It also supports iOS.

No, the DRM wouldn’t work at higher levels so you would have the same requirements with regard to 4k.

Please be civil and polite. This type of aggressive comment insulting people because of the tools that they use isn’t welcome here.

Of course, but because the law is so protective you won’t need to 99.9% of the time. Canada also isn’t a very litigious place and even if it does get raised it will probably get thrown out quickly. To most doctors it is also a huge stressors to watch someone that they can help die. So overall the balance is well worth trying to help out.

No, but you can still choose to choose software that doesn’t steal and sell your data. You can also support laws that make doing this illegal.

Of course it can only surely be decided in a court. But in this case it would be something like was not actively trying to cause harm.

In Canada all provinces have some form of Good Samaritan law which means that you aren’t responsible other than gross negligence. So any off-duty doctor would be very safe to help out unless they were doing something very stupid.

The idea that putting this on your phone is bonkers is bonkers to me. Why would you want to carry around a journal or paper when you have everything on your phone? It can also be more easily backed up and synced.

It shouldn’t be normal that this data is stolen and sold. That is 100% the problem, not the fact that people track things on computers.

Yeah, downtown there are tons of gas-station brands that are just convenience stores. Surely many gas stations will offer electric charging but since most people will be charging at home the total number of gas stations will surely drop. Some will turn into convenience stores and some will just shut down.

This is also likely interesting because console SDKs are usually highly restricted. So not only is the Minecraft code leaked (which is probably moderately interesting) it is likely that the console APIs are quite interesting to emulator developers and reverse engineering for other PS3 games.

Please be polite. If you don’t like a post you can downvote it. If you would like to comment please be more civil.

Nah, 90% chance that they do something stupider.

While Amazon is awful it isn’t just them. It is a systematic issue with our economic system. Our society constantly makes efforts to keep the poor poor so that they are forced to work for low pay resulting in a cycle of abuse. Basically every public company will end up in the same situation and we see that with every large company. If a large public company isn’t shit the CEO will be fired by the shareholders and replaced with one who makes the company shit.

So yes, avoid Amazon, but also talk to your government representatives. The cycle will always continue until the incentives are changed. To properly exit this shit system we need to change our society and government.

It’s also super locked down. You are only allowed to use it if Google or Apple says that your device is authorized. So no root, no custom ROMs. Unless your phone is owned by a corporation and that corporation is blessed by Apple or Google you are out of luck. (There are currently ways around this but the gaps are slowly being closed as older devices are phased out.)

I’m also not familiar. But my understanding is that the package maintainers should prevent this situation. Because otherwise even if there are package version dependencies (I don’t actually know if pacman does this) it would just block the update which results in a partial update which isn’t supported. For example if your theoretical unmaintained Firefox blocks the update of libssl but Python requires new functionality you would be stuck in dependency hell. Leaving this problem to the users just makes this problem worse. So the package maintainers need to sort something out.

It is a huge pain when it happens but tends to be pretty rare in practice. Typically they can just wait for software to update or ship a small patch to fix it. But in the worst case you need to maintain two versions of the common dependency. In lots of distros very common dependencies tend to get different packages for different major version for this reason. For example libfoo1 and libfoo2. Then there can be a period where both are supported while packages slowly move from one to the other.

IF no dependency tries to update too. Off course in that case I would stop. Without pacman -Sy, I never do that anyway, only -Syu.

That’s all you need to know. As long as you always use pacman -Syu you will be fine. pacman -Sy is the real problem. The wiki page is pretty clear about the sequences of commands that are problematic https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System_maintenance#Partial_upgrades_are_unsupported.

Right? What i don’t understand is, when I uninstall with pacman -Rs firefox, delete the cached firefox package (only that file), then the system is in the same state as before I installed it. Then -S firefox should be okay, right? And it even looks up the new version.

This isn’t correct. It won’t look up the new version. Assuming that the system was in a consistent state it will download the exact same package that you deleted. The system only ever “updates” when you run pacman -Sy. Until you use -y all packages are effectively pinned at a specific version. If the version that gets installed is different than the one you removed it probably means that you were breaking the partial update rule previously.

But that is my point. Just running pacman -S firefox is fine as long as you didn’t run pacman -Sy at some point earlier. It won’t update anything, even dependencies. It will just install the version that matches your current package list and system including the right version of any dependencies if they aren’t already installed.

But that means if you already have Firefox installed it will do nothing.

I think you are a little confused at the problem here. The issue is that partial updates are not supported. The reason for this is very simple, Arch ensures that any given package list works on its own, but not that packages from different versions of the package list work together. So if Firefox depends on libssl the new Firefox package may depend on a new libssl function. If you install that version of Firefox without updating libssl it will cause problems.

There is no way around this limitation. If you install that new Firefox without he new libssl you will have problems. No matter how you try to rules lawyer it. Now 99% of the time this works. Typically packages don’t depend on new library functions right away. But sometimes they do, and that is why as a rule this is unsupported. You are welcome to try it, but if it breaks don’t complain to the devs, they never promised it would work. But this isn’t some policy where you can find a loophole. It is a technical limitation. If you manage to find a loophole people aren’t going to say “oh, that should work, let’s fix it” it will break and you will be on your own to fix it.

Focusing on your commands. The thing is that pacman -S firefox is always fine on its own. If Firefox is already installed it will do nothing, if it isn’t it will install the version from the current package list. Both of those operations are supported. Also pacman -Rs firefox && pacman -S firefox is really no different than just pacman -S firefox (other than potentially causing problems if the package can’t be allowed to be removed due to dependencies). So your command isn’t accomplishing anything even if it did somehow magically work around the rules.

What is really the problem is pacman -Sy. This command updates the package list without actually updating any packages. This will enter you system into a precarious state where any new package installed or updated (example our pacman -S firefox command form earlier) will be a version that is mismatched with the rest of your system. This is unsupported and will occasionally cause problems. Generally speaking you shouldn’t run pacman -Sy, any time you are using -Sy you should also be passing -u. This ensures that the package list and your installed packages are updated together.

I hear what you are saying. But our society is pretty fucked up if you “deserve” something bad because you bought a product without imaging how the manufacturer can make it worse in the future.

The owners should be able to return the product if something like this happens, no matter how long ago they bought it.

Reverse DNS is different than static IP.

But yes for outbound email, if you can’t control reverse DNS you will have pain. (Inbound is totally fine) You can in theory just use whatever hostname the ISP’s reverse DNS resolves to however you will get some spam score (or be rejected) as it doesn’t match your “from” domain.

Outbound email is a huge pain really no matter what. Unless you have a long-term lease on the IP and it isn’t in a bad network you really have to pay someone else if you want reliable delivery.