What the hell are you talking about?? You've just made up this "ARM ecosystem" thing, when it never was a thing.
ARM design processors, then license those designs to other companies to build devices. There is no "ecosystem" because they don't define the rest of the device.
The "ecosystem" you're referring to is the overall phone itself, much of which is defined by Android and Google more than it is by ARM.
It's open source, but the license agreement prohibits using it in other projects. You can do it for your own personal builds, but not any published builds.
Just because they have the same function in the OS doesn't mean the hardware is the same. That's where custom ROMs falter, with closed sourced hardware drivers.
The issue isn't normalisation, it's inaccessibility to understand the core functionality to drive the hardware.
In terms of how they're spending them, yes. Trump is wasting weapons so as to deplete US arsenals, but also to create demand for new weapons. More money for those dealing arms.
In terms of what you want to defend against, you should consider their potential success rate to be far more than 2%.
And that's without needing to listen to the words of a lady from Texas who's emigrated to Russia and interviewed a retired academic.
That’s going to be decided by the judicial system.
Absolutely. Like I've hinted at, the US is kind of unique in this black and white one party/two party consent structure. Other countries deal in "expectations of privacy", which is far more nuanced, and dare I say it, more sensible.
It’s perfectly legal to record officers while they are on duty.
It's legal for a member of the public to record an officer on duty. There is a question of whether they are considered on duty (sounds like maybe? It was senior officers formally training other officers, not some private locker room conversation) and also whether an officer can record another. It's perhaps a different legal dynamic between a member of the public and an officer, vs two officers.
How it plays out depends on the law. Like you say, he has a strong argument against a criminal conviction - and he shouldn't really be convicted of any crime either. But it does sound like he broke the letter of the law in that jurisdiction.
People still don't understand what they meant by Sovereignty.
William Rees Mogg (Jacob's father) wrote about it in the 90s. He defined a "Sovereign Individual" (book title) as someone who earned over $200k per year (in 1990s money, call it £0.5M+ per year now), who used their wealth and influence to live above the law of any nation.
They told voters they'd be voting for the elite to be above the law, in a way that voters would think they were talking about the country coming together.
Please please pleeeeeease start tariffing the export of electricity from Canada to America.
Tariffs affect buyers through increased cost, and sellers through reduced sales. Import tariffs affect local buyers and foreign businesses, while export tariffs affect local businesses and foreign buyers.
All of Trump's tariffs are import tariffs. They affect American buyers, who have to pay more, and foreign businesses who sell less. Generally, export tariffs are avoided, because reduced sales for local business is "a bad thing" (but fuck local consumers amirite).
With Canada's electricity exports, America needs it. They can't not have it. So a tariff here makes perfect sense: the foreign consumer has no choice but to pay, while the local business loses no sales. All the pain is felt in the foreign domain.
Electricity export tariffs are win/win for Canada as a retaliation to the US.
Unfortunately US two party laws were made as a knee-jerk reaction to Nixon's wiretapping; the US doesn't deal in "expectations of privacy" like more sensible countries do.
Making an audio recording should be no different to getting out a pen and paper and making a written recording. Keeping a personal record should not be a crime. It's what you do with the recording that matters.
But that's how things should be, the law is often not right in this area. As others have said, the whistleblower broke the law here.
I might not have the fastest processor (Ryzen 5 3600) and my graphics card is long in the tooth (5600 XT), but damn am I smug for buying 64GB of DDR5 years ago.
Just wish 2 years ago I'd talked my boss into upgrading my work laptop from 8GB. No chance now.
Also it's an oil firm, and Trump has already shown fondness towards the Argentinian government. I think the US is going to start pushing the UK to abandon its claim on the Falklands - which incidentally is the location of a massive oil field.
What the hell are you talking about?? You've just made up this "ARM ecosystem" thing, when it never was a thing.
ARM design processors, then license those designs to other companies to build devices. There is no "ecosystem" because they don't define the rest of the device.
The "ecosystem" you're referring to is the overall phone itself, much of which is defined by Android and Google more than it is by ARM.
A retired MIT professor. That's what "professor emeritus" means.
