Nighed

They said that the option to use other authenticators were disabled by their company

The ms authenticator works in 'reverse' in that you type the code on the screen into the phone. I assume this is preferable to corporate as you can't be social engineered into giving out a 2fa token. It also has a "no this wasn't me" button to allow you to (I assume) notify IT if you are getting requests that are not you.

I don't believe that the authenticator app gives them access to anything on your phone? (Happy to learn here) And I think android lets you make some kind of business partition if you feel the need to?

They restarted it last year on YouTube. They have a few series of the classics up on a different channel, with this one being for new digs

Is this the team they moved it to, or the team they moved it from?

Then you don't get any new people at all. (Or very few)

I don't think Google has a road/mountain bike toggle for navigation does it? ☹️

There goes my fantasy F1 team for this week...

That's on used from McLaren?

I would split digital privacy from the foss and Linux discussions. They attract the same people, but are fundamentally different topics.

It also means you could get deeper into the digital privacy topic which is more useful to most people.

For the digital privacy one, ask for a volunteer (or do you!) ahead of time and get them to do GDPR requests for apple, Google, Microsoft, Meta etc. sanitizer anything they want to hide, but do a demo of what big tech actually knows about them.

Then go though how to prevent that and have a discussion on the pros and cons of that data collection. (Eg I don't care about Google data tracking as I find the Google location history really useful)

I'm somewhat cynical about their actual commitment to this issue after they scrapped the investment fund.... It's an investment can we not spend money on some more risky schemes and give them legislative/planning assistance to help them succeed and generate the government money back?

Or was it all meant to be subsidies for things that wouldn't give money back to the govt?

It would be good to know the actual questions asked, it's suspicious how low green/libdems/reform are in almost everything.

Shouldn't a question like this have a neutral midpoint with trust/distrust on either side? This looks like it's penalising parties people are less aware of the policies of.

Edit: oh, it's the bit at the top "which party would you trust most to:"

Naff question really what was the point of including the smaller parties there? Should have just been the main parties for that question or a graded version with all parties.

It's been a while since my politics A level, so I may get some of the terms wrong but hopefully the facts right.

As the UK doesn't have a formal constitution, it relies on convention and that parliament is effectively all powerful (under the crown) in that if parliament (encompassing both houses in this context) votes for something it can do it. (As it represents the will of the people and has the authority of the crown (less relevant in the modern day))

Parliament can't therefore lock a decision in such a way that a future parliament can't change because the future parliament is still all powerful.

In practice though this isn't entirely the case. You can make a law like you said, and while a future parliament can break it, it would (probably) look bad on them. But what does that do to stop politicians?

A further note on the previous chain - we go have two houses of parliament; the house of commons is the main one with the green benches that most will recognise. It has our elected representatives (MPs) in and (normally) where the PM is selected from.

The house of lords (red benches, appointed members for life) is generally considered the check chamber. It used to be able to block laws entirely, but I believe lost that power semi recently and it can now be overruled by the commons after 2/3 rejections.