Subject matter also resulted in significantly different levels of CO2 emissions. Questions that required lengthy reasoning processes, for example abstract algebra or philosophy, led to up to six times higher emissions than more straightforward subjects, like high school history.
So we've finally realised the sci-fi trope of defeating machines using philosophical paradoxes. Only, instead of robot heads exploding, Tuvalu sinks.
That product description sounded to me like a mechanical (not chemical) sunscreen. Unlinke chemical sunscreens those tend to have a visible whitening effect when applied properly. Given that the Choice tests were blind and on human skin, I can imagine a scenario where it was "rubbed in" like chemical sunscreen until invisible, and gave the absurdly low score as a genuine result of misapplication
On the other hand, two independent labs getting similar awful results is damning.
It's unfortunate the responses from these companies are mostly along the lines of "nuh-uh". It's good that there have been some emergency retests, but I would have hoped that someone would have worked with Choice to figure out what was up rather than just telling them "you did it wrong".
I don't know if the changes coming into affect today have something different about replaceable batteries, but the 2027 replaceable battery requirement has this as the exemption:
2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the following products incorporating portable batteries may be designed in such a way as to make the battery removable and replaceable only by independent professionals:
(a) appliances specifically designed to operate primarily in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion, and that are intended to be washable or rinseable;
(b) professional medical imaging and radiotherapy devices, as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Regulation (EU) 2017/745, and in vitro diagnostic medical devices, as defined in Article 2, point (2), of Regulation (EU) 2017/746.
The only thing there Apple could even pretend is "washable or rinsable", and I'd be shocked* if they could get away with that.
*not that shocked
I desperately want to play through it but they seem to have made some weird technical decisions with the sound system and I don't get half the sounds on any of my devices.
Just to be clear before I respond to the rest of this comment, my position is that Peertube solves the sustainability problem and in no way am I suggesting Peertube will replace YouTube
I do not expect the vast majority of channels to survive the end of YouTube, as is normal for any paradigm shift.
P2P is completely achievable using NAT Hole Punching. I have no clarity on if Peertube is doing this but since there's already a trusted server involved it would be silly not to.
In a hypothetical, unlikely future where YouTube dies and people generally move to Peertube, I expect the majority of content creators to pay small fees to have instances host their videos. I expect small, free but restricted instances will continue to be the home for amateur videographers as they are today. The more technical folk will likely self host, and groups of like minded creators will pool efforts to run group specialist instances (not unlike Nebula).
Frankly the most likely scenario is YouTube dies and everyone starts posting videos to Instagram or Tiktok or something equivalently anti user.
Encryption is an exemplar. It applies to all features in XEPs. My comment fully addresses two of your three dot points so the claim that I only read a fragment of a sentence is bizarre and patronising.
I don't feel the need to address every point because I'm not setting up an opposing argument, I don't even disagree with the overarching concept. I wanted to clarify some aspects of XMPP that I see as being misrepresented or overlooked.
I don't think it's reasonable to say XMPP both lacks encryption and has a XEP for encryption. XEPs are how features are added to XMPP. There is support for encryption in the XMPP standard because there's a XEP for it.
The feature fragmentation used to be a real problem, which is why they introduced compliance suites.
Content creators. It's hard to host everyone's videos, and it benefits monopolists to imply that doing so is necessary, as it prevents new entrants. It's not nearly as hard to host your own server (or pay for it to be hosted). It becomes harder when you suddenly become popular, a situation which Peertube explicitly compensates for by sharing the distribution effort between viewers, which scales with popularity.
Signal makes it's own bed like YouTube by being a single centralised server for everyone. Nobody ever asks "who pays for the servers" when it comes to Matrix or XMPP
Peertube has already delivered the sustainable model: creators host their own videos and viewers assist distribution.
You wouldn't happen to have any resources regarding how to run a community makerspace, would you?
Just like bears