Ah; I don't use Chinese branded phones at all. Never have.
Phones in the US market do not usually have them, unless they're Samsung branded, and since I don't include Chinese made phones in that "group", what I'm saying is true for the US.
Uh, No. Hell to the fucking no. Bring back SD expansion. Treat it like the data storage device it was.
Your beefs with Google are misplaced; because they were trying to mess with what folders were used; and with trying to protect user privacy because applications were misusing storage to violate their user's privacy.
- Losing SD Expansion sucks; they should bring this back. Only reason they stopped this is greed.
- Yet another Nice-To-Have that is gone; but I've never seen any phones that weren't Samsung with this. This one doesn't really even affect waterproofing; or phone size so they have no excuse.
- I certainly miss this one; but the FM Radio was present back on my 2020 Moto G6 Power. It was present on my 2020 Moto Edge. This one got stolen from us because we lost the 3.5mm Jack too...they used the wire from your wired headphones as an FM Antenna lead.
- This is nice; but I ended up having to root my Nexus 6 to make this work properly and use all the colors the LED could perform. I don't really miss it with Bezel-less phones.
- I hate that bootloaders are frequently locked; but it's been less necessary to root Android as it's improved over the years. There are still a few pain points; but not quite as many that require root.
- This is another case of greed. There's no reason why we shouldn't have removable batteries for phones that aren't IP67 or higher. If it ain't waterproof; there's no reason to seal the battery in...and replaceable batteries is a benefit when they accidentally ship units that become "spicy pillows" when the batteries swell due to bad batteries. It also simplifies disposal of phones; which don't need disassembly if they've got a removable battery.
Can it? Maybe. It's not impossible; but it isn't practical and most ISPs limit their shenanigans to grabbing your unencrypted DNS requests.
Will it? Probably no; aside from the previously mentioned DNS redirections; they're not interested in most people's packets, only in how many they deliver.
Should you care? I won't tell you not to take precaution, but I do urge you to consider your threat model carefully and consider the tradeoffs. When Security & Privacy goes up, Convenience and Functionality WILL go down. Balance your needs. Don't put yourself in a state of Privacy fatigue.
Are there easy fixes? Maybe. I think a VPN or using Tor would solve your concerns here anyways; it's not required that your modem be running OSS that you can control. If you can achieve it; that's still good for you; but it's not something to be sweating if your modem isn't capable and your invasive ISP is the only effective option.
In general I think using AI imagery, and catfishing in general, is basically entrapment. In most civilized countries; that's illegal for police to do.
Now if they begin to actually trade in actually legitimate forbidden materials...sure; by all means arrest for that charge alone. That wouldn't be unjustified. But provoking someone who might then turn around and harm a real child, seems wrong.
As I stated before; 5% is not significant enough. It won't ensure the victory; it might barely even turn the tide. Depends on how Trump does.
In some states; that's even within a margin of error, and might be close enough to cause certain states to enter run-offs...because we know the GOP is a bunch of sore losers.
I'm not accounting for State laws; which may in fact be stricter. I'm talking about Federal Laws which might not explicitly forbid such things; so long as they're done in an actually safe manner by professionals.
But, as I said before, if the DEA believes it has the power to stop that none-the-less; that's what they will do, without respect to if the law is actually legally unclear or borderline. Unfortunately many pharmaceutical places don't care to invite the wrath of the DEA; even if what they're doing could be considered permissible; so long as they do not synthesize an exact drug that the Feds specifically name as a controlled substance.
Again; IANAL either. But I do think there's a lot of room for small compounding pharmacies to synthesize various drugs to meet a patient's needs quickly while waiting for proper shipments to arrive. There's lots of compounds that are life-sustaining that do not fall under the DEA banner of authority.
If I'm going to be completely honest; I feel like these people in support of such a withdrawal of support (of Israel) are going to have to move the needle A LOT more than a mere 5% to get the attention they want.
Might be acceptable to get a little louder about your issue; and properly educate people about it.
Depending on how Vyvanse is Scheduled; it might be legal to privately make. If it's not scheduled like a standard amphetamine; the DEA is powerless.
I have a sneaking suspicion it's not illegal to compound this stuff. But IANAL; and it doesn't matter if the DEA thinks it is and will hassle anyone trying.
I firmly think this would be a boon for many people; owning one of these is likely a lifeline that even small town physicians could utilize to dispense drugs freely or cheaply to patients in need.
This is something that I think small-town pharmacies could use to create compounds in cases of drug shortages. I think tools and programs and small labs like what are discussed in the article are a positive force for good; and that they should be not only allowed, but encouraged, for many drugs that are expensive, unavailable to someone in need and can be readily synthesized safely with a basic college level of chemistry training by someone in a pharmacy.
I think the potential risks and downsides are small right now; and I think more of it should be encouraged gently so that we can find out quickly what the flaws and limitations are so that we can put regulatory guardrails around it so that people do not harm themselves.
https://youtu.be/hYeGDYcsZsE