Voluntarily sharing informative posts from unaffiliated sources.
Tesla didn’t respond to a request for comment; it has dissolved its press office.
Summary:
Summary:
Summary:
Summary:
Summary:
Summary:
Related:
The platform does not pay according to a per-stream rate, but rather puts all the revenue from subscribers and ads into a giant pot, and divides that share according to their respective “streamshare.” Under this model, artists are estimated to receive between $0.003 to $0.005 per play.
That’s about to change. Beginning early next year, Spotify will only pay royalties to artists whose tracks have been streamed 1,000 times in the past 12 months, effectively locking out the smallest artists from the “streamshare” pot. The money that would have been paid out to these small artists — which Spotify said amounts to $40 million a year — will instead go to “those most dependent on streaming revenue.”
According to Spotify, artists generally don’t pocket the earnings from tracks that have under 1,000 streams anyway, because they don’t meet the labels and distributors’ minimum withdrawal amount. The company also says it does not make any additional money under the new model. But musicians have said they feel the model is “putting a number on art," and industry experts said that this change essentially makes Spotify the arbiter of which artist is deserving of payment.
There has to be a way for multibillion-dollar companies to both keep music accessible and appropriately compensate musicians — especially fledgling, independent ones.
Spotify will stop paying anything at all for roughly two-thirds of tracks on the platform. That is any track receiving fewer than 1,000 streams over the period of a year. Tracks falling under this arbitrary minimum will continue to accrue royalties – but those royalties will now be redirected upwards, often to bigger artists, rather than to their own rights holders.
This sounds incredible, but there’s nothing to stop it. And their primary business partners – the three major labels – are cheering the change on because it will mean more money in their pockets.
Summary:
Summary:
In the past, you could bypass the sign-in requirement by choosing ‘Offline Account’ or ‘Sign in with a local account instead.’ However, Microsoft removed this option in recent years, meaning you would need an active internet connection to create a Microsoft account for a new Windows 11 install.
Some users discovered that they could bypass this requirement by using the following blocked email addresses: example@example.com, a@a.com, or no@thankyou.com, and then typing in a random password. While this would let you fall back to proceeding with an offline account until recently, it now results in an ‘Oops, something went wrong’ message, which will return you to the same email input screen.
Thankfully, there remains another way to install Windows 11 without a Microsoft account. When you’re at the log-in screen, you can hit Shift + F10 and type OOBE/BYPASSNRO, which will let you create a local account instead if you do not have an internet connection (so disconnect the internet for this). However, non-tech-savvy users will likely not know this, so many would likely end up creating another unwanted online account.
This is just one of the controversial steps Microsoft has recently been taking, like including ads in the Start Menu, nagging Windows 10 users to upgrade, or adding a watermark if your PC does not support AI features.
Alternative to Instagram:
Pixelfed is a free and open-source image sharing social network service. The platform distinguishes itself from other image sharing services through its decentralized architecture, meaning user data is not stored on a central server. It uses the ActivityPub protocol, allowing users to interact with other social networks within the protocol, such as Mastodon, PeerTube, and Friendica. Pixelfed and other platforms utilizing this protocol are considered to be part of the Fediverse. The network is made up of several independent sites that communicate with one another, which is roughly comparable to e-mail providers. The parties involved do not all have to be registered with the same provider, but can still communicate with each other. Thus, users are able to sign up on any server and follow others on the other instances.
Much like Mastodon, Pixelfed implements chronological timelines without content manipulation algorithms. It also aims to be privacy-focused with no third party analytics or tracking. Pixelfed optionally organizes its media by hashtags, geo-tagging and likes based on each server. It also allows audiences to be distinguished in three ways and on a post-by-post basis: followers-only, public, and unlisted. Like several other social platforms, Pixelfed allows accounts to be locked, when followers must be pre-approved by the owner.
For those looking to move beyond Chrome, there are alternatives that come pre-installed with uBlock Origin and are considered better than Firefox:
This project is a custom and independent version of Firefox, with the primary goals of privacy, security and user freedom.
