Apple brings age verification to UK users in iOS 26.4 beta - Users who don’t verify their age may not be able to download or purchase apps.
https://www.theverge.com/tech/884306/apple-age-verification-uk-users-ios-26-4-beta
https://www.theverge.com/tech/884306/apple-age-verification-uk-users-ios-26-4-beta
136 Comments
Darkcoffee@sh.itjust.works · 205 pts · 168d
The UK government is so god damn dumb.
umbrella@lemmy.ml · 69 pts · 168d
MrWildBunnycat@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 168d
Both
umbrella@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 167d
Trihilis@ani.social · 5 pts · 167d
For who? Themselves? Are their lives so miserable they just want to see people suffer?
osanna@lemmy.vg · 2 pts · 167d
Yes.
flandish@lemmy.world · 131 pts · 168d
if a phone is tied to a svc acct like a telco provider- age verification should be automatic as THAT provider cannot open an acct for a child.
Doom@lemmy.world · 51 pts · 168d
FUCKING THANK YOU!
d00ery@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 168d
I'm not in favour of any of the age restriction stuff UK government is doing.
Good argument, but:
Phones in the UK can be bought without a contract and untied to any network.
Pay as you go SIM cards can be bought without a contract.
Credit cards used to make purchases online require users to be 18 or over. Debit cards on the other hand can be issued to those under 18 (but a bank account will require evidence of ID, address, age). https://www.gohenry.com/uk/blog/financial-education/what-age-can-you-get-a-debit-card-in-the-uk
flandish@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 168d
can a debit card be created by someone under 18? ie does a parent have to do it then give johnny a card? can a bodega owner sell a prepaid to a minor, and can prepaids be used?
just wondering where up the chain the responsibility lies. i’m all for corps being held to task, but also parents. if i handed my kid a phone it was my responsibility.
now he had phones that he acquired. i saw them. so i know it is largely irrelevant my thoughts on chain of concern.
in short: this is a terrible tar pit of gov horseshit sold in the “protect the kids” camp but really is “build a bigger fascist state db…”
evilcultist@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 168d
A parent can do the age verification captcha for Johnny. All of this is bullshit once they start thinking any of this will stop kids who have the help of an adult (actually, already is imo). Anyone ever hear of kids getting adults to buy alcohol for them in the past?
phoenixz@lemmy.ca · 81 pts · 168d
This is what happens when your phone is no longer YOUR phone
lepinkainen@lemmy.world · -47 pts · 168d
Noja@sopuli.xyz · 48 pts · 168d
SethTaylor@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 168d
Tim Apple and Don Orange
osanna@lemmy.vg · 2 pts · 167d
Donvict diaper donny. Did i make enough insults yet?
ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works · 30 pts · 168d
Dude, apple IS the man
Zetta@mander.xyz · 15 pts · 167d
Open source software like GrapheneOS is the only software you should ever trust to not be government spyware.
jjlinux@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 167d
I've been on GrapheneOS for years now, and I still don't trust anyone 'not to be government spyware'. I believe they are not bending to governments right now, but the way this is going, it wouldn't surprise me if they end up being coerced to introduce backdoor at some point. I'm not saying that the GOS team would willingly do something like that, I am saying that, in this time we're living in, this is not outside the realm of possibility.
Im preparing to, if necessary, move my personal life entirely out of the reach of the internet eventually, because at the speed these legislation and laws are being passed, anything connected will be a straight shot into our deepest thoughts.
Meanwhile, I'll remain on GrapheneOS, CachyOS and ProxMox as long as they can be kept private.
rektdeckard@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 167d
Apple is the man. Google is the man. The men claiming they are the men are just little pocket puppets.
FreddiesLantern@leminal.space · 5 pts · 167d
Apple has done a fantastic job surrounding their privacy reputation. Problem is, they absolutely bent the knee and kissed the ring.
The only way out is either going with custom roms on an android or a Linux phone, … anything along those lines (you know, IT stuff that let’s you actually do stuff). Or don’t participate.
phoenixz@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 155d
The company that bribed the Cheeto?
Yeah, sure. Trust THAT company
XLE@piefed.social · 65 pts · 168d
> can't have apps without an account
> cave have an account without a loicense
Will this finally kill off the "Apple is private enough" mantra I always hear?
nullPointer@programming.dev · 7 pts · 168d
unfortunately, that is not how cults work.
Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 0 pts · 166d
Apple is doing this instead of requiring app developers to implement and maintain their own system, which is what Android is doing.
The question comes down to who trust more, any random app developer or a single entity.
For example this means meta doesn't have to verify their iOS users because iOS already has.
I'm sure most people in this thread are coming at this all from a morally superior position about how they don't use meta but they also don't use iOS devices so this is another bit of outrage.
No one here is actually anything besides get upset about something that doesn't effect them. The internet has become a silly place.
XLE@piefed.social · 2 pts · 166d
To put it simply, I do in fact care a great deal, because Android is also moving towards centralization from Google. It's bad. It's all bad.
These companies can't be trusted with their identity, and they've been demonstrably untrustworthy for over a decade. Have you heard of Total Information Awareness and its spawn? PRISM? Palantir?
Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 166d
Yes. It's all bad. The solution is to get rid of these political stooges. Dealing with capitalists is a different topic. There is some cross over with the poltical stoogery but that's all there is.
Matty_r@programming.dev · 55 pts · 168d
Wow, thats fucked. I hope Australia doesn't decide to do this as well. This shit is happening so quickly at the moment
awaysaway@sh.itjust.works · 13 pts · 168d
me too but i'm not overly optimistic. i don't think there is a strong enough culture of anti-surveillance
hector@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 168d
I think they did this first, at least they passed the law first. Our "left center" government in action.
Quicky@piefed.social · 50 pts · 168d
Mixed feelings about this.
However, ethical questions aside, and from a purely legal conformation standpoint, if the phone validates the user is over 18 and passes only that info as a token to whatever application or website requests it, then it's a good implementation. It means elimination of multiple validation requirements, minimal transfer of data to third parties, fewer sources holding personal data, etc. Whether it works that way remains to be seen.
nul9o9@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 15 pts · 168d
I haven't read this particular law. But one proposed in Colorado still requires service providers to look for other indicators of age and override the one reported by the OS.
SorteKanin@feddit.dk · 10 pts · 168d
It's still stupid even if it's required by law.
Quicky@piefed.social · 0 pts · 168d
The technical implementation, or the law itself?
SorteKanin@feddit.dk · 7 pts · 168d
Law itself
Quicky@piefed.social · 1 pts · 168d
Yeah, no doubt.
0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -13 pts · 168d
It's always funny when Apple fanboys try to whitewash its brand.
"Apple is the most private mobile operating system there is that cares for its users that stands up to governments" until it doesn't but that's still great because it is how it is and apple has to obey laws and its fine because they hide their involvement with feds so well with marketing, and the cult accepts whatever they do, so they get a pass.
https://web.archive.org/web/20260226022937/https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-secretly-giving-governments-push-notification-data/
Have you tried not being a cult member to manufacture consent for corporations?
That or PR agencies are picking up fediverse to push people into being docile consumers.
Quicky@piefed.social · 11 pts · 168d
Not a single word in this rant has any relevance to my comment.
Nelots@piefed.zip · 6 pts · 168d
Kinda just sounds like you were looking for an excuse to aggressively rant at someone. I don't know how you came away thinking they were an apple fanboy after reading that comment full of ifs and general skepticism.
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world · 49 pts · 168d
linule@lemmy.world · 46 pts · 168d
Why is there no privacy respecting solution for age verification? Like the government giving you some sort of token that says you’re over 18 and that’s it?
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 47 pts · 168d
Because its not about age verification, its about tracking and controlling you and making a privacy respecting solution isn't compatible with that.
linule@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 168d
So there should be a rebuttal demanding a privacy respecting age verification token, instead of just arguing against age verification, which technically does have a point. This way it’s disabled as excuse to sneak in the other things.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 167d
No, we still need to be against it. I said tracking and controlling, not just tracking.
They are already blocking resources that shouldn't be blocked from youth, and even a privacy centric method would still let them do that, and then expand it to anything at a whim in the future.
We don't want the internet built on this infrastructure, it would br a disaster.
linule@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 167d
Okay, it’s 2 topics then, the privacy, and basically adding a mandatory authorization layer to the internet derived from your real identity.
