Because the Android SDK is owned and controlled by Google. They’ve consistently made decisions to make it harder to stay out of their ecosystem (like the new “Integrity” API).
As consumers, we would vastly benefit from having another choice that isn’t controlled by one of the biggest tech companies in the world.
I like how their idea of entry level is a 16GB RAM phone for €890.
Honestly, it’s better than when people say I need to “just concentrate more”.
Yeah, fair enough. That’s a great point. I will update my opinion of this advancement.
The catch is that it’s useless in most plastics applications, where you really don’t want it to dissolve easily. Probably more catches, but that’s the one I see right away.
You see the thing is, the point of plastic is that it doesn’t dissolve easily. I can see this having some niche applications, but this won’t be replacing most plastics any time soon.
You wanna eat?
You want to eat?
No more parents!
Ah yes, cosmetic features like… a grenade launcher.
Yeah, I was being sarcastic to show how ridiculous that logic is.
I’ll tell you that as soon as you tell me where else we ignore 50% of a law. ;)
Here’s a study on gun ownership vs gun deaths:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3828709/
Results. Gun ownership was a significant predictor of firearm homicide rates (incidence rate ratio = 1.009; 95% confidence interval = 1.004, 1.014). This model indicated that for each percentage point increase in gun ownership, the firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9%.
Conclusions. We observed a robust correlation between higher levels of gun ownership and higher firearm homicide rates. Although we could not determine causation, we found that states with higher rates of gun ownership had disproportionately large numbers of deaths from firearm-related homicides.
Here’s a graphic showing gun ownership by country:
https://www.graphicnews.com/en/pages/42747/firearms-civilian-gun-ownership-by-country
As you can see, the US is almost 4 times higher than the next highest country.
And here’s a graphic showing the number of mass shootings by country:
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/mass-shootings-by-country
Again, you can see that the US tops the chart by a huge margin (more than 5 times).
We can’t really compare based on just violence alone, because any country in active conflict severely skews the data. You’d have to include only countries in peacetime. But you can certainly compare based on gun violence, because the US always trends very high. Even when you include countries in active conflict, the US compares to them in gun violence. So, living in the US is similar to living in a country involved in active conflict with regard to gun violence.
Highlights
- Globally, the U.S. ranks at the 93rd percentile for overall firearm mortality, 92nd percentile for children and teens, and 96th percentile for women.
- The U.S. has among the highest overall firearm mortality rates, as well as among the highest firearm mortality rates for children, adolescents, and women, both globally and among high-income countries.
- Nearly all U.S. states have a higher firearm mortality rate than most other countries. Death rates due to physical violence by firearm in U.S. states are closer to rates seen in countriesexperiencing active conflict.
- Black and American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) people have the highest firearm mortality rates of any racial or ethnic group.
What you’re asking for doesn’t exist, wasn’t called for in the law, and is an unreasonable demand.
Similar enough laws have been studied and shown to be effective, as pointed out in the article I provided. Demanding that a specific law be researched regardless of existing research of similar laws is unreasonable.
Again, if you’re actually worried about this kind of research, you should be petitioning the federal government to make it easier to perform scientific research on gun violence.
And it should be granted. It’s disgusting that people that have done nothing wrong are being targeted by the bigot in chief.
The easier it is to access guns, the more mass shootings there appear to be in the country, yes. Access to guns is the cause of gun violence. No one has claimed that access to guns is the cause of all violence.
If someone’s goal is to kill 20 kids, having access to a gun makes that goal substantially easier to accomplish.
I provided my sources.
He was talking about the law, which does more than that. I don’t think anyone here is proposing banning one single model.
So the majority of countries either don’t allow guns at all or don’t allow guns without a permit and a good reason. A few allow guns with a permit and no reason necessary. Three (that I could see) don’t require a permit. I mean, yeah. Strict gun laws work, and a lack of gun laws leads to gun violence. Is there any more proof you need?
Ok, I’m gonna need a citation for that one. I mean, sure, we’re not “unique” in that regard, but it’s fairly uncommon.
Ok, let’s try it and see if you’re right.
The second amendment has four clauses, each separated with commas. The way I interpret it (the way it was originally interpreted for over 200 years) is that it guarantees states the right to maintain well regulated militias of its citizens, and that the federal government can’t take away the firearms of those militias.
It’s only relatively recently (2008) that we’ve reinterpreted the amendment to basically forget about the first two clauses and the third command. That’s why the NRA only has the second half adorning their office buildings.
The text:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
How I interpret it:
How republicans interpret it:
The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
The top level comment was also talking about the law, incorrectly.