Just a few days saw a post about LLMs being excellent at reasoning because they're not limited by the language, sure buddy, now walk your fucking car.

No, neither of them register as a blip on the usage stats and both have, and will continue having, priority access through OEM partnerships.

It's not that difficult, plenty of ROMs exist, and analogues of all the apps exist as well.

AMD USB4 is a joke. Every unplug is a gamble with amdgpu driver, you might get a working system, you might not, same for suspend-resume cycles.

Apparently Surface laptops come with stellar repair guides now, and they improved repairability greatly. MS doing something nice for once?

Counterpoint… the battery is superglued to the chassis and to replace for my model was STEP 53, and that was to scrape the old battery off and glue the new one in, then 53 steps backwards to re-assemble.

See for yourself: https://www.ifixit.com/News/96998/from-0-10-to-8-10-microsof...

As someone not swimming in piles of cash, I can't bring myself to get a framework laptop. Ironically enough, new ThinkPads, which are on sale pretty regularly, end up being much nicer, solidly built, more performant, and with an awesome warranty, even in my shithole region.

They do have their own fork, they just don't have any of the security infra that google does. So they "rely" on Google for that.

Forbes as always top notch journalism, what does Samsung have to do with Google updates and why are they indirectly blamed for Samsung's slowness?..

Elaborate please. PI on its own is just an insurance API for banking and similar apps to ensure that they can do secure compute on the device. It can also be used to check if the device that the app is running on is a genuine Android device, since no VMs or custom ROMs can pass hardware integrity.

Well, only it isn't.

Very old, unpatched and rooted devices can fairly easily pass device integrity check.

It primarily assures the software vendor that the phone is running Google buttplug in the privileged mode.

Remember, handsets running on ANCIENT versions of Android with no patches for years. Whilst seems to be important to raise under the Forbes article (rightly) fussing about a couple of zero-days.

"Custom roms" (whatever that means) can easily spoof the checks in the specific situation (mainly hardware that allows for several things).

What sense is does it make to certify an insecure device that may be subject to all kinds of remote exploits and elevated code execution as 'unmodified'. The argument of the banks is: the device is insecure (even with the latest patches). We all know the whole compliance is a bit more complex, so it might make sense on that level...

It's nowhere near that. Pretty sure even modules are signed by Google.