idle76

Wierd, I just updated to v128 (been offline a couple of days) on android, and the Settings -> Data Collection -> Marketing wad already off. I already had the usage and studied off, so maybe that's why

Finland is Finland in Swedish too.

Soo, "kan"= "can" in norwegian and "must" in danish? Is that correct?

Are you sure you're not mixing up Montessori and Steiner schooling?

The latter is more focused on self-expression and seems kinda "artsy".

Glasses for working at a computer. The same as reading glasses. The word is directly translated from the common name for it in my native language.

I suspect it's npt just Samsung. Both google and microsoft (SwiftKey) does the same thing.

The worst part is that the most used national ID-function now stops you from using third party "approved" keyboard due to (misguided) security reasons. Both AnySoftKeyboard and AOSP keyboard is banned.

This one is the same phone type with 4G(my kids have them): https://m.gsmarena.com/nokia_105_4g-10966.php

Yep, this is part of the reason I avoid google like the plague. Everything else works like a charm in FF, so why would I use an inferior product? Granted, I don't use youtube, but everything else has better alternatives away from big evil.

I did this and it worked like a charm!

Upgraded to Android 13, and it's gotten really slow, so I'm thinking of moving to /e/

Which is solvable by having enough voting stations spread out, and making voting day a national holiday or done on a sunday.

Also check out Glorious Eggroll on Gihub for even better performance.

Backer?

But you cannot give it to companies, as that would be illegal subsidies. Thus, our economy will tank even if the households are compensated.

I know trade _can_ be beneficial even without an advantage. But not if it means giving away our only advantage. I'm sorry, but if you don't tell me why it is a bad plan, I'm supporting it. Trade is not always better than building industry. Especially not if it means that we go back to being a resource economy. Trade is always more lucrative with refined goods than raw materials.

Why would any industry start here if it means higher labor costs if all else is equal? How do we compete then? We've already seen much industry being moved to for example Latvia, or Russia, or China, or Vietnam. And that was with the cheap electricity.

We're not the one "pointlessly" increasing Europe's electricity prices. They did that to themselves by combining the gas and electricity markets in the first place. And relying on Russia for their energy needs, instead of building more energy for themselves.

Because the EU thinks it's ok to have an advantage with lower wages, but not on cheap electricity. If they didn't, they would have made regulation that either normalised wages throughout the EU (VERY unpopular with the inhabitants of northern Europe) or allowed nations to demand that all wages must be paid locally in accordance to local laws or tariffs. This is not allowed today, as it would make work migration a lot less beneficial for capitalists importing workers from eastern Europe.

You fail to see my point. Cheap electricity is our only competitive advantage (well, in addition to a well educated population). We cannot compete on labor wages, which are much higher here than pretty much anywhere in the world.

If we give away that advantage for shortsighted profit instead of using it to build our own industry, we will only strengthen central europe's industries, while we go back to being a resource economy.

Yes, but why should we pay the price when it is our natural resources being sent abroad? Why is it not allowed (due to EU/EEC-regulation) to have a competitive advantage on energy prices when it is allowed to have an advantage on for example lower wages.

Plus, transport of electricity is not efficient. You lose a lot in the cables. It would be better to transport the factories that need it to where the electricity is generated.

And, the backlash is because of what is perceieved as poor energy politics from the central european powers. Making oneself dependent on fossil energy Russia while decommisioning nuclear is madness when trying to reduce carbon emissions.

Northern europe is also much more based on the use of electricity for heating than the rest of europe, so it hits them a lot harder when prices skyrocket. The result is much more use of wood for heating, which in turn increases air pollution.

Not neccesarily. They could choose to implement a two-tier system for pricing. One system for internal use (within Finland), and only making the rest available for export (and thus Europe) after the finnish needs have been covered.

The full market integration isn't a natural law, as some free-market enthusiasts would have you believe.

Maybe between Scandinavia and Poland?

There's curators you can follow, sort of like "Spotify DJs"