I’m well aware, I just meant that it costs a lot more than other phones of similar quality. Not saying there aren’t good reasons for that.

I don’t think I need more power. The charging and headphone ports don’t work (so need to use wireless charging) and battery life is quite poor. I don’t feel like the phone is too slow or anything so I imagine the FP5 would be plenty of power.

Anyone know how well the Fairphone 5 compares against the Samsung Galaxy S10? I know the specs are pretty public but I don’t follow this stuff that closely so find it difficult to draw comparisons between different chips etc.

My S10 is on its last legs so I think a bit about what I will buy to replace it. I really like the idea of the Fairphone but of course you pay a lot (relatively speaking) for the ethics. One of the worries is that the phone will become unusable in a few years anyway, either because parts are unavailable or because software has become too heavy. The other option I am leaving towards is a second hand Pixel.

Honestly… I can understand being disappointed with the decision to remove it. But it blows my mind just how worked up people get over it.

This is the publicly owned and funded NHS, not a business.

It’s possible there’s a regional or generational gap there. If you’re pushing 110 you probably haven’t worked in 40 years. You could even argue that the ones literally working themselves to death are the very ones paying for the older generation’s happy carefree lifestyle.

Link, because unbelievably this article about a website does not contain any link to the website: https://sanctions.nazk.gov.ua/en/art/

I like my Garmin Vívoactive 3. It has all the basic features (for casual walking/running) and looks okay.

I really like the look of the “hybrid” watches like the Garmin Vívomove or Withings watches. They look great but as far as I know none of them have in-built GPS.

Would be very interested in checking out the BangleJS 2 as well.

There are definitely other win conditions, but it’s still winner-takes-all. So say if an ally is really strong scientifically or culturally it inevitably becomes in your interest to destroy them.

One limitation that games like Civ suffer from is that diplomacy is ultimately pretty shallow because there can only be one winner, so even when you’re building alliances or trading relationships it is generally to gain some temporary benefit until you are in a position to defeat your partner later on (whether militarily, scientifically, etc).

What I would love to see is a multiplayer game like Civ but where each player has independent win conditions (so that a game could have multiple winners, or no winners). The condition could even just be to attain a certain level of happiness or wealth. And if you achieve that then you win even if other nations are bigger or stronger, and conversely if you don’t achieve it you lose even if you are the last nation standing. So decisions to go to war, or focus on technological development, or build alliances or trading relationships, etc, are driven by the wants and needs of your own people and not just a need to dominate others.

I haven’t played ESO but I can tell you the standard of writing in the other ES games is, IMO, very high. Morrowind is my all time favourite, the lore in that game is fantastic.

Other people have covered the main reasons, which are time and expense. I will just add:

• Lawsuits are public, and a lot of dirty laundry can get aired. They have the potential to be embarrassing for both sides.

• They are also stressful, particularly if you are cross-examined which must be an awful experience.

• Finally, they are risky: even if you think you have a very solid case, there is always a significant chance that the judge will rule against you on the day.

Basically litigation is a bad experience, whether you are plaintiff or defendant, corporate or individual, right or wrong. So both parties have a strong incentive to settle.

UI and pricing aside (I don’t have much direct experience of either on GitLab), GitHub is, AFAIK, by far the most popular and therefore it’s easier to get your project discovered and get other developers to contribute.

I do kind of think that by centralising so much stuff on a website owned by Microsoft we are running the risk of another Reddit-like situation where GitHub turns sharply anti-user in an attempt to monetise in the future. But for the moment, the network effects are real and significant.