To some extent this already exists for movies or say to buy alcohol, getting a driving license etc. in the real world, where people often also have to verify their age. So here it could be asked on what exact basis the internet should work differently.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 167d
The basis is its how the world communicates and they become the gate keepers to communication and knowledge. Its like book banning on topics they don't like but on a scale much more massive.
They're already banning internet content from people that shouldn't be about sexual health because its not about protecting kids its about controlling them and people.
You gotta be a good sheep and they're going to do their best to make you one.
linule@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 167d
Not saying that these are not possibilities, but the technology itself and mistrust of government are, at least partly, different things. This is definitely a complex topic, spanning a lot of topics.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 167d
I don't personally think so when it comes to technologies like this that can be used to surveil and/or control a population (edit: and especially that are being heavily driven by governments)
It's pretty much a given that it will be used against us as history has shown us its always the case.
Trying to separate them out, gives them the extra support they need to pass it through and then abuse it.
0x0@infosec.pub · 1 pts · 167d
Neither alcohol or the car verifies your age when you use it.
A minor can't really sign up for an Internet subscription, so who gave them access?
Mandate age requirements when buying digital units would be better, but then we're back to the "I have no control over my children and can't set boundaries"
linule@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 167d
But what about porn / general nsfw, that doesn’t need a subscription and currently anyone can sign up / just visit those.
sunbeam60@feddit.uk · 44 pts · 168d
What if I told you that by regulation, the EU age verification system has to be anonymous and that it’s only the AUKUS countries that are moving forward in a way where anonymity is “a nice to have”.
Denmark’s system, which is a front-runner implementation in the EU, is going to be fully ZKP.
And yes it’s basically built with tokens.
You identify with a government system in an app. The services issues you signed tokens that are anonymous. You hand these anonymous tokens over to the sites that demand proof of age.
linule@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 168d
That sounds great. I don’t follow the topic closely (probably I should), so wasn’t aware of these developments. This should be brought up in all discussions about age verification, so everyone knows there are better options.
Some people will feel that it’s not ideal, as you still have to trust the government, opposed to full anonymity, but that is a bit of a separate problem.
sunbeam60@feddit.uk · 7 pts · 167d
Ultimately someone has to vouch for “yes, this person is 18+”. People can’t self-attest, except through crappy biometric, so at some point a government ID has to be involved.
I’d trust my government over a credit reference agency that literally makes revenue from selling access to your private data.
linule@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 167d
Yes, and governments, at least democratic ones, represent the interests of their people, so at least on paper this is the correct way to structure things. Then you use the channels to government to ensure it’s regulated properly. If this is not possible or there’s no trust, there’s a larger problem.
ageedizzle@piefed.ca · 2 pts · 166d
linule@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 166d
Then they’re not truly democratic, which is a problem on its own
ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk · 9 pts · 167d
How are you supposed to abuse the data of people that you can't even identify...?
eah@programming.dev · 4 pts · 167d
Anyone have a more in-depth technical description of how that works? I'm interested.
sunbeam60@feddit.uk · 8 pts · 167d
https://digst.dk/media/5gybwsaq/implementing-age-verification-with-danish-digital-identity-wallet-dktb-09.pdf
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 168d
Because then you can share the token and everyone can use it
I'm sure a more robust solution is possible though.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 167d
You can make them biometric and still be private, but that's even more effort which they wont spend.
linule@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 168d
Personal ids can also be used by non-owners, not much different than this theoretic age verification token. But yeah, ideally it would have a security layer to sufficiently confirm ownership.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 168d
Ah tbh I just realised that with the tokens being unique you could still limit accounts per token to 1, achieving the same effect as using real ID.
undu@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 167d
The scheme from the Danish government, shared in another comment, avoids the sharing by allowing token to be used only once, and, because the government issues the tokens, it can block people from getting tokens if they detect abuse. This can be done by rate-limiting, geoblocking and all sorts of techniques.
Remember that the function of the anonymous token is to not allow the service provider (like an OS, or a a website) to see your identity. This still allows the government to see which service provider you are using.
Hopefully the service provider can form pools yo block the government from knowing each individual website, but that's not a given.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 166d
That was a poor choice then. They can do this with ZKP and not even know that.
