These are the things i care the most: I want a smartphone i can repair on my own (battery and screen are the essential parts), with a bootloader easily unlockable, even better with verified boot / supporting a custom OS with re-lockable bootloader.

I don't care if it's supported by an official foundation or by custom ROMs foundations, i want something that will most likely get the longest term updates and security patches.

Does a device like this even exists?

I know that probably one of the few alternatives here is the fairphone, however it's really expensive and i've read many negative reviews of it (pieces staying out of stock for months or stuff like that), and i can't see the meaning of having a repairable smartphone if i have to spend the same money that i would spend buying 3 smartphones with the same specs that would last me the same time. That said, i know the market isn't favouring these kind of businesses and these devices NEED to be expensive in order to keep existing, but i would like to know some other possible alternatives that satisfy these requirements, if they even exist.

Honestly i've come to a point i would probably prefer spend my money on a guitar instead that on a smartphone and just give up, the industry is terrible 😅

The vast majority of computer vision research leads to technology that surveils human beings, a new preprint study that analyzed more than 20,000 computer vision papers and 11,000 patents spanning three decades has found. Crucially, the study found that computer vision papers often refer to human beings as “objects,” a convention that both obfuscates how common surveillance of humans is in the field, and objectifies humans by definition.

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept 28 (Reuters) - Opening statements are set to begin on Thursday in the first U.S. trial over allegations that Tesla's (TSLA.O) Autopilot driver assistant feature led to a death, and its results could help shape similar cases across the country.

The trial, in a California state court, stems from a civil lawsuit alleging the Autopilot system caused owner Micah Lee’s Model 3 to suddenly veer off a highway east of Los Angeles at 65 miles per hour (105 kph), strike a palm tree and burst into flames, all in the span of seconds.

The 2019 crash killed Lee and seriously injured his two passengers, including a then-8-year-old boy who was disemboweled, according to court documents. The lawsuit, filed against Tesla by the passengers and Lee's estate, accuses Tesla of knowing that Autopilot and other safety systems were defective when it sold the car.

Tesla has denied liability, saying Lee consumed alcohol before getting behind the wheel. The electric-vehicle maker also claims it was not clear whether Autopilot was engaged at the time of crash.

Tesla has been testing and rolling out its Autopilot and more advanced Full Self-Driving (FSD) system, which Chief Executive Elon Musk has touted as crucial to his company's future but which has drawn regulatory and legal scrutiny.

Tesla won a bellwether trial in Los Angeles in April with a strategy of saying that it tells drivers that its technology requires human monitoring, despite the "Autopilot" name. A Model S swerved into a curb in 2019 and injured its driver, and jurors told Reuters after the verdict that they believed Tesla warned drivers about its system and that driver distraction was to blame.

The stakes are higher in the trial this week, and in other cases, because people died. Tesla and plaintiff attorneys jousted in the runup about what evidence and arguments each side could make.

Tesla, for instance, won a bid to exclude some of Musk’s public statements about Autopilot. However, attorneys for the crash victims can argue that Lee’s blood alcohol content was below the legal limit, according to court filings.

The trial, in Riverside County Superior Court, is expected to last a few weeks.

cross-posted from !google@lemdro.id

• Tech startup, Branch Metrics, claims Google hindered its search app development through exclusive revenue-sharing agreements with Samsung, Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile.
• The US government accuses Google of illegally maintaining its online search monopoly by having its search engine as the default on PCs and mobile phones, which Google denies.
• Branch Metrics aimed to create a search engine for mobile apps, with significant funding raised and intended integration in Samsung devices starting 2019.
• Due to Google's contract, Samsung limited the functionality of Branch's product, restricting it to search only 25 apps and conceal results from apps not installed on the device.
• Google's revenue-share agreements initially required it to be the sole "web search engine" on devices, later extending to "only connected search and internet search" on devices in 2020.
• AT&T and a Google executive raised concerns about the Branch product violating revenue-share agreements, impacting potential partnerships and Branch's product functionality.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/5592397

Forty years ago, Richard Stallman announced the plan to develop the GNU operating system, which would be entirely composed of free software. The existence of a free operating system would enable people to operate their computers in freedom, throwing off the power of the developers of nonfree software. The GNU Project has also built the global free software movement.

This is something I am seeing more and more of. As companies start to either offer or require 2FA for accounts, they don't follow the common standards or even offer any sort of options. One thing that drives me nuts is when they don't offer TOTP as an option. It seems like many companies either use text messages to send a code or use some built in method of authorizing a sign in from a mobile device app.

What are your thoughts on why they want to take the time to maintain this extra feature in an app when you could have just implemented a TOTP method that probably can be imported as an existing library with much less effort?

Are they assuming that people are too dumb to understand TOTP? Are they wanting phone numbers from people? Is it to force people to install their apps?

*edit: I also really want to know what not at least give people the option to choose something like TOTP. They can still offer mobile app verification, SMS, email, carrier pigeon, etc for other options but at least give the user a choice of something besides an insecure method like SMS.

https://archive.is/TmbC1

After three years, a Washington, DC, judge will hear the Department of Justice’s potentially landmark antitrust case against Google. The department alleges Google struck anticompetitive deals with Apple and other companies for prime placement of its search engine, while Google contends its dominant market share is the result of a superior product. It’s the biggest tech antitrust trial since the US took on Microsoft in the 1990s: 10 weeks that could tip the balance of power online.

And the pendulum swings.

Source: https://www.404media.co/first-google-search-result-for-tiananmen-square-tank-man-is-ai-generated-selfie/

Compared to Bluetooth:

• 60% lower power consumption
• Six times higher data transmission speed
• 1/30th the latency
• 7 dB improvement anti-interference for a more stable connection
• Twice the coverage distance, and
• 10 times more network connections

US won't benefit from this tech due to the US Huawei ban.