Between these two options DuckDuckGo Browser is at least free and open source, while Vivaldi is closed source, which makes DuckDuckGo Browser the better choice.

Firefox and its forks are better than both. Firefox's Gecko engine is independent of Google and Apple, while Vivaldi uses Google's Blink engine and DuckDuckGo Browser uses either Blink or Apple's WebKit engine depending on platform.

The paper does not recognize fluoride as a neurotoxin in its current application in Europe:

Overall, despite the remaining uncertainties, and based on the totality of evidence the present review does not support the presumption that fluoride should be considered as a human developmental neurotoxicant at current exposure levels in European countries.

The article you linked explicitly concludes:

Overall, despite the remaining uncertainties, and based on the totality of evidence the present review does not support the presumption that fluoride should be considered as a human developmental neurotoxicant at current exposure levels in European countries.

(and possibly Snap)

I hope they exclude Snap from the default installation. Don't want an OS with built-in support for Canonical's closed source app store service when Flatpak is decentralized and FOSS on the server side.

Any details on that? The full uBlock Origin works well on mobile and I don't see how a lite version with reduced blocking effectiveness could be more useful.

The RCS Universal Profile is a publicly available standard, but there is no FOSS client stack that implements the standard. Google restricts RCS support on Android to the proprietary Google Messages instead of making it part of the Android Open Source Project. Apple Messages and iOS are also proprietary.

The EU should use the Digital Markets Act to force Google and Apple to allow competing RCS clients on Android and iOS.

Let's say you want to buy a printer from a retailer. The retailer also sells replacement ink cartridges, and so does the printer manufacturer. The manufacturer prefers that you buy the ink cartridges directly from them, because their margins are higher when they don't have to pay the retailer a cut.

To encourage customers to buy the cartridges directly from them, the manufacturer provides a link or QR code to their online ink cartridge store on the product box, printer manual, and another paper insert inside the box. The manufacturer might offer more competitive pricing than the retailer or some other enticement, like a coupon.

However, the retailer implements an anti-steering rule, preventing the printer manufacturer from providing a link or QR code to their online ink cartridge store on the product packaging, printer manual, or anything inside the box, as a requirement for the printer to appear on the retailer's shelves. (As a result of corporate consolidation, there is only one other retailer in the entire country.) This is the equivalent of what Apple is doing to apps in their App Store: preventing developers from disclosing that users can purchase subscriptions or other app-related digital goods on the developer's website.

Here's the feature request for a TrackPoint on a Framework. Hope they change their mind, because a pointing stick is the most obvious use case for Framework 16's input modules.

This ThinkPad keyboard project for the Framework Laptop is worth keeping an eye on.

Avast should not be recommended.

In late 2019, Avast browser extensions were found to collect user data, including browsing behavior and history, and send it to a remote server. The discovery led to the extensions of the Avast and AVG brands being temporarily removed from the Google Chrome, Firefox and Opera extension stores, however, they returned a short time later as there was no concrete evidence that demonstrated a breach of private data of the users.

In January 2020, a joint investigation by Motherboard and PCMag found that the Avast Antivirus and AVG AntiVirus Free version were collecting user data, which was being resold to personalize advertising through a subsidiary, Jumpshot. The leaked documents showed that Jumpshot offered to provide its customers with "Every search. Every click. On every site." from more than 100 million compromised devices. In response, Avast announced on January 30, 2020, that it would immediately shut down Jumpshot and cease all operations due to the backlash of its users' data privacy.

On the basis of the information revealed, on 11 February 2020 the Czech Office for Personal Data Protection announced that it had initiated a preliminary investigation.

In February 2024, the Federal Trade Commission fined Avast $16.5 million for collecting user data and reselling that data. The collection was done under their program to ensure that such collection of user data was not happening.

Vote here and leave a message to let Proton know how important a Linux client for Proton Drive is.

Based on the statements Google previously made, Google most likely sent a check for a fraction of the damages that a jury could find them liable for.

It's unclear just how big the check was. The court filing redacted key figures to protect Google's trade secrets. But Google claimed that testimony from US experts "shrank" the damages estimate "considerably" from initial estimates between $100 million and $300 million, suggesting that the current damages estimate is "substantially less" than what the US has paid so far in expert fees to reach those estimates.

According to Reuters, Google has not disclosed "the size of its payment" but has said that "after months of discovery, the Justice Department could only point to estimated damages of less than $1 million."

A fine of less than $1 million is absolutely not what anyone except Google is asking for.