Like it should be doable where sure the website might ask the government if its valid, but the government doesnt know who owns the token, so all they know is someone accessed the site, not who. So they could know general traffic to sites, but that would be it.
There would be ways to hide even the site as well where the website gives you a non identifying token to use with yours and be verified by the government as well, then they only know some site is requesting verification and sign it back to you as valid and you return it to the site. In this one the government only knows your using it, but not where.
Edit: clarity, but also if they put this much effort into the system using ZKP, this oversight almost sounds intentional so they can track people / population usage even if less.
Edit: 10 years from now - our age restriction service shows traffic to porn hub increased 10x over the past decade while poverty has increased! PornHub is clearly the cause of our poverty situation we should ban it! The traffic is too high! A bit over the top, but the info is still useful to them.
odelik@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 166d
There is.
It's called Parental Controls.
It also does a fairly good job at preventing stuff from getting through.
One of the big issues right now is that there's a lot of sexualized content on social media right now that's bypassing parental controls because the social media services are doing a poor job of limiting that content when encountering a parental controlled device.
Jimmytea@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 168d
There is!, one of the officially recognised and approved ways is credit card verification, however afaik only steam is doing that.
linule@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 168d
I mean a dedicated, government issued age verification token that doesn’t reveal any data to the third party other than you are allowed access age wise.
JenitalJouster@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 167d
i’ve seen screenshots of ios users being verified due to having their credit cards as payment methods tied to their name, which is a hell of a lot better than an ID
Ulrich@feddit.org · 44 pts · 168d
Another reason sideloading is important.
lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 168d
Sideloading isn’t a real term - there is only loading a better OS than whatever spy-tech google is offering.
You can’t “sideload” hardware you own - you just install whatever software you like and prefer
Ulrich@feddit.org · 24 pts · 168d
Jesus Tittyfucking Christ, yes it is. I'm not typing out "installing software from outside the Google Play Store" every time, so you can go away.
HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 168d
You could go with something in between? Side loading is a loaded term created to insinuate we are doing something we shouldn't be doing.
Ulrich@feddit.org · -1 pts · 168d
No it's not. Someone just made that up.
Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 168d
Yes, Apple did. Before that, it was called downloading
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 0 pts · 168d
Yes, Apple notoriously invented it for the Android Debug Bridge too.
Ulrich@feddit.org · 0 pts · 168d
Once again, no they didn't. Literally just look it up. You have the knowledge of the world at your fingertips.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sideloading
Had I said "downloading" it wouldn't have made much sense, would it?
chunes@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 168d
listen, I've been in technology since before i-drive existed and I've never heard of i-drive nor do I care about the vocabulary they used.
The first time I ever heard the term sideloading was when these mobile stores started using it to make other options sound illegitimate.
Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 168d
Yep, and that definition was definitely what you meant lmfao.
You’re obviously within spitting distance of the point, you basically spelled it out in your last sentence, just, I don’t know, reread your words slowly?
lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 167d
Can I ask you why Google has deliberately chosen to ALWAYS use the term sideloading? Doesn’t that seem weird for an internet company - who should know better - to not just say “install?”
How do you think this came to be?
Scrollone@feddit.it · 2 pts · 168d
Exactly. It's important that we stop saying "sideloading", we should just say "install directly" or some other non-loaded expressions
odelik@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 166d
I've been using the term side loading since the late 90s/early 2000s for installing software or files to a device via a transfer cable. And by the time Android came along, the early app development community was using the term to push the app to your device via ADB. And from there it's expanded from transfer cable push to download and install from an unmanaged 3rd party source on a mobile computing device.
So the term has existed in some form throughout the tech/power user community before modern mobile computing. Now did Apple and Google usurp the term? Ehhh, possibly? I've yet to encounter somebody that uses sideloading to mean something negative, but I'm sure there is a group out there that does. I'm not convinced that group is large enough for me to stop using language I started using nearly 30 years ago to mean something specific. "Why use more, less precise, words when this single term says it already?"
lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 166d
Yea sorry but I think this misses the point entirely. No one is arguing etymology, nor does the word carry a negative connotation inherently
The issue is that using the term sideloading makes it seem like you’re doing something other than “installing software,” which is truly without editorialization what is happening. Referring to it as “sideloading” is seen widely as editorialization.
