the Clacton by-election, to dismiss it as a stunt too ridiculous even for him, and that would be fair enough. But it would be better for him to go the distance, to provide the people of Clacton with an option. To show the political class – the entire establishment! – that anyone who considers themselves above the rules can be taken down by a man with a bin on his head.

Continue Reading here - https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2026/07/britain-must-now-unite-behind-count-binface

“Super Easy to Defeat” is the now. They don’t care about that.

They just need you to accept it, and move along.

In a few years time, it will not be “super easy to defeat” but will be standard practice and accepted law.

By that stage it will likely be too late to do anything. They will have tied it in with chat control and all of our data.

Can you imagine the freedom that will be discovered 50 years from now in a trend, when people decide to ditch their personal devices and live like they used to 70, 80 years ago (maybe even 60).

Stop using Google as a verb. “Search” company name.

• If you stay in/get into the habit of searching for products using google, inflation will just keep happening and amazon will give them a kickback. (Google charge for the higher search results).
• They save and use your data, you are effectively an unpaid employee of google (it is how google ‘work’ - they also are the reason you are often paying more. The best way to do it is

1. Find a cool product (if it happens to be on amazon, so be it).
2. Search the name of that company on Duckduckgo, or qwant or many other non data collecting engines that don’t have a kickback agreement with seller, or just a lower rate.
3. 10% (or any) code is the reason they are selling product higher. Some people buy at the higher price (presumably most) so why would they care if people find the 10% discount code (advertisement on search engines) to get the product for the normal price?
4. Company avoids paying both amazon and google, - it’s not really “losing a 25% margin” unless you believe that they don’t pass the fees on to the customer (YOU).
5. You avoid giving money to all the c**ts but more importantly, you pay the proper item value, or you help competition grow.

The old way (2007ish - 2026) is the shit way.

That’s my point. They are the ones who should be transparent. The reason they are pushing this, the reason SKG was beaten etc… They need reminding.

It won’t be long before they are at our doors, cap in hand begging for us to tick their name on a ballot paper as we should believe that they are the best person/people for the job.

Deciding on the Procedure means Deciding on the Substance

If the urgency is approved on Tuesday, the decisive vote on the substance is scheduled to take place as early as Thursday – the final sitting day before the summer recess. Experience shows that significantly fewer MEPs are present on this day. However, since 361 votes are required for amendments or a rejection, the reinstatement of the expired “Chat Control 1.0” regulation would become virtually inevitable.

Every payment sent, every penny received, every communication, every deal that they try to strike should all be publicised as they seem to forget which direction the transparency should be.

Jesus. I was better off not knowing.

From OP article.

The BBC set up a new alias Instagram account in India after noticing the platform was pushing sexually suggestive content even when users had not searched for it.

Who the fuck would be searching that?

Rhetorical.

No wonder so many are moving from Telegram to Max

Excuse my naivety, but what is “content that promote or facilitate child sexual abuse material”

Maybe it’s living in a society where that stuff is already banned/not seen, but I can’t get my head around that at all.

is it ads like “meet young kids in your area” type thing?

I’m not sure I want to know, I know I definitely don’t want to see, but could someone explain what something like that would entail.

The Israeli papers to give them their official title. they damn most of the most powerful and influential people in the world. Given that it’s easier for them to collude and say nothing, that’s what they’ll do.

Lol.

I agree. I don’t know what way my head was thinking. I was thinking of the $60. $20 per month is doable, especially to those that have no other choice, but admittedly it would be a stretch. But the point is the pricing (not just for kagi).

$60 per year to search something is too much. But, the price of all tech is too high. It has never properly been structured and companies charge what they want.

$60 per year might be ‘nothing’ to you, but not all people in every developed nation would agree. ~~Many could feed 3 families or more on that for a month. ~~ Edited because my brain exited for a minute.

Developed nation or not, the pricing structure of tech that has driven up the cost of everything around the world needs to be reigned in.

I could use:

• Kagi free tier for 100 uses per month
• Qwant - Free (do not collect or sell data)
• Brave - Free (Claim not to collect data)
• DDG - Free (do not collect or sell data)

And many more. So how is Kagi “Starter” worth $5 per month + sales tax and limited to 300 searches (Advertised as “Enough searches to get you going”).

That argument could be repeated (and they hope it will be) as to why the ‘professional’ ($10 per month + tax) or ‘ultimate’ ($25 per month + tax) are better. Effectively saying that the $5 per month is barely worth paying for.

No, how often you would need to use a search engine that would give you the results that something like kagi would. price vs privacy is a great selling point as mentioned by somebody else, but $60 per year is probably regarded as a bit high to many users.

You could probably get similar results using many different engines for the same query, or their free tier, which could be good enough to get people to agree with their pricing. 🤷

Another subscription. $5 a month is fairly pricey anyway, considering how often you would probably need to use it.

Yes you are. BBC says it so it has to be true. You just probably don’t remember doing it and can’t see it on the windows.

iVPN and Mullvad are usually the two go-to mentions when somebody asks “what is the best VPN?”.

There are many comparison reviews and sometimes there are one or two others thrown into the mix, most common one I’ve seen is protonvpn, but others may have seen different

Another comparison review

I’m pretty sure it’s corrected in the article. The myth is explained as are the facts. But don’t say it didn’t happen. There’s too much proof.

EDIT…

I just read that wiki.

Fuck sake… there’s no attempt to say that Irish slavery is a reason to downplay African Slavery.

Just because the Paddies were white (hard to see past the dirt on their faces in the old photos). The “indentured Servants” a.k.a Slavery did exist… it doesn’t belittle anything else.

It happened. it’s a thing.

it’s a thing a lot of the world tries to disown. But it happened.

Most are over it.

A lot of the Caribbean islands descendants are proof of both African and Irish Slaves.

Admittedly I didn’t read past the first paragraph on that wiki. But it seemed like it’s as good as denying anything else in history because it downplays other atrocities (which it doesn’t).

It’s just another example.

It’s not “the Irish got it worse” etc.

That wiki page is funny though.

Walking and dietary changes.

Even if it’s a diet you can’t stick to forever, sticking to it for a couple of months, or 10 weeks should make a big enough difference that you find many exercises easier to start, and then go from there. One step at a time instead of trying to achieve finished goal immediately, will probably work better for you.