Our behaviour is also responsible for China's and India emissions.
We've exported lot of our production to those countries and are importing it back. If we were to measure emissions not by the country of the producer but the country of the consumer, our numbers (USA and Europe) would look dramatically different.
As consummer we are responsible for the whole world emissions in the end. Changing those habbits, can impact things far beyond borders. But that's a political choice which goes against a constant growth based economy and it seems that not many people in our countries are ready to accept this.
We want to buy and travel as much as we always did but bear no reponsibilities for the impact it has.
I wonder what the plan is to recycle those. Without a plan to safely bring back all this hardware and recycling it, we'll deplete earth from it's mineral. The matter used to build things on earth stays within earth's ecosystem.
Moving matter out continusously at industrial scale with no plan to bring 100% of it back in the ecosystem other than burning it seems quite unsustainable and irresponsable.
Sure, in the end, we must always find a way to blame western societies while we give a blank check for China (and other bad actors) to continue doing whatever they are doing...
This was never about saving the planet, it was always about destroying our socio-economic system. Look how the tune changed in Brazil when Lula came into power: they never burned so much rainforest, but now it's fine, becasue socialists are in power.
Security is a fallacy here because, being a US company, it is technically not secured by default as it has backdoors (or one has to assume it has backdoors and those cannot even be audited).
Then it is just about the sense of security which is based on the threat model you consider threatening to you.
You do not chose who you are the enemy of though and in fascist countries with no regards to the rule of law like the USA, this becomes a fairly important threat model to take into account.
Libreoffice is used quite a bit in administrations across EU.
I would expect more stickiness to microsoft caused by legacy applications that requires windows to run rather than office.
Allowing people to own their devices and modify them can first foster creativity and competition, which can lead to the creation of standards, alternatives and businesses around that.
The current situation makes it impossible to create a business from modifying an existing product, you need to start from blank slates, making it hard to crack a walled-garden.
What the US built is already dystopian, there's nothing to lose moving away from that. Things like chat control are not a good thing neither, but adding regulation can also be beneficial and lead to interoperable standards. That's where the US failed big time. E.g. things like having standardised chargers seems like a no brainer but it required regulators to step in for it to happen.
reply