He gave an interview to a YouTuber in Russia because he's retired and doesn't have much else to do.
It's open source, but the license agreement prohibits using it in other projects. You can do it for your own personal builds, but not any published builds.
Just because they have the same function in the OS doesn't mean the hardware is the same. That's where custom ROMs falter, with closed sourced hardware drivers.
The issue isn't normalisation, it's inaccessibility to understand the core functionality to drive the hardware.
I think you don't really understand how hard it is to standardise everything. Just because IBM managed it in the 80s doesn't mean it was easy.
You're supporting diva devs selling out.
We don't need GOS to do well. We need a fully open ecosystem for phone operating systems. GOS devs don't let anyone incorporate their code.
They also refuse to provide basic functionality like inverted navbar buttons. Because they're diva devs.
Lmfao 10 year service life is woefully short.
In terms of how they're spending them, yes. Trump is wasting weapons so as to deplete US arsenals, but also to create demand for new weapons. More money for those dealing arms.
In terms of what you want to defend against, you should consider their potential success rate to be far more than 2%.
And that's without needing to listen to the words of a lady from Texas who's emigrated to Russia and interviewed a retired academic.
Absolutely. Like I've hinted at, the US is kind of unique in this black and white one party/two party consent structure. Other countries deal in "expectations of privacy", which is far more nuanced, and dare I say it, more sensible.
It's legal for a member of the public to record an officer on duty. There is a question of whether they are considered on duty (sounds like maybe? It was senior officers formally training other officers, not some private locker room conversation) and also whether an officer can record another. It's perhaps a different legal dynamic between a member of the public and an officer, vs two officers.
How it plays out depends on the law. Like you say, he has a strong argument against a criminal conviction - and he shouldn't really be convicted of any crime either. But it does sound like he broke the letter of the law in that jurisdiction.
I literally can't stand this kind of logic.
No, not that Trump. Obviously.
People still don't understand what they meant by Sovereignty.
William Rees Mogg (Jacob's father) wrote about it in the 90s. He defined a "Sovereign Individual" (book title) as someone who earned over $200k per year (in 1990s money, call it £0.5M+ per year now), who used their wealth and influence to live above the law of any nation.
They told voters they'd be voting for the elite to be above the law, in a way that voters would think they were talking about the country coming together.
Oh no, the businesses will have to cut into their profits to ensure their investments mature.
Please please pleeeeeease start tariffing the export of electricity from Canada to America.
Tariffs affect buyers through increased cost, and sellers through reduced sales. Import tariffs affect local buyers and foreign businesses, while export tariffs affect local businesses and foreign buyers.
All of Trump's tariffs are import tariffs. They affect American buyers, who have to pay more, and foreign businesses who sell less. Generally, export tariffs are avoided, because reduced sales for local business is "a bad thing" (but fuck local consumers amirite).
With Canada's electricity exports, America needs it. They can't not have it. So a tariff here makes perfect sense: the foreign consumer has no choice but to pay, while the local business loses no sales. All the pain is felt in the foreign domain.
Electricity export tariffs are win/win for Canada as a retaliation to the US.
Old reddit requires an account now.
If the law were inherently right, we would neither have nor need a facility for changing it.
The bigger issue there is the implication that they themselves commit rapes on vulnerable people.
Unfortunately US two party laws were made as a knee-jerk reaction to Nixon's wiretapping; the US doesn't deal in "expectations of privacy" like more sensible countries do.
Making an audio recording should be no different to getting out a pen and paper and making a written recording. Keeping a personal record should not be a crime. It's what you do with the recording that matters.
But that's how things should be, the law is often not right in this area. As others have said, the whistleblower broke the law here.
I might not have the fastest processor (Ryzen 5 3600) and my graphics card is long in the tooth (5600 XT), but damn am I smug for buying 64GB of DDR5 years ago.
Just wish 2 years ago I'd talked my boss into upgrading my work laptop from 8GB. No chance now.
Also it's an oil firm, and Trump has already shown fondness towards the Argentinian government. I think the US is going to start pushing the UK to abandon its claim on the Falklands - which incidentally is the location of a massive oil field.