A young musician, tormented by an abusive situation at home, must contend with a rival singer, a burgeoning romance, and his own dissatisfied band, as his star begins to rise. Cast: 1984 viewing Prince was CONTINUE READING... The post 84 From ’84: Purple Rain appeared first on The Retro Network.

Naughty dogs are the star of a new TikTok trend called 'Show Me Your Bad Dog' where owners expose their pets for their hilarious yet bad behaviors.

LEGO Advertising Pride With Drag Queens and Furry Figures

One of the rarest cats in the world, the Iberian lynx was once on the brink of extinction. Now, thanks to intense conservation efforts, they’ve clawed their way back from being classed as an endangered species to a vulnerable one.The change in status was announced by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), which has a “Red List” that acts as an information source on the extinction risk status of animals across the world. According to the IUCN, the number of adult Iberian lynx has shot up from just 62 in 2001 to 648 in 2022.Iberian lynxes were once far more widespread across the Iberian Peninsula, playing a carefully balanced role in the ecosystem as predators. However, with the 20th century came decades of hunting and loss of habitat to agricultural land, to the point where at the start of the new millennia, only two isolated breeding populations remained in southern Spain.Then, in the early 2000s, a concerted effort began between governments and non-governmental organizations to bring the cats back from the brink of extinction. This involved bumping up the numbers of its primary prey, the European rabbit – which is also endangered, making this a 2-for-1 conservation situation, despite the bunnies getting, y’know, gobbled up – bringing their scrubland and forested habitats back to life, and cracking down on hunting and road safety.As a result, the Iberian lynx has expanded its territory from just 449 square kilometers (279 square miles) in 2005 to at least 3,320 square kilometers (2,063 square miles) to date, and with the help of breeding programs, the total population is now estimated to be over 2,000.“The significant recovery of the Iberian lynx demonstrates that even the most threatened species can be brought back from the brink of extinction through committed, science-based conservation action and provides hope for those working to protect wildlife across the globe,” said Sarah Durant, a professor at The Zoological Society of London’s Institute of Zoology, in a statement.But while the change in status of this distinctive cat species is a good sign, the Iberian lynx isn’t out of the woods just yet. That’s largely due to diseases threatening both the lynxes and their prey, but also the looming impact of climate change and illegal poaching.“There is still a lot of work to do to ensure that Iberian lynx populations survive and the species recovers throughout its indigenous range,” said Francisco Javier Salcedo Ortiz, coordinator of the LIFE Lynx-Connect project, which led the conservation action. “Looking ahead, there are plans to reintroduce the Iberian lynx to new sites in central and northern Spain.”There is hope that, all being well, the Iberian lynx could become one of the greatest conservation and recovery stories yet, with the IUCN stating that “enough suitable habitat remains that the species could reach Fully Recovered status in 100 years”.

Before you continue reading, I would like you to empty your pockets of the excuses you regularly rely on for sitting on the sidelines instead of acting. Put them on the table and let them out of the shadows where truth and courage often go to die. Then ask yourself how they hold up to the example of a state senator from southeast Iowa.That would be Adrian Dickey, who has made the two-hour drive to Des Moines on a handful of occasions this month — “Pride Month” — to raise the American flag over the entrance of the veteran’s hospital. It’s a pilgrimage he began last June when it was brought to his attention that instead of the stars and stripes, the satanic abomination known as the Pride flag was being raised despite complaints from veterans.The simps who run the VA, even in a homespun red state like Iowa, know who their true master is. And they will obey accordingly.Dickey would drive, often in the middle of the night or early morning hours, to raise the American flag and then turn around and go the two hours home only to be told it was taken back down. So, he did it again. And again. Until finally last year, the officials at the VA waved the white flag and kept both flags on the pole.That was then. This year — and hold on tight now to your Beelzebub hat to find out just how deep the Romans 1 mind rot of the federal government currently goes — the staff at the Des Moines veteran’s hospital removed the flagpole itself to head Dickey off at the pass. He called the VA to find out what was going on after showing up with a flag on June 1, and they told him they “thought it would be easier than having to fight with me.”Still undeterred, Dickey decided that two could play that game. So, this year he has been bringing an entire flagpole with him as his righteous road trips have continued. Again and again. Along with a plaque that says the following:This flagpole was placed on June 6, 2024, by Senator Adrian Dickey, Packwood, for his humble appreciation