I pay for YouTube because it does give more revenue than watching an ad to the creators. I pay 6$ and watch hundreds of hours monthly. If it was more than that I will consider alternatives and AdBlock (what I was doing before started my sub). To each their own :)
When the Find My Device network came to my device I was literally asked if I want my device to be part of it, so even though by default it's an opt-out feature, everyone whose device can be connected to the network is asked if they want that to happen.
Seems like it's just another switch toflick off and forget about
Going to be called YouTube Podcasts. Soon to be spun off into Google Wallet + Podcasts, then to be renamed Podcasts Pay, then Pay Podcasts, then Google Chrome with Podcasts.
You seem to have some particular privacy concerns that I'm not totally in the know about, but if it being an app isn't a requirement, I've used photojoiner.com with great success and no obnoxious stuff to my knowledge.
They do have an app, but I'm not sure it will meet your privacy requirements.
You sound like someone who has a pretty locked down browser, so all it should get is what you supply, but if you want to keep it locally, I don't imagine this would help you, but if it's not the photos but rather your other data and location you wish to protect, this may work.
Again, I'm not hardcore into data privacy, so I may be off on what you need.
Thanks! Yeah that is a service running entirely on their site, so permissionwise very good but they get your stuff. There are lots of browser tools running locally using javascript, and images never leave the browser.
Greetings, friend. Do you wish to look as happy as me? Well, you've got the power inside you right now. Use it, and send one dollar to Happy Dude, 742 Evergreen Terrace, Springfield. Don't delay. Eternal happiness is only a dollar away.
(Sorry for your inconvenience, but this is all I can think of now. 😆)
The device OEM should ensure any RCS client is not modified since it was released, e.g. using integrity checks. The service provider and MNO could potentially rely on such assurance from the OEM. For example, the RCS client should not be running on a device that has ‘root access’ or is ‘jailbroken’.
We really need to move away from the idea that a user having control over his/her device is insecure.
I can use online banking and paypal with windows logged in as administrator or GNU/Linux logged in as root[0], why shouldn't I be able to use google walletpay wallet with root?
[0] yes I know you shouldn't log in as root, but that doesn't change that you can do it.
The problem with root access is that malware uses root access to take funds out of Google Wallets and banking apps. They're not protecting you, they're protecting themselves from having to pay their users their money back for losing all of their savings to TotallyLegitWhatsAppUpdatev0.1alpha.apk.zip.
I must be missing something. How would Google be at all liable for restoring funds stolen by software that they themselves didn't furnish, on a device that's out of their control?
A judge may not see it that way. They may perceive it as Google failing to provide adequate protections to their users.
If user installed the app created by Google and did not share any login credentials. It's easy to claim Google is liable.
The equivalent would be a bank leaving the back door to their vault open. An intruder going in and removing your funds. Despite following all the banks instructions, the bank has not replaced the funds.
The banks is responsible for people gaining unauthorised access to your account. Especially when you don't share your login credentials with anyone (even unknowingly). If they can't protect against root access attacks then, they shouldn't permit use of their app on those devices.
Apps have convenience features, especially related to easy sign in. Their website logins don't have these features. They require the user to enter passwords, challenge codes, card reader etc. If someone gets access to a password manager, the user is at fault. The bank likely stated you shouldn't write down or record your password.
I have no special love for Linus Tech Tips, but a lot of the defences used by Fairphone are quite weak in my opinion.
"It's better than the Fairphone 4" doesn't really matter when I'm comparing the Fairphone to a Pixel phone.
"Who needs to watch 10 hours of Youtube"? Very few people do, but half the battery life in video decode means charging your phone twice as often even if you don't watch Youtube all day. The unfortunate SIM card/SD card slot placement is also just that, unfortunate; there are good reasons for them to be placed there, but other phones have sliders or slots that will let you live swap either card without even taking the back off, and I think the way Fairphone approached it is suboptimal. It not being designed for easy swapping doesn't mean that people who do want easily swappable cards are wrong for having their preferences, especially when so many thinner, faster, cheaper phones can do the same just fine.