LibreWolf is designed to increase protection against tracking and fingerprinting techniques, while also including a few security improvements. This is achieved through our privacy and security oriented settings and patches. LibreWolf also aims to remove all the telemetry, data collection and annoyances, as well as disabling anti-freedom features like DRM.
The Mullvad Browser is developed – in collaboration between Mullvad VPN and the Tor Project – to minimize tracking and fingerprinting. It is designed to be used with a trustworthy VPN instead of the Tor Network. It does not require the use of Mullvad’s VPN.
We recommend Mullvad Browser if you are focused on strong privacy protections and anti-fingerprinting out of the box, Firefox for casual internet browsers looking for a good alternative to Google Chrome, and Brave if you need Chromium browser compatibility.
For those looking to move beyond Chrome, there are alternatives that come pre-installed with uBlock Origin and are considered better than Firefox:
This project is a custom and independent version of Firefox, with the primary goals of privacy, security and user freedom.
LibreWolf is designed to increase protection against tracking and fingerprinting techniques, while also including a few security improvements. This is achieved through our privacy and security oriented settings and patches. LibreWolf also aims to remove all the telemetry, data collection and annoyances, as well as disabling anti-freedom features like DRM.
The Mullvad Browser is developed – in collaboration between Mullvad VPN and the Tor Project – to minimize tracking and fingerprinting. It is designed to be used with a trustworthy VPN instead of the Tor Network. It does not require the use of Mullvad’s VPN.
ICYMI: FTC judge rules Intuit broke law, must stop advertising TurboTax as “free”
According to Chappell’s 242-page ruling, “the evidence proves that Intuit engaged in deceptive advertising in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act.” Intuit “advertised to consumers that they could file their taxes online for free using TurboTax, when in truth, for approximately two-thirds of taxpayers, the advertised claim was false,” he wrote.
About Samsung (from Techopedia):
Not every manufacturer has wholly embraced the idea. iFixit recently dropped its Samsung partnership over allegations the Galaxy phone maker wasn’t much interested in do-it-yourself repairs. 404 Media learned that Samsung required independent repair shops to not only report customers who fix devices with unofficial parts, but to “disassemble” those devices. While right to repair laws don’t necessarily address that behavior, they along with existing warranty law could mandate policy changes.
About Apple (from The Register):
The fact that a strong parts pairing prohibition was included in the bill indicates that the practice continues to fall out of favor as more and more localities take action to ban it. Even Apple, which has relied heavily on parts pairing to maintain control of its devices while speaking out of the other side of its mouth about support for right to repair, recently caved to the parts-pairing pressure by announcing it would allow used parts to be installed in some devices.
However, as iFixit pointed out, Apple’s declaration of allowing some used parts to be used for repairs doesn’t comply with Colorado’s prohibition on parts pairing, nor the version included in a recently passed right to repair bill in Oregon.
“Apple has made no promises to enable previously blocked functionality for third-party parts, which are also key to independent and DIY repair,” iFixit said. “To be clear, nobody expects Apple to make parts work when they don’t meet the necessary specifications — but currently, Apple blocks functionality of many third-party parts preemptively.”
In other words, Colorado is another win, but it’s hardly the end of the war.
At a committee hearing, opponents of the new law argued that it would endanger the security and reliability of devices by opening up the market to independent shops of dubious quality and making documentation and tools more widely available.
“The marketplace already provides a wide range of consumer choices for repair with varying levels of quality, price and convenience without the mandates imposed by this legislation. The marketplace continues to evolve and manufacturers will continue to make changes to address consumer demand while offering consumers safe and reliable repair options,” said Michael Blank, director of state legislative affairs for CTIA, the trade association for the wireless communications industry.
At the hearing, Katz argued the change was necessary because companies were using technology to take more control of the market and block people from making reasonable repairs.
“When you limit choice and you limit freedom to fix the stuff that you own, then that can lead to higher costs. It can also lead to more people deciding it’s just not worth it and buying a whole new thing and … that can have a huge impact on our society from an environmental perspective as well,” he said.
As stated in the Internet Archive Blog post:
The source of the attack is unknown.
According to a report from Arizona’s Family: