This seems moderately contradictory, because as the time that you use something increases the chance of some physical damage increases, especially for a portable device where dropping, an imperfect bag holding, or someone else bumping it, and the like, are all more likely than a stationary device (like a desktop).

This is a huge reason that I don't use many Apple devices, so if they somehow effectively addressed this without reparability, I'd be interested to know. However, I suspect that that's impossible because just making it durable only delays the need to repair, so you end up up shit creek maybe 2 years after buying it instead of 1 year (made up numbers).

`ssh -XC` (look up SSH X forwarding). You can also easily tunnel remote desktop over ssh.

> Why I cannot watch a 4k movie in the terminal or browse the web using pinch to zoom ?

Kitty, sixel, and iterm2

Making justice available only to people with monetary (and in US courts at least, wealth is a strong predictor of outcome) and other relevant resources is not the kind of thing that I want society getting worse on.

DMCA enforcement of copyright is thus fundamentally a good law, and in my opinion should only be tweaked to deal with the pathological cases on platforms like YouTube, and even more so what's happening in YouTube.

Some mild disincentive against incorrect DMCA takedown requests being filed seems reasonable to me, as long as it scales with the level of inflicted damage. A few dollars per false claim seems like a good starting point to consider from. That makes a legitimate mistake by a human not a major issue, but also maked unleashing inaccurate mass bots and performing extremely overly broad blocking deeply unprofitable.

Of course, the broad EU blocks aren't governed by US's DMCA, but the basic incentive argument applies there too I think.

What specific policies achieve this is also a separate question.

So, even if computers in and of themselves are completely valid in such product categories saying "No Tech" (which means "no computers") is a great way to market to people who really just want to avoid anti-ownership anti-features.

Lastly, I find it mildly amusing that a tractor (which is very clearly a form of technology, in the traditional definition of the word where fire and printing presses are technology too) is now being marketed as having no technology.

Usually the argument is for scalability, but a single VM for personal use doesn't need that, and even if you do want that, you'll need more than a bare repo.

I generally agree with that sentiment, except we don't have a vibrant market of many options with many different trade offs. Finding headphone jack, solid reparability, user swappable battery, easily replaceable USB port, and all the other things that one might want is basically impossible. The vast majority of phones are highly unrepairable, have no headphone jack, have everything soldered to a tiny number of internal boards, and are full of anti repair dark patterns.

If a truly well made phone was common and made by many people, then there'd be much less argument for this regulation.

Claude code is almost there

https://levelup.gitconnected.com/theres-a-react-app-running-...

> "sanic" the hedgehog

The quotes seem to shut down autocorrect

1: there's nothing that I see about the T-shirt, but the first result is titled "Sanic DA hedgeh0g". I will not be looking at what this video is. Several other results also include the word "sanic" in relation to the hedgehog.

With that said, it can be even worse when it isn't listed.