Yeah this has less to do with VW and GrapheneOS and more to do with Google Play's attestation. Many apps don't work with sandboxed GMS/microG currently and more will come as we get closer to a locked down version of Google's Android.
> or detonated a bomb at Holloway Prison that covered sleeping children in shards of glass
They attempted to bomb a prison notorious for holding and torturing women. Some windows were broken in nearby houses [1], and I don't think there are any reports of actual injuries to the children.
Significantly worse collateral damage is accepted daily for far weaker reasons; broken glass from windows is something that wouldn't even be mentioned in any other context. Recently, the US dropped a bomb on a school directly--if the suffragettes should be castigated for the windows, what do you think of that country?
No, it’s not. You shouldn’t have to muzzle your opposition to feel safe, or to threaten them with jailing to feel like your ideas are being heard. That speaks to some pretty deep seated insecurity if you feel that way.
The comment is not excusing censorship, but illustrating that censors don't like to call what they do "censorship". Even a justification for it is not enough - they don't want to call it "justified censorship", they want to call it something else entirely, and even then they want as little attention paid to it as possible, to trick people into thinking their discussions are free.
> Does this advice apply in every case or does it have a restricted scope?
In case you’re being serious, this has been debated in various liberal traditions since the conception liberalism was first born. In essence, the modern liberal tradition (modern as in post-Enlightenment, i.e. about the whole time America has existed) says you don’t censor anything except for forces seeking to censor (paradox of tolerance).
So now every force seeking to censor will just say its opposition is a force seeking to censor, and get them censored. Like how the Nazis claimed the Jews were the ones destroying Germany, then the Nazis destroyed Germany. How do you stop that?
Better minds than mine have debated the paradox of tolerance (a name only given in the 1950s, but a concept recognized for longer).
Also, not tolerating something doesn’t mean forcefully censoring it. Norms and conventions largely keep e.g. frowned-upon slurs out of common usage. The person getting told to shut up for using the N- word isn’t being censored by the state, but they are being encouraged to engage respectfully.
In practice, it seems that whenever someone is told to shut up for using the N- word, they react by saying it many more times. So it doesn't work very well.
> whenever someone is told to shut up for using the N- word, they react by saying it many more times
One, not my experience. (Indian family.) Two, people spouting out the N- word have generally caused themselves to be ignored, which sort of solves the problem as well.
Huh? That’s what I said. They are going to win but wow the AI product team lacks a lot of imagination. I feel like an arm chair jerk saying it but they have had years to copy others and still don’t. They have the data agreements with business but lack product vision.
This product is exactly how Google improves Gemini. For better or worse (I'd argue worse) Google will be putting these devices in classrooms and everywhere else to train Gemini.
My take is related but different. I believe that Google believes the customer's for these "premium" Googlebooks are the kids who used Chromebooks all their school years, and are now graduating school, getting into university, or getting into their first job. Google is presenting them an option, that feels familiar, but is also premium. The next level. The big-boy upgrade. Familiar but Better.
Except that Chromebooks are widely reviled as cheap, laggy garbage plus a negative mental association with tedious schoolwork. If anyone buys one, it'll be in spite of the brand association.
reply