Instead of sandboxing I would much rather it drops all those permissions

Ain’t google play assumes it always installed as system app and graphene os team had to build a sandbox around it?

How about all app stores (including Play Store and Samung own app store) not installed as system apps and show warnings equally when user install something new?

Still, the effects benefits the consumer, so I would consider this a good thing.

Also, I wonder if we can do the same to other companies and let them revert course.

But the outcome is good for me at least and I’m satisfied.

Oh. Steam tried to rip gamers off so hard that they removed forced arbitration clauses and class action waivers from their terms of service.

Steam is a monopoly no doubt, but it’s not a result of major anti-competitive behavior, but simply because others can’t match it.

I’m using Postmark for my Vaultwarden. Nothing major I know of.

What’s “ethical”?

It isn’t just about one company, but precedent. If today Asus can get away with this, other will look and copy the behavior. Apple and Samsung started a lot of anti-consumer precedents and no one can sure Asus isn’t the next.

What data?

At least I want to see some proofs my voice data being transmitted over some medium. Those slides are ads created by ad company to potential ad clients.

Then I don’t see any problem for them just put down $50 more.

I didn’t say it isn’t legit nor I distrust automation, but I would like to see anyone operating an online shop paid for a cert to show they are honest and won’t diappear in thin air not delivering. Am I going to get back what I paid, properly not, but a basic DV cert isn’t expensive either for a business.

I don’t believe paid cert can’t use automation to keep certs upto date.

Proof: https://docs.digicert.com/en/certcentral/certificate-tools/certificate-lifecycle-automation-guides/automation-service-overview.html

Personally, I distrust any ecommerce site that uses any free cert. I see paid cert as a commitment to do honest business, as they need to have some records on the CA.

But for a blog or anythings other than ecommerce is totally fine by me.

Note: It is not about security, nor automation, but a show commitment (i.e. buying a cert), largely psycological.

I expect “modular” as in how Fairphone approaches it.

It is NOT. It is just a smart case with pogo pins that can communicate with the phone.

EDIT: I think using “smart” is too much credit to them.

The apology reads:

Dear Samsung Galaxy Z Fold owners, we’re sorry. We know you were excited to buy a phone that folds in half and fits in your pocket, awkwardly. You were promised the future, a technical marvel, a world of boundless multitasking and performance.

And now, you’re probably looking at the new HONOR Magic V3 and feeling a little… betrayed. Size matters, and we feel your pain. Like being tipped for a gold medal and then coming last in the race, the knowledge that a thinner, lighter, and more durable foldable exists is enough to make anyone question their choices.

We get it. You were an early adopter, a pioneer bravely venturing into the uncharted territory of foldable screens with questionable durability. You deserve better. In fact, you deserve a gold medal.

In all seriousness, we at HONOR are committed to pushing the boundaries of technology and bringing you the best possible foldable experience. We’re just saying… it’s okay to feel let down. We’d feel the same way.

Photos are never a concrete representation of the reality. Photos are being pre-processed by image processor already and we also got Photoshop. One can even fake a film based photo if he knows what to do. The proliferation of image generation models and impainting models make the access easier but image manipulation tools always exist.

Does that counts as emtrapment?

So how are they going to detect, proof, and enforce?