Anti-consumer for the sake of the bottom line is to be expected, but they’re burning millions of dollars on this.

Across the board, in product survey after product survey, consumers agree with you every time about thin phones. At best nobody cares beyond being briefly conceptually impressed (in a way that doesn’t translate into sales), at worst people actively hate how fragile it looks (or actually is). They always would rather have more battery life than a thinner phone, and actually below a certain weight most consumers prefer a phone to be heavier.

So why do companies keep racing to make the thinnest phones?

I honestly have no idea. This isn’t one of those things where I pose a rhetorical question and then answer it. The planned obsolescence of the battery seems plausible, but a thinner battery doesn’t really correspond to a shorter lifespan, just a shorter duty cycle. Maybe it’s just a vanity thing, like a competition between companies, but the bean-counters don’t usually let that sort of thing keep going if it doesn’t sell. Maybe it’s marketing, but that never really succeeds either. I really don’t know.

It’s so hard to tell. I’ve been online for almost 30 years and I still can’t tell most of the time.

I’m not saying Trump wouldn’t try to take such a thing, but this doesn’t give him any more ability to do so than he had before. Obviously he’s willing to be a fascist, so he doesn’t need any change in an organization’s designation to do something undemocratic toward them. He has exactly as much control as he had before. This doesn’t change anything.

Again, it doesn’t matter for this news. The ease of undemocratic shenanigans toward the Internet Archive has not changed.

Trump has exactly as much control over it now as he did before: none. It literally just means that all official government documents go to them for archiving. This is cool and neat and raises the profile of the Internet Archive, but other than that it doesn’t really mean anything. Trump can of course do some undemocratic shenanigans to them, but no more or less than he could before this designation.

This doesn’t change anything about the ownership, governance, or control of the Internet Archive. It literally just means that all official government documents go to them for archiving. This is cool and neat and raises the profile of the Internet Archive, but other than that it doesn’t really mean anything. Trump has exactly as much control over it now as he did before: none.

You’re not wrong, but this isn’t “tying into” the US Gov any more than your mailbox “ties into” the postal service by being approved by the postmaster general. Your mail carrier could throw a rock at it, but they could have done that before anyway.

Yes, but that has always been the case. If they’re going to do some undemocratic shenanigans, this designation doesn’t make it any easier or harder.

I strongly recommend that a whole bunch of people actually look up what the FDLP is before commenting. Trump doesn’t “have control” over the Internet Archive.

The Federal government gets no control over the Internet Archive through this designation.

No. They remain independent.

Edit: well, ok, they can, but only in the way that they previously could: through a court order that would affect any library of any kind.

The Federal government has no direct or indirect control over the libraries in the FDLP.

No, it doesn’t. It’s still an independent entity. The right is already slinging around enough misinformation, we don’t need to add any of our own.

Look again. Trump has no control over it. The Federal Depository designation basically just means that all official documents go to it for archiving. All Federal Depository libraries remain independent and receive no funding from the Government as a part of their membership in the program.

Having a shared calendar has been a godsend for us. Honestly we would each probably miss like half of our appointments if my the other wasn’t able to say “hey don’t you have that thing…?” or “hey aren’t the kids supposed to be at that place in twenty minutes…?”. I can imagine location sharing makes that even easier because you’d know if it’s even possible for them to make it, or if you need to get them ready or whatever.

Honestly, with the current political situation in my country, this might be a good idea.

That’s really not the type of person she is, or the type of relationship we have. She might well know that I’m still sharing with her, but it’s not because she’s controlling or untrusting. It would be because she had a reason to check recently.

I have my location shared with my wife because while I was working out of the house I got tired of answering the same text message (“how far from home are you so I can start dinner?”) every afternoon. She’s the only one in the world I have no secrets from, so I just never turned it off. I honestly don’t know if she still knows I’ve got it shared with her.

Oh, you know, I think you’re right. Good call.