“we plan to” “we intend to” “Our Environmental Improvement Plan, to be published in January 2023, will provide more detail.”

Seems like that publication is quite old, and before implementation. I see the sentiment, but I have to wonder how well it was implemented and still have to wonder how different it is. While the EU did cut back on green requirements to reduce bureaucracy, they’ve also always had subsidies and rules regarding “green” concerns.

Unfortunately, it’s proprietary licensed. I was wondering if there was an opportunity for protest use, but that’s difficult with restricted licenses.

How does the UK run its agriculture now? Do they do subsidies? In what way? Do they protect their produce market through import policies?

It’s insane that these people are elected representatives of so many people.

That’s what they do, yes. Unfortunately, it’s not fully drone-proof.

/edit: You can see it in this video, if you’re interested

The amount of optic fiber cables from drone use spread across fields is insane.

I was confused by seeing DisplayLink there, but couldn’t fully place them, and Wikipedia made me think they may be using HDMI and have an interest in keeping it inaccessible to sell their products and services.

There is no such sentiment. There are political parties across the spectrum, of course, and it’s quite obvious to everyone, including the press and citizens, that the current implementation is not sustainable long-term. But there is no public sentiment or consensus about dismantling it. Honestly, this is the first time I’ve heard of this ask/claim/argument of dismantling as the goal or necessity.

I was wondering/suspecting they were being sarcastic as well, but I don’t know.

Very high quality.

I find them pointless to me (sometimes irritating as noise and insurrection), but I understand they could be helpful and useful for others, so it’s fine to me when people use them. I simply was past them.

https://hdmiforum.org/members/

AMD is part of the forum but can’t get them to accept their own open source driver. I guess we can’t complain or shame all of them in one. I wonder who voted reject vs accept.

Sad.

In this video I found it felt AI padded with repetition and no coherent direction across the entire video.

I’ve seen more of this channels videos in my recommended videos, and one or two were briefly interesting, but ultimately, all felt padded and unfocused, and yeah, the clickbait titling and thumbnails is horrendous (may have gotten worse even). I evade them now; no interest in recommendations like that.

Nevertheless, I linked this video here because the first half or third was interesting to me when I watched it and I haven’t seen an alternative resource for this info and overview of it myself.

We kinda have that already

Some frameworks/standard libs do support that, making use of OS webrendering capabilities.

For example MAUI WebView

WebView uses different browser engines on each platform to render web content:

• Windows: Uses WebView2, which is based on the Microsoft Edge (Chromium) browser engine. This provides modern web standards support and consistent behavior with the Edge browser.
• Android: Uses android.webkit.WebView, which is based on the Chromium browser engine. The specific version depends on the Android WebView system component installed on the device.
• iOS and Mac Catalyst: Uses WKWebView, which is based on the Safari WebKit browser engine. This is the same engine used by the Safari browser on iOS and macOS.

I guess the prices give us a new kind of issue ticket template; “new RAM is too expensive for me, please consider optimizing”

Less abstract, more concrete than “take less of a share please”

I’ll link this video I watched a while ago Moscow’s Belarus Land Bridge Is Gone–Millions Panic as Lithuania Shuts Down All Border Crossings (published 3 weeks ago) which goes into the issue and response of closing borders and Belarus being blocked on their main transport route to the sea. Lemmy post

This flag image has a resolution of 3840 × 2160 pixels.

No, it’s not “all out there”.

I use Google, and they have data about me, and while it’s a lot through Android, settings limit quite a bit what they may do, collect, connect, and reuse. And partly because they have this significant information and control, I make a deliberate effort to not use their email. Email gives a lot more insight, attack surface (technically and through knowledge) and control (almost every service or their uses email in one way or another).

Email is so central, I don’t want to depend on a free service by a huge impersonal/dehuman corp. My phone has data even without Google. I could migrate. With email, migrating data is possible with caveats, but changing the address on all services I use is infeasible.

Ultimately, is a matter of dependence, risk, and convenience. If they’re fine with the risks, that’s on them. Most people are not as poweruser or caring. And that’s fine by me - I can’t and don’t want to invest into wasted effort beyond where appropriate and voicing or offering to a degree.

accused of repeat copyright infringements

Does this court determine whether this concrete accusation against a person holds as well, or does this court determine whether an accusation is enough?

Is that the conclusion? I thought that’s still under investigation. I remember reading about it months after the first reports.

It’s sad how huge companies are basically their CEO. CEO makes decisions and talks - that’s the company. Even if the hundreds and thousands of workers below them [largely] disagree and would do differently.

I wonder how this will work. If they use third party services under GDPR they’ll have to disclose that data may or will be shared. So at least in that case it should be obvious that end-to-end is not a thing but only one channel of transfer.

If they scan themselves, I would assume it’s also necessary to disclose under GDPR as working with and through personal data.

The Council also wants to make permanent a currently temporary measure that allows companies to – voluntarily – scan their services for child sexual abuse. At present, providers of messaging services, for instance, may voluntarily check content shared on their platforms for online child sexual abuse material, and report and remove it. This is allowed thanks to an exemption from certain rules specific to the electronic communications sector. Although this exemption is due to expire on 3 April 2026, according to the Council position, it will continue to apply. [src]

So we already had the exemption active, apparently. I just hope this exemption does not invalidate the necessity for transparency about systematic handling of data?

On the basis of today’s agreement, the Council can start negotiations with the European Parliament with a view to agreeing on the final regulation. The European Parliament reached its position in November 2023.