So fighting against this new understanding of the term is either pedantry for the sake of it, or you have some sort of stake in Google perhaps? Either way the worst case scenario is people use a word you don’t agree with - but the upside is someone might realize they’re being lied to when told they don’t own their hardware and the decisions associated
odelik@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 166d
Great use of a bad reason fallacy with a touch of ad hominem in an attempt to discredit.
Your claim is that the term has been used to mean something negative. You present no evidence to back this up other than your feelings.
I don't discredit that major corporations do evil shit.
However, I presented you with the experience I've had with the term dating back nearly 30 years where I, and the people I talked tech with, was sideloading files onto our PDA and Rio MP3 players.
The term started out as a technical distinction in the circles I ran in (Detroit area) back then.
Aside from your feelings on the term, I see no valid justification to stop using it when I'm trying to clearly communicate something. I work in tech (and no, it's not Google or Apple. Fuck publicly traded companies) as a lead on the platform support group, and I need to be able to clearly communicate with my peers and reports. Sideload is a widely recognized term in the spaces I have worked in.
I'm not going to stop using a precise technical term because some internet strangers have unfounded negative feelings about the possible marketing connotations.
Present me with evidence that it actually means what you're saying and maybe I'll consider working on making the language change. Just like I've done with actually real problematic industry terms (master/slave, black/white lists. Etc).
lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 166d
Please do as you wish, I’m just happy others are getting the message. Have a great day
Lazer365@feddit.nl · 37 pts · 168d
My Apple account is probably old enough to vote…
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 167d
I wonder if any companies would ever accept that as proof hah.
tackleberry@thelemmy.club · 34 pts · 167d
Time for more users to adopt GrapheneOS
ohshit604@sh.itjust.works · 20 pts · 167d
GrapheneOS is great and all but I refuse to willingly give google a single dollar for their hardware.
When GrapheneOS can be installed on any device is when I’ll gladly make that switch, and hopefully one day Apple iPhones can run other operating systems.
Xatolos@reddthat.com · 17 pts · 167d
Buy a used one then. Google won't see your money then.
Or wait a little longer. https://piunikaweb.com/2025/11/19/grapheneos-to-release-non-pixel-flagship-phone-in-q4-2026-or-in-2027/
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 167d
First time I'm hearing about a non google OEM made phone, that would be amazing!
jnod4@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 166d
Increasing the value of an used second hand market devices can empower other people to seek the Google Pixel devices as a decisive buy considering they keep their value for a longer time compared to other brands.
Warl0k3@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 167d
If only you didn't have to give google money to be able to install it.
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 167d
Buy used and unlocked. Just sold one at my work, was a pixel 8 pro for 300 USD.
Warl0k3@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 166d
Except that's not how that works - creating a healthy used resale market drives demand for the Pixel phones. I may not be giving them my money directly, but it's still of huge monetary benefit to Google if I purchase one of their phones used. I like grapheneOS, I really do, but it's inseparability from Google hardware is a serious problem.
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works · -1 pts · 166d
No, it drives demand for used pixel phones. No one's buying new pixels to supply the used market. They don't interact in that way.
If you really want to make sure Google never benefits, buy one off Craigslist, put a case on it, and tell people its a Samsung galaxy with a custom home screen.
Osan@lemmy.world · 31 pts · 167d
For god's sake can corporations and governments stop trying to
control and survey peopledo the job of parents and society. If parents are not doing their job then you need better awareness and education not to take over.pressanykeynow@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 167d
Pretty sure everyone understand it's not about the age.
melsaskca@lemmy.ca · 26 pts · 168d
When we were young adults and couldn't buy our own booze, we made it. Let's do something like that here.
kilgore_trout@feddit.it · 13 pts · 167d
That is what F-Droid would be, on Android. If it survives…
Of course, we have SailfishOS, postmarketOS, and other small ones, too.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 167d
Damn I was not nearly that based at 20. And given that you're on a Canadian instance and this is about the UK, I'm assuming you're talking more like 16-17…
melsaskca@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 166d
We were 14-15. 1 can pineapple, same can filled with sugar, a packet of my mom's bread yeast. Dump it all in a gallon container and fill with water and put a lid on it (loosely, so it can "breath"). Hide it somewhere safe and live in fear of it being found for a month or two. Strain it and pass it around. We were stupid fools. We even tried "Scope" (a mouthwash) which was about the same as wine, back then.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 166d
Damn, at that age we just snuck vodka from parents
mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca · 25 pts · 168d
no problem, I'll just use apps from outside of the App Store, right?
