Ha, my thoughts exactly. I've dipped out of Lemmy for a few weeks, just dipped back in today. "I wonder if it's still wall to wall Musk?" I thought, logging in; and this was the first post I see.
Patch
joined 1 year ago
There's nothing truly like a Framework, because they're a whole unique category of one. But if you just want something that is user serviceable there are other options.
I'm a big fan of my Star Labs laptop. It came with complete disassembly and reassembly instructions, and pretty much every part is available to buy individually as a replacement. It's not magically "plug and go" like a Framework, but if you're comfortable with a screwdriver you should have no trouble.
They're a Linux specialist small independent producer, too. And being based in the UK, imports to Switzerland should be more straightforward than imports from the States.
The corollary of that line of thought though is that by preventing tech companies from dabbling in microprocessors you reduce competition in the microprocessor space- a sector which has proven very prone to the formation of monopolies/duopolies. If anything, we want to encourage more new competitors in that space, not fewer.
Also, it'd be essentially arbitrary. Is it OK for Apple to design its own microprocessors, but not Amazon- and if so, why? Is Google allowed if it uses them in phones like Apple, but not if it uses them in data centres like Amazon?
What with Trump recently declaring (in his usual completely coherent and not at all deranged manner) that Google Are Bad, the Supreme Court might not necessarily be feeling so keen to help out on this one.
All licence applications cost the same in the UK, regardless of what you apply for (or to be more exact: the cost scales with the size of the venue according to fixed bands related to "business rates" valuations).
Licensing conditions are actually entirely fluid and negotiable between the applicant and the local council, who act as the licensing body. Not only with regards to opening hours, but also to all sorts of weird and wonderful additional terms. In practice when it comes to opening hours, a lot of pubs and bars apply for (and are granted) licenses quite a lot later than their actual intended closing time, as it gives them leeway to open late for special occasions without the need to apply for a temporary extension, and gives flexibility for "lock ins" (i.e. continuing to serve customers after they'd normally have shut up shop).
Yes, "24 hour licensing" means that bars can apply for any licence they want, but they don't need to apply for a full 24 hours if they don't want to; they can apply for any licence terms they like.
They also don't need to open for the full terms of their licence. Just because they've been granted a 4am licence, it doesn't mean they can't still shut up shop at 10:30pm if they like. It's permission to open during those hours, not an obligation.
The UK already has 24 hour drinks licensing in theory, and lots of bars have a late licence. But in practice, very few bars actually open through the night; it turns out that the economics of keeping a bar staffed and open when most of the customers are in bed just doesn't work out.
It's pretty much just nightclubs that make any use of it.
The UK isn't quite that far, but it's absolutely the dominant text messaging and calling app in the UK. Nobody uses the built in Android or Apple tools anymore, and I'm as likely to receive a WhatsApp voice call as an actual phone call these days.
I have Signal on my phone, but I've literally never had a cause to use it; I've simply got no contacts on there.
One of these days someone should write a script that just automatically adds all the Amazon Prime games to your various Epic/GOG/etc. accounts.
I say "someone", because I'm far too lazy to do it.
But anyway, it would take a lot of work out of the job of mindlessly hoarding games I'll never get round to playing.
See, now I'm fine with that. I pay for Netflix and I want what I pay for to stay ad-free. Having an ad-supported tier with no fee in addition to that means that there are options for other people without enshittifying my experience.
That's a world of difference to what Amazon have done where they've shoved ads into the service that I thought I was paying for, and then offered to charge me even more to get my original ad-free service back.
They said wrong answers only, wtf.
I know number literacy is not journalism's strong point, but surely even the author can grasp the basics of "which number is bigger".
Bringing 0.25 million houses into occupancy does not "arguably" negate the need to build 1.5 million houses. At best it reduces the required new builds to 1.25 million.
The larger figure (700k) is a meaningless figure for this discussion, because short term vacant homes are by definition not a problem that needs to be solved. Most of them will be homes which are vacant "between occupants", e.g. ones where the tenant has moved out and a new one hasn't moved in yet, or the homes of the recently deceased whose estate is still in the process of winding up.
Heck, even a proportion of the 250k "long term" ones won't be actual problem vacancies; some of those will just be ones like those of the recently deceased for whom the process takes longer than 6 months. A relative of mine recently died, and it took maybe 4-5 months to sort out probate, another couple of months on the market before an offer was accepted, and as far as I know now (about 6 months on again) the new owner is still in the process of renovating it prior to moving in. That's "long term vacant" in those stats, but it's not a problem that needs anyone to solve it- it's just that sometimes things take time.
Dealing with genuine long term vacancies is legitimately a worthy pursuit in these times of housing crisis, but pretending that it's literally the solution to the problem (and not, you know, building stuff) is a cheap dream.