My answer to a crappy ISP router is to turn off its WiFi and plug my own into ethernet.

Each participant is sent a separate copy of each message encrypted with their own key.

A problem is that some sites that don’t need cookie banners use them anyway due to a poor understanding of the law and excess of caution.

And I think we’d all agree a sophomore dating a college student would be pretty imbalanced.

I was a college student at 17, but I think you had a larger age difference in mind. I do think we can all agree there should be laws against adults sexually exploiting teenagers.

Yes, though legally that’s a bit of a grey area. It’s only really entrapment if law enforcement or informants entice the offender to commit a crime they weren’t predisposed to commit. I imagine it would be an uphill battle to convince a judge or jury of that when it comes to meeting minors for sex.

The decoys were careful so that it would never even be a question.

I remember looking up the people To Catch A Predator worked with and reading some of their chat logs. The decoy was always very upfront in giving an age unambiguously below the age of consent in their jurisdiction, and never initiated conversation about sex or suggested meeting in person.

Of course, the decoy would always agree to do so if the offender asked, but the criminal conduct was unambiguously criminal, and unambiguously the offender’s idea. What we see in this article appears to abandon that sort of rigor to manufacture more opportunities to confront someone.

We’ve decided, as a society, that humans cannot consent until 18.

Older criminal laws were based on that idea, usually called “statutory rape”. Modern laws about sexual abuse of children usually ignore the concept of consent entirely to allow for more nuance.

One example of nuance is exceptions for people close in age so that non-abusive relationships between teenagers don’t suddenly become crimes when someone has a birthday. Another is that consent is often a factor in the severity of the penalty.

Federation doesn’t inherently require large amounts of memory. Fundamentally, it’s a matter of selecting a list of unique servers (likely tens, maybe hundreds) from a larger set of followers (likely hundreds, maybe thousands) and sending an HTTP request to each when there’s a new post. There’s a speed/size tradeoff for how many to send in parallel, but it’s not a resource-intensive operation.

Growth beyond a few tens of megabytes was a bug in Writefreely, which is a likely-suitable option several comments here recommended.

I’d put it farther removed from the technical side than that; dreadbeef is thinking like a manager. OP might be better off paying a third party $3/month to handle the details and host a heavyweight, full-featured blog for them, but that’s not what they asked for.

This is selfhosted, which I think implies a desire to self-host things even if it might seem a wiser use of resources to do something else.

I’m thinking like a programmer about what a basic blog has to do and the computing resources necessary to accomplish it. Software that needs more than a few tens of megabytes to accomplish that is not lightweight regardless of its merits.

This comment seems to be arguing that one should not demand blog software be lightweight because there’s inexpensive hosting for something heavyweight. That’s a fine position to take, I guess, but OP did ask for lightweight options.

I’m sure there’s a way around it for institutional customers.

It wants a gigabyte of RAM. Maybe that passes for lightweight in 2025, but given the fundamental things a blog has to do, I’d probably put the cutoff at less than a tenth that amount.

Does the fact that American “conservative” politicians are lying about it make it an invalid position to take?

It makes my phone just as secure or insecure as my PC. I’m good with that.

If I was at higher risk of being directly targeted for attacks, I’d probably rethink that.

I insist on having root on principle; if I don’t, the device isn’t really mine.

In a practical sense though, ACCA is probably my biggest use case for it. I could work around most everything else.

See also https://nobsgames.stavros.io/android/

Many of these are paid, but they’re one-time payments and usually a reasonable price.

The article only tests whether the batteries get hot. High electrical loads, both charge and discharge can also degrade batteries directly.

I’ve been setting limits with ACCA for years on my Pixel 4A because its battery is difficult to replace. I didn’t expect to keep it for five years, but there isn’t a new phone I would like better.

My standard limit is 60% charge and 500mA charge rate. Sometimes I increase the limit to 80% or the charge rate to 1000mA for convenience. I rarely allow 100% or the full 3000mA charge rate, and it’s set to pause charging in response to temperature.

While it’s essential for keeping devices safe, it can sometimes interfere with third-party app installations.

That’s… kind of biased language. I can’t keep my device safe without Google playing sysadmin for me?

Yet they still think it’s a good idea to limit text posts to 300 characters for reasons I cannot fathom.

A larger phone is nicer to sit down and use with both hands, and while that is a primary use case for many people, it isn’t for me. I want my phone to emphasize portability and one-handed use.

I think there’s a viable market niche for a small phone, bi but I wonder if small phone customers might be unprofitable for other reasons.