i’d rather have him chicken out than continue a pointless war though

It’s difficult to describe how much Trump is doing for the climate here.

yeah well it’s all about who carries the risks i’d say. i think that if you’re willing to take the risk yourself, you should be allowed to install a banking app on any device. just beware the risk, and you need to be warned about those.

interesting.

yeah that makes sense actually

And who guarantees that your PC doesn’t have malware?

Microsoft is legally responsible if the software they provide is found to actually contain malware.

hmm do you have a link to the product?

It’s in the article:

The researchers said it was “maddening” that such easy action to fight the climate crisis was not being taken, and said people should be angry. Stopping the leaks can even be free, given that captured gas can be sold – methane is the “natural gas” that fires power stations.

Gas that does not leak is gas that can be sold.

sure we can, the only question is who’s legally liable if things go wrong

The problem will solve itself once fewer fossil fuels are consumed overall, there’s less fuels to transport around and therefore fewer leaks … also the companies are losing money on the leaks so they already have an incentive to fix shit today.

I should be able to tell my bank to only trust devices running an OS signed by the grapheneos key, and more importantly I should be able to tell them to trust an OS signed by my key.

How do you know that your OS installation doesn’t include malware? Like there have been many cases in the last few years where npm modules were found to contain malware. Who says that’s not also the case in some modules that are a part of your OS?

And more importantly, who is legally liable if malware actually does cause harm? E.g. malware acts on your behalf and sends your money to some criminal organization. Not only did you lose money, but now you’re a suspect of supporting a criminal organization!

Of course that issue might be alleviated if you simply don’t have any money to send anywhere in the first place. That might be a viable alternative, but it only works for some people, i’d say. Or you could also set a daily transaction limit of say $100 that you can use to buy groceries; to limit your losses that way. The limit ofc cannot be changed from your phone alone, you need to go to a bank physically to change it or sth. Otherwise malware could again change it on your behalf.

I’d say if you have more alternative gatekeepers, that means you have more options and that gives the user more power (to choose).

i’m just guessing here but i think that the critical requirements to be able to run banking apps securely on your smartphone are:

• lockable/unlockable bootloader
• quality control of the operating system to make sure it doesn’t contain malware/spyware
• internet connection & open-protocol banking network

the first two parts are general smartphone/laptop security and operating system integrity, which can only be done through hardware/general software developers. Like i think we need reliable hardware manufacturers but also institutions that check that open source software doesn’t contain malware. Like when you run apt install some-package who says that some-package doesn’t contain malware?

The third one is the only part that is actually specific to banking. That’s a whole separate topic and has barely anything to do with the first two steps.

It feels a lot like Trump shits and then asks us to wipe his ass clean.

how is this different than europeans learning english at 10 years old? except the earlier onset age.

lots of countries have hosted US bases because they sold oil and made good business that way … now it’s becoming clear that they won’t be selling oil to the US in 10 years, so better start kicking them out now that they’re of no use anymore .

And if there was they wouldn’t ever give it to regular civilians.

takes 20 years for patents to expire and cheap generica to become available

Random thought: If there’s a breakthrough in life-prolonging medication in the next decades (i.e. you live to 120 instead of 80), that would mean that world population would go up by 1.5x simply due to that, so if there’s no prior drop in numbers, that might not be sustainable.

be dubai
build city in the middle of the desert
literally nothing grows here
we import all our stuff
trade blockade
gonna starve
mfw

Also how did people historically live there? Before desalination plants

can’t say that i’m surprised