The inefficient SoC that gets Fairphone 8 years of support is nice, especially for a company that small, but with Google and Samsung also offering 7 to 8 years of support on their phones, it becomes much less impressive. Five years ago, this would've been a gamechanger, but right now, they're doing marginally better than their competition at the cost of a huge dip in performance. What's worse, is that regardless of it being their fault or not, Fairphone has a relatively spotty history when it comes to patching.
The software gripes Linus seems to take issue with seem to be the LineageOS/Android defaults, or the Google parts (i.e. the stupid Google launcher that Google forces its partners to use, unless you want to ship your own). Still, promises of "we will fix the software in an update" are meaningless to a consumer buying a phone now. I've read plenty of "we will patch this" comments from manufacturers over the years, and without a definitive timescale, those promises are worthless.
For a customer who wants the best phone for their money, the Fairphone is objectively worse. It's marketed at the niche segment of people who are willing to spend extra for a mid-tier phone to get more environmentally and socially conscious hardware. And you know what? I don't disagree with Linus' suggestion at the end: even the fairest phone is environmentally costlier than rescuing an old second hand phone.
Most people will be incredibly unhappy with a Fairphone 5 if the alternative would've been a Pixel 8. I think it's fair for LTT to review the phone from a general consumer point of view.
Of course, LTT is also hypocritical as balls, as very similar problems and the very same insane price-to-quality difference is also present for Framework laptops. Expensive hardware, meh software, many suboptimal design choices.
For a customer who wants the best phone for their money, the Fairphone is objectively worse
Objectivity worse in performance, sure. Some people consider more things than just being a fastest bang for the buck. Unethical mining, forced labour, e-waste, data mining, and lots of other things. If you care at all, that is.
If you want to compare that to a product made by a billion dollar company, no one is stopping anyone. There is cost associated with doing things ethically. Small companies aren't financed to eat those costs to gain the market. It speaks more about principles than anything else.
I don't disagree with Linus' suggestion at the end: even the fairest phone is environmentally costlier than rescuing an old second hand phone
is it? The person who sold the phone is most definitely going to buy a new phone and if they sold the phone released last year they will most likely do so every year. The reason there's a second hand market with a year old phones is because people obsessively buy new phones. How exactly is that environmentally friendly than starting to use a phone made by a company with higher ethics? Surely the later stacks higher in being environmentally and morally friendly?
Duchebag is spouting capitalists "trickle down" economics. Rather than fix the cause, find the flex tape to hide it. Rich people buy new phones, less rich buy phones from the rich, and so on. No one needs to look past the marketing into ethics in how they were made and companies keep profiting in billions by exploitation of the poor. So so environmentally friendly.
People are going to buy new phones regardless. You not buying used phones is not going to change that.
Buying used or refurbished keeps the devices they‘d throw away (or keep in a drawer for 10 years, then throw away), if they couldn’t sell them, from landfills.
Also, I know plenty of people who are well off that buy second hand phones and even more people who couldn’t even afford a Fairphone (which starts at almost 500€ for a 4 and 650€ for a 5) that buy a brand new 200-300€ phone every two years.
And those low end phones are the least environmentally friendly because they‘re definitely unethically made they most likely break more quickly than higher end options, they usually don’t get updates for very long, if at all, and there’s no noteworthy second hand market for them because people just throw them away (or into a drawer) if the phone stops working or when they feel like getting a new one, because who buys a 2 year old low end phone second hand?
Buying used instead is a great option. You get a higher end device for cheaper without anything new having to be made for you. It‘ll still last you years and you’ll have a better experience than with a cheap new phone.
Yes, it would be better if all phones were ethically produced, easy to repair and would last a long time. Especially if there are ethically phones in the sub 300€ market.
Won’t be easy to achieve, if at all, and wouldn’t stop blind consumerism but it would make for an even better second hand market. Because, you know what’s better than a fairphone? A second hand fairphone.
They are both products focused on being fairer for consumers with upgradable components and better repairability. In terms of this discussion yours is a distinction without a difference.
Android
Top
This magazine is not receiving updates (last activity 2 day(s) ago). Subscribe to start receiving updates.