Scrollone@feddit.it · 24 pts · 168d
You could, if you lived in the EU :)
plyth@feddit.org · 19 pts · 168d
Teens can travel alone and setup their phone in France or Ireland, or buy their phone from a dealer. All the cool kids will have free phones and be on snapchat, forcing everybody else to follow suit.
LemmyEntertainYou@piefed.social · 17 pts · 167d
Starmer really needs to fuck off.
maplesaga@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 167d
What if a butterfly was made out of butter?
These kinds of thoughts could destroy big brother.
PurplebeanZ@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 167d
Your thoughts are incredible sir!
9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 168d
Holy. Shit.
Fijxu@programming.dev · 11 pts · 168d
What the actual fuck?????????
nul9o9@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 11 pts · 168d
Disgusting.
LoremIpsumGenerator@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 167d
KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 7 pts · 167d
Most kids phones are hand me downs from parents these days. At least they were with my kids other than the first line purchase, and most of their friends. A 6 year old with an iPhone 11 wouldn’t be that weird.
parson0@startrek.website · 6 pts · 167d
No need for the r slur and parents' handed down phones going to kids is not as sensational as you seem to think
LoremIpsumGenerator@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 167d
The "slur" is for these technocratic corpos pushing the narrative down on OS level blatantly hiding "its for the kids" whilst gaining more control and power over users.
parson0@startrek.website · 6 pts · 167d
While “mental retardation” was originally introduced as a medical term in 1961 for people with intellectual disabilities, in the decades since, the R-word has become an insult used all too commonly in everyday language. Those who use the R-word often do so with little regard for the pain it causes people with intellectual disabilities—and the exclusion it perpetuates in our society.
Taken from specialolympics.org
So just call them assholes or cunts - get creative
MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 167d
Fucktards implies "fucking retards"
parson0@startrek.website · 3 pts · 167d
Ouch... edited and thx.
imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 167d
Not only used. Parents buy new phones to children and these are not cheap Xiaomis or OPPOs. Most of the time it is actually a Samsung or an iPhone, be it an older version or a new one.
thingAmaBob@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 168d
Looks like the ways they’re doing this is via credit card or account age. I wanted to keep my current phone until it died before switching to something else but fuck me, who knows what nonsense they’ll make us do in the near future.
StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.org · 3 pts · 168d
Well, since I'm not doing that, that would prevent me from having to install the apps that every damned company seems to insist I install rather than having a website. Kinda makes me wish for this nonsense to come to the US.
khanh@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 168d
IT GETS TO A POINT
rimu@piefed.social · 2 pts · 168d
2026, the year of the PWA.
goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org · 4 pts · 168d
https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWJmY2Q2MDNiNjZhM2I3ZGJ4dHk5bXdibjZqdzFseWRramhteXN5Nm1jaXgwZHM1diZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/iNjfcmUM8lUPWm3fay/200w.gif
https://media4.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWJmY2Q2MDNiYWNtMTFlcDk1cTFmeDRiMTJucXo5ZmJ1cGRtcXNpdmQzeTcxamdydCZlcD12MV9naWZzJmN0PWc/nR4L10XlJcSeQ/200w.gif
paequ2@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 167d
Unfortunately, Google and Apple have crippled PWAs. Surprise, surprise. They don't get the attention, features, or bug fixes native apps get.
But also, a lot of apps are just views into websites anyway. So I bet a lot of apps could just be PWAs.
The main hurdle is getting people to install the PWAs instead of apps. It's a different install flow.
HexaBack@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 167d
quite funny for me to read this on a furiphone...
ironic, even
imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 167d
Guess that is an epic time for android phones. Sike! Unfortunately, majority will do ID verification.
Ashiette@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 166d
Nah, I really think Android is becoming worse. In six months we won't be able to install unoficial apps. It won't be long until this happens too
joyjoy@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 166d
Stay small. If you get too big, the government will start bossing you around.
bridgeburner@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 166d
Nah, US sheeple will still purchase iPhones, cos for them it is sth of a status symbol.