of the sacrifices that the men and women made 80 years ago today as they invaded the beaches of Normandy and for EVERY soldier who has used this facility in the years since. These soldiers are who Made America GREAT! But the new poles and the plaque have been taken down as well, until finally the VA henchmen put a cable lock through the base so that Dickey would have to relent. Instead, he just found a narrower pole that would still do the trick.At which point VA officials, instead of simply allowing the American flag to fly during Pride Month, dug out the entire flagpole footing from the ground. You read that right. The spirit of the age takes its unholy month very, very seriously. You will be made to care.They say the flag is flying on a different pole elsewhere on the grounds to be compliant with federal law. But as for the main entrance where the veterans who fought and bled for their country enter every day in June, it must be the Pride flag or nothing at all.“I thought that was pretty appalling,” Dickey said. “There is just no reason for this stupidity.”He’s correct, of course. But we are way beyond reason here, because we are as east of Eden as we can get. We are openly promoting darkness now. The simps who run the VA, even in a homespun red state like Iowa, know who their true master is. And they will obey accordingly.Nevertheless, Dickey plans on continuing the two-hour drive to Des Moines this month to plunge a four-foot pole with a flag on it into the earth if need be. He’s spurred on by the memory of two veterans who thanked him last summer for what he was doing and how seeing the Pride flag waving over the VA hospital left them feeling “humiliated.”Which brings us back to the beginning. How do your excuses look now, the ones you dust off when you don’t want to go to the school board meeting to fight the groomers because they might call you names and make you miss part of the game? Why don’t you feel humiliated for not doing the bare minimum required of you as a citizen before the lights get turned off permanently on this once great republic?They can’t stop all of us, if only we follow Adrian Dickey’s lead. Pick a fight. Get in the car. Drive. Plant the flag. And remember your Churchill: “Never, ever, ever give up.”Or else.

Charles LipsonDonald Trump is a master showman and marketer. He demonstrated those skills once again with his proposal to kill the tax on tips. It’s more than shrewd. It’s brilliant. After the hoorays from waiters and other service workers died down, political analysts weighed in. Their conclusion: This is a very smart way to gain an edge in Nevada, where the presidential race is close. That’s certainly true. But Trump’s proposal is much smarter and will have a bigger impact, not because of its impact on tips, as such, but because of the larger signal it sends. That signal says to lower-income workers across the country, “I understand your struggles, and I’m with you.” Try as they might, Democrats cannot convince voters that Trump is Richie Rich, that he looks down on them, or wants to line his friends’ pockets at their expense.Trump’s proposal says that loud and clear. It is both a blow to the IRS (who doesn’t like that?) and a tangible demonstration of how the former president connects to everyday working people. That’s a much broader cohort than the folks who rely on tips. President Biden has emphasized his own connection to working people. He does it every time he calls himself “Scranton Joe” and says he was raised by every group in town except the Hmong and aboriginal Australians. (Those groups surely would be included if they had enough voters in swing states.) This contest for the allegiance of the working class is central to American politics and has been since the days of Andrew Jackson. They have been central to the Democratic Party’s coalition since Franklin Roosevelt’s re-election in 1936. FDR solidified the party’s coalition. Every successful Democrat on the national level since then has counted on the working-class vote — and the ones who didn’t (most notably Adlai Stevenson in 1956 and George McGovern in 1972) lost in landslides. Ronald Reagan, who’d been a New Deal Democrat as a young man, mounted a frontal assault against the FDR alliance and launched a long-term shift in the process. Donald Trump has gone farther. He has captured that constituency among whites, competes for them among Hispanics, and is eroding it, at least slightly, among black men. That shift in all three groups could have a huge impact in the swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nevada, and Arizona. This year’s election may well hinge on them, and even slight changes could alter the outcome. Trump’s challenge to the heart of the old Democratic coalition is part of a larger realignment in American voting patterns. That realignment is obvious in the wealthy suburbs, which have gradually switched from moderate Republican to moderate Democrat. The wedge issue there is the Republican Party’s social conservatism, which alienates more than it resonates with in those areas. The suburbs are up for grabs this year because of weak economic performance, persistent problems with public schools (which are linked to Democrats because of the party’s bond with teachers’ unions), and the Democratic Party’s move much farther left. No matter how the suburbs vote this year, though, their longer-term shift is clear. An equally clear shift in the opposite direction is happening in working-class neighborhoods. Chicagoans call them the “bungalow belt.” They were once occupied by immigrants from Eastern Europe. They are now the home of second- and third-generation Mexican-Americans, Puerto Ricans, and pilgrims from Central America. Trump is emerging as an unlikely champion of that constituency. He knows they don’t want ideological indoctrination in public schools or control by teachers’ unions instead of parents. They want cheaper energy a lot more than they want electric vehicles, which are too expensive. And they damn sure don’t want some bureaucrat in Bethesda telling them they can’t cook on a gas stove. They recoil at the idea of non-elected officials pushing that agenda down their throats. Their resistance is part of a broader, more populist movement. It’s much different from the traditional constituency behind the Republican push for lower taxes and less regulation. That old constituency is no longer in the control of the party. Trump’s leadership makes that clear. It doesn’t seem to be clear to Democratic campaign consultants, though. They are saying what they always have: “Republicans are just out to help the rich.” It’s not working this year. Why not? Because Donald J. Trump is not George H.W. Bush, and Trump’s party is not Bush’s. Try as they might, Democrats cannot convince voters that Trump is Richie Rich, that he looks down on them, or wants to line his friends’ pockets at their expense. Democrats can’t make those labels stick to today’s Republican Party, either. It has become a populist, working-class party — and voters can see it. Democrats respond that Trump is a billionaire. He is, of course, but that label hasn’t damaged him for a couple of reasons. The first is his personality. He effectively presents himself as an ordinary guy who connects easily with ordinary people. He knows how to entertain them and demonstrates it every time he walks on stage. Second, he didn’t make his money as a banker, stock trader, or middleman. He did something tangible working people can relate to: he built buildings. They may have been high-income residences and golf clubs, but those are Trump’s consumers, not Trump himself. It is simply impossible to label the former president as a country club Republican who looks down on the peasantry. Voters certainly don’t think see him that way. A lot of them think, “Hey, he’s doing just what I’d do if I had his money. I’d fly in my own plane, put my name on it, and eat as many Big Macs as I want. And I would tip the poor guy or gal who works behind the counter. What a lousy job.” That brings us to the cherry on top of Trump’s “no tax on tips” idea. He’s telling people to write that message on their bills when they pay them. That’s another ingenious ploy. It directly engages consumers (who are voters, of course) and lets them demonstrate their support for both service workers and Trump. Who doesn’t want to put in a kind word for the people serving them? Trump has not only made that easy to do, he’s made it clear that doing so puts the consumer on his side. They don’t have to wear a MAGA hat to do it. It’s a small ball in a bigger game. But it will matter if the election is close. And it demonstrates, once again, why Trump’s intuitive grasp of marketing and glad-hand showmanship give him a huge advantage. His challenge now is to stay disciplined and not shoot himself in the tip. This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire. Charles Lipson is Peter B. Ritzma Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Chicago and co-founder and director of its Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security. He is a regular contributor to RealClearPolitics, SpectatorWorld, and other publications.

The specter of replacing humans by their creations has long haunted the collective psyche. We have always feared human obsolescence, from assembly lines to personal computers to, now, artificial intelligence. The discussion often centers on labor — machines taking our jobs. The factory-worker replaced by an assembly line; the software engineer replaced by artificial intelligence.There’s also a longstanding fascination, if not outright fear, that something similar could happen in romance, from the ancient Greek myth of Pygmalion and his ivory statue brought to life to early science fiction works featuring artificial women, like Auguste Villiers de l'Isle-Adam's novel "The Future Eve" (1886). Recent works like the 2007 film "Lars and the Real Girl" or "Her" (2013) have taken our deep-seated dread into the 21st century, but we still seem to come back to the idea that while, yes, maybe machines can change how we work, they won’t be able to change how we love: Artificial companions cannot truly replace genuine human connection, no matter how lifelike or personalized. Love is what makes us human.I suspect it’s likely that AI boyfriends will present a more complex challenge than AI girlfriends.As technology has advanced, the idea of artificial companions has shifted away from the realm of film and literature to sex dolls and, more recently, AI-powered virtual partners, with disproportionate attention placed on AI girlfriends. Men are addicted to porn, this is the next iteration — right? A few months ago, an article about the supposed rise of AI girlfriends went viral on X. The crux of the piece was: "If women become infinitely personalizable (and probably beautiful), how will real-life women compete?" Most people in my corner of social media were skeptical, arguing that what makes romance romantic isn't perfection or customization. Even with OnlyFans models, there’s some promise — no matter how small — of connecting with a real person. And while it’s true that some people indeed enjoy erotic roleplaying with AI, it’s rarely to the exclusion of a human girlfriend or boyfriend. If there is no human in the picture, it’s likely because they cannot find one, not unwilling to. What’s more, this may be true even if they do have a specific fetish for AI or robots. What came first, the gooner (internet-speak for compulsive masturbator) or the microwavable meal for one? To some critics, the answer is the former: These technologies aren’t a symptom of isolation but are the cause of isolation. While that’s tempting — blame the porn, blame the robots — everything we know, from the eccentric to the mundane, suggests differently.I'm reminded of a 2007 article by MIT professor and sociologist Sherry Turkle, “Authenticity in the Age of Digital Companions.” Then, now, and significantly before 2007, machines existed in this liminal space of both inauthentic and alive. Children, for example, perceive machines as emotional, sometimes "living" beings. We also have emotional responses to what Turkle calls "relational artifacts," such as objects like Furbies, Tamagotchi pets, and these days, chatGPT (ever apologized or said please after a request?). Turkle wrote that we can form emotional relationships with them, but they aren't comparable to our relationships with other people. Turkle ends the piece with an anecdote about a friend who is severely disabled, one that I think is still relevant. "Show me a person in my shoes who is looking for a robot, and I'll show you someone who is looking for a person and can't find one," he tells her.According to Turkle:[Richard] turned the conversation to human cruelty: "Some of the aides and nurses at the rehab center hurt you because they are unskilled and some hurt you because they mean to. I had both. One of them, she pulled me by the hair. One dragged me by my tubes. A robot would never do that," he said. "But you know in the end, that person who dragged me by my tubes had a story. I could find out about it."For Richard, being with a person, even an unpleasant, sadistic person, made him feel that he was still alive. It signified that his way of being in the world still had a certain dignity, for him the same as authenticity, even if the scope and scale of his activities were radically reduced. This helped sustain him. Although he would not have wanted his life endangered, he preferred the sadist to the robot.Richard's perspective on living is a cautionary word to those who would speak too quickly or simply of purely technical benchmarks for our interactions. What is the value of interactions that contain no understanding of us and that contribute nothing to a shared store of human meaning? These are not questions with easy answers, but questions worth asking and returning to.The counterargument concerns whether that lack of authenticity arises because we know machines are not human or the technology isn't there yet. I tend toward the former. Even in the “Love Revolution” manifesto of the “fictosexual” writer Honda Toru (that’s someone who knowingly seeks romantic relationships with fictional characters, as opposed to real people), there are the echoes of "I am like this because I have to be" as opposed to "I am like this because I was born this way":"Some of us find satisfaction with fictional characters. It's not for everyone, but maybe more people would recognize this life choice if it wasn't always belittled. Forcing people to live up to impossible ideals so they can participate in so-called reality creates so-called losers, who in their despair might lash out."Reading Toru's writing about “love capitalism,” a term he uses to describe the transactional nature of romance in Japan, it seems like he wouldn't have chosen a “waifu,” or anime wife, if he felt more accepted by society.Talking to Cait Calder, another fictosexual, I got a similar impression. Neither Cait nor Toru argue that their attraction to and love of fictional characters aren't real — they describe the experience as weird, wonderful, and authentic — and both want acceptance for who they are. But there is also an acknowledgment that this orientation doesn't emerge in a vacuum, whether they say so explicitly, like Toru does, or implicitly like Cait did when she spoke about her autism diagnosis.I wonder if part of the quest for people to stop invalidating these relationships is partially the argument that they're not maladaptive; they're perfectly rational in our mediated and sometimes very alienating world as it is.Gender dynamics also complicate this conversation, with women overwhelmingly being framed as the losers as men chose simulated women over real ones. That’s intuitive, but I think it's incorrect. I suspect it’s likely that AI boyfriends will present a more complex challenge than AI girlfriends. My prediction is that AI boyfriends will trend in four core manifestations:For a minority, like fictosexuals or those who are deeply committed to a fandom, AI companions will substitute for physical world romantic partners. However, even within this community, many report not being able to fully suspend disbelief, finding AI interactions fun but less satisfying than daydreaming or writing fan fiction.AI will be a form of play, similar to The Sims, playing with dolls, or role-playing. While potentially addictive, it won't be a 1:1 substitution for human interaction.They will be a form of erotica, similar to romance novels, with some users preferring to "play a character" within the AI chat narrative universe. They may become popular in fandom communities.They'll be deployed in romance scams against the naive and gullible, like those who believe celebrities are directly messaging them on Instagram.Among these manifestations, the third one seems most likely to gain traction. This is because there is already a well-established precedent for women forming emotional attachments to fictional characters and celebrities and engaging in fantasy relationships through various media, including romance novels and fan fiction. AI boyfriends could serve as an interactive, personalized extension of these existing tendencies, allowing women to engage in immersive, emotionally satisfying experiences tailored to their desires and needs. That being said, any AI companion's threat to real-life relationships is likely overstated.Text-based roleplaying and dating simulation games have been around for years. While they can provide a sense of connection and fulfillment, they have not replaced the desire for human companionship. They're proxies for it. That's what all of this stuff is — a proxy. No teenage girl, since time immemorial, has preferred a Sherlock Holmes, an Edward Cullen, or a boyband member to a real-life boyfriend. The same is broadly true in reverse until AI can power sex dolls. Unfortunately, the jury's not out on sex robots that can strongly mimic a human woman. As it stands, though, chatGPT, Replika, character.ai, and Digi are not substitutes for girlfriends among men who feel confident in their ability to find a girlfriend. When this type of media becomes an obsession, it betrays a lack in one's life. If they inculcate people with unrealistic expectations, then those are people who've had very few opportunities to have their expectations lowered.Ultimately, I don't believe AI companions will become widespread, sustainable substitutions for physical-world partners or replace dead loved ones, as in the film "Marjorie Prime." The uncanny valley (the unsettling feeling when AI or robots closely resemble humans but are not quite convincingly realistic) will likely limit their appeal. Ultimately, people crave genuine human connections, and while AI companions may offer a temporary salve for loneliness, they cannot replace the depth and authenticity of another person. I do see a halfway point becoming more common in the future, and indeed, this might be the situation we’re living in now.A surge in internet, but not dating-app-native, relationships and prolonged pre-dating communication squares better with what we know about younger generations. As dating apps lose favor while online socialization continues, meeting potential partners and friends online is becoming more common and accepted. People aren't ashamed they have "internet friends" anymore, and it seems like every app except dating apps are used for dating.People still crave uniquely human connections, but in an increasingly isolated world, the compromise is human-machine-human interaction, not human-machine. While these technologies can provide comfort and companionship for some, they cannot substitute the richness and authenticity of face-to-face human interactions.

Roll back a few years, and the mobile market was a diverse place full of platforms like Android, BlackBerry, iOS (then iPhoneOS), webOS, and Windows Mobile, along with several feature phone platforms. Now, the market has consolidated to all but two: Google’s Android and Apple’s iOS. Apple and Google increasingly leverage their market positions to control app distribution and all the personal information smartphones can collect. Increasingly, Big Tech is using that consolidated data-collection power to fuel its new AI initiatives. The most notorious example is Microsoft’s Recall feature, which has since been recalled and would constantly capture screenshots of what you’re doing on your Windows PC. Apple’s partnership with OpenAI and its recent AI initiatives have spawned similar concerns, and, of course, Google is entering the AI data-collection race with Android.When you switch to an alternative operating system, especially one that's developed by a volunteer community, you trade convenience and user experience for the sake of sticking it to the man.How can you avoid the AI panopticon? There are many alternatives to the Apple and Google mobile juggernauts, many based on Android’s open-source code base minus the Google spyware. In this article, we’ll examine five of the top alternatives.GrapheneOSPreinstalled or self-install: Self-installLicense type: OpenNoteworthy devices: GrapheneOS only works on Google Pixel phones. The team maintains a list of recommended hardware.Variants: Android, CalyxOS, LineageOSA bit of Android history: The core of Google’s Android mobile operating system is open source, which means that anyone can download the code, modify it, and even redistribute it. In the early days of Android, CyanogenMod was a popular open-source Android variant. After CyanogenMod unsuccessfully tried to go commercial, the team reconvened for a new open-source Android variant, LineageOS, which is still being actively developed.GrapheneOS is one of the most popular forks of LineageOS, and it’s also the most polished. That’s partly because the GrapheneOS team only supports Google’s Pixel devices, so there are fewer hardware variables when squashing software bugs.You may be wondering: If Google gives away Android for free, how does it make money from it? While Android is free and open-source, such as the Google Play Store, Google's apps and services are not. Phone manufacturers pay Google big money to include those Google services on their phones, and Google, in turn, uses those apps to gather your personal information.Many free Android spin-offs don’t offer Google apps and services; instead, they offer open-source app markets like F-Droid. However, those app markets won’t have all the apps you expect from a smartphone and likely won’t have many you think you need.The GrapheneOS team has a clever workaround: The Play Store is not preinstalled, but you can install a “sandboxed” version that is walled off from your personal information. That means you can use your usual set of smartphone apps but with (theoretically) better security.However, GrapheneOS has one major security endorsement: It’s the mobile OS preferred by Edward Snowden and has been for many years.GrapheneOS ProsFree and open-sourceExcellent security endorsementsRelatively user-friendlyYou can access the Google Play Store for conventional apps.GrapheneOS ConsYou must install it yourself, which may be beyond your technical comfort.It only works on Google Pixel devicesUnplugged PhonePreinstalled or self-install: PreinstalledLicense type: ClosedNoteworthy devices: Unplugged PhoneThe Unplugged Phone is a new player in the smartphone world from Erik Prince. Yes, that is Erik Prince of Blackwater fame. It’s available for $989 and, unlike many of the alternative OS options, is ready to go out of the box. It only works on the AT&T and T-Mobile networks, not Verizon. Erik Prince: NATO vs. Russia, the Secrets of Drone Warfare, and CIA Corruption www.youtube.com The Unplugged Phone runs a proprietary, closed-source fork for Android called LibertOS. Since no one can examine the source code for LibertOS, it has caused concern among privacy advocates who fear that it may be doing things you wouldn’t want it to do. Unplugged counters this with several reassurances:It hires independent auditors to test the phone’s security (we would love to see these reports).It works with Cye Security to advise on security issues.The company invites security professionals to visit its offices or join its White Hat testing program.One of the unique features of the Unplugged Phone is the kill switch, which is a literal off switch for the device that disconnects the battery from the electronics. What a concept! In terms of hardware, it offers what you would expect from a premium phone, such as high-resolution cameras and a fingerprint scanner. Much of the software is custom, such as the app store and elaborate privacy center, to manage privacy settings.Like any Android fork, you can expect to encounter app compatibility issues and other rough edges. However, the idea of a de-Googled secure phone that provides a pleasant experience out of the box is compelling. We have not reviewed the Unplugged Phone ourselves but would love to do so.Unplugged Phone ProsProvides an out-of-the-box privacy experienceBacked by a commercial companyUnplugged Phone ConsClosed-sourceUncertain securityLinux MobilePreinstalled or self-install: BothLicense type: OpenNoteworthy devices: Purism Librem 5, PinephoneVariants: PureOS, Plasma Mobile, Sailfish OS, Ubuntu TouchWhile Android is ostensibly open-source, Linux is the OG open-source operating system, and it’s slowly been making inroads to mobile in recent years in a few different flavors, such as:PureOSPlasma MobileUbuntu TouchUnfortunately, none of these operating systems are even close to ready for everyday users, and many Linux users will warn you as such. Case in point: One of the “best” Linux phones on the market is the Purism Librem 5, and, in our review, we found it an utterly dreadful experience full of crashy, incomplete software and poor battery life.If you want an open-source alternative on mobile, we recommend one of the Android variants listed here. However, if you’re a curious techy or a developer, the $199 PinePhone is an intriguing toy. It’s a fully functional LTE phone that runs all the prominent mobile flavors of Linux and is designed to be user-repairable. It almost certainly won’t replace your phone, but it could help pave the way for a more open future.Linux can be made user-friendly, even on mobile devices, as proven by the popularity of Valve’s Steam Deck, a Linux-powered portable game console (like a Nintendo Switch) that plays PC games.That said, Linux mobile has some high points. One cool feature is the option to plug a Linux phone into a USB-C hub, connect a monitor and peripherals, and use it as a desktop computer. Samsung has been trying to get traction for this idea for years with its Samsung DeX feature, but it’s never taken off.Linux Mobile ProsOpen-source, community-drