For those of us stuck on normal android, is there a way to achieve that? I know it used to work with some firewall apps but nowdays they all require root access.
It looks like you can't revoke the internet permission, but you can use the firewall via ADB. Settings are lost on reboot, but you can use an automation with Tasker or similar to set them on boot:
Or you can set your DNS resolver to dns.adguard-dns.com and it blocks almost all ads. You can search "private dns" in Android settings app and set it there.
iOS allows this, but only on mobile data, which is pretty infuriating. Why should I not be able to also restrict apps from dialing home/anywhere just because I'm on a Wi-Fi network (which isn't even necessarily unmetered)?
It's really annoying. I have a sudoku game on my phone, works great but give it internet access and it's suddenly full of sketchy adverts.
If I'm playing it on my commute, it's usable with mobile data disabled for the app. But when the train stops in a station long enough to auto-connect to wifi, immediate full screen adverts :(
Then don’t use an ad supported app? I have one as supported app on my phone - Overcast. The developer created their own ad platform and serves topic based ads based on the podcast you are listening to right now. Ironically enough I started to pay for a subscription even though it didn’t give me any real benefit just to support him until he started having ads.
I’m gonna be That Guy for a minute: if you enjoy using a Sudoku app, isn’t there one available on more acceptable terms, e.g. a single purchase or a IAP that removes the ads from this one? I’m not saying you have to pay like $3.99/week for a scam one, but more like pointing out that if you don’t like ads (as I also don’t) why not support the developers who believe in selling software to you for a few bucks rather than selling your annoyance to Google via Adsense?
yes. it's an argument that since EVs are heavier than fossil-fuel vehicles due to their batteries, that they generate more particulate emissions (brakes/tire dust) than fossil-fuel vehicles.
it's a wrong argument, but it's still circulated in groups of factually-challenged people
Nobody said they generate more but simply that they generate some. Modern petrol engines output very little particulates so almost all the particulates are from tyres and brakes. Why would EVs produce any less?
While EVs are heavier—increasing tire wear—their regenerative braking significantly reduces brake dust, and they eliminate tailpipe exhaust entirely. Overall, EVs offer a net reduction in particulates.
> Overall, EVs offer a net reduction in particulates.
Nobody said anything to the contrary.
I am sceptical about the reduction versus a modern, efficient hybrid, though. Those can use regenerative braking too.
EVs are heavier which increases road wear. Everyone loves to forget about the road.
When it comes to particulates and other issues, EVs are just "less bad". We still need to push for walking, cycling and trams and stop pretending that EVs solve the bigger problems. I hate how every comment on HN that doesn't sing the praises of EVs from the rooftops gets immediately downvoted. We can do better than "less bad". We should be aiming much higher.
I wish EVs happened earlier, before the explosion in fossil fuels that led to enormous vehicles with full air-conditioning "cabins" (more like portable living rooms). EVs being slow to charge is an extremely good thing for us. It makes it obvious that this energy isn't free and takes a while to accumulate. If this was obvious from the start, I doubt people would have wanted these huge, inefficient things. Imagine opting for a climate controlled cabin or a larger vehicle if it meant a significant increase in charging time. Nobody would go for it unless they really had to.
> EVs are heavier which increases road wear. Everyone loves to forget about the road.
Passenger vehicles are pretty negligible when it comes to road wear compared to trucks (1000 times more). The weight is more important when we consider freight trucks (electric freight trains just get the power from overhead cables or a third rail). As freight trucks transition to electric, we will definitely have more road wear to worry about.
> When it comes to particulates and other issues, EVs are just "less bad".
Is this a perfect is the enemy of good argument? I mean sure, using public transit, bikes, and walking is better than using private personal transportation. But I can tell you...Beijing has all of that and electric cars are still much better than the ICEs they used to have.
> I hate how every comment on HN that doesn't sing the praises of EVs from the rooftops gets immediately downvoted.
All kinds of Perfect is the enemy of good comments generally get downvoted because the fallacy is overused on HN.
> Imagine opting for a climate controlled cabin or a larger vehicle if it meant a significant increase in charging time.
The WSJ and Daily Mail both ran stories with headlines explicitly stating that they generate more particulates. I can't find any credible source stating the same, so I'm assuming the stories were the usual agenda fiction, but they do exist.
It's an argument that means you can still say cars are bad even if they're electric, which may be true but also clearly leans into some people's preexisting biases
It's infinitely better than HDA2 at tracking and maintaining lanes.
HDA2 cuts out if there is a break in lines more than 50ft or so.
Openpilot can track the slightest of roads, even able to follow off-road the tracks in grass from a leading car.
It does basically everything HDA2 does and then some, and does it much better.
It has a driver-monitoring camera that you control, that monitors for inattentiveness which is much more effective than simple wheel-torque based sensors.
The hardest thing about splicing fiber is not splicing fiber(at least not anymore)
It's cable management and routing to keep things from kinking and breaking while accounting for cable flexing, thermal expansion, and unforseen circumstances like another company lashing their cables to yours for vertical support.
Your cab's environment should be pretty thermally stable. Your switches are probably venting to the hot isle through their front ports. Thermal expansion of glass and the sleeve is going to be negligible over a metre or so.
Kinking is a possible issue. The minimum radius these days is quite tight. However, if you don't leave enough space inside the doors to allow for the terminations it will go horribly wrong. If you don't allow a gap for cable management between all switches and top and bottom, it might go wrong.
I think that the person to whom you replied is speaking of outdoor installations, while you are speaking of controlled (maybe datacenter) installations. I have outdoor fiber running aerially between buildings on my property, in a region with massive seasonal temperature changes. Multiple local FTTH and Coaxial ISPs also run fiber on shared utility poles (the same ones that the electrical grid maintains) and when I look at the poles I see communications lines all in the same general area, often mere centimeters apart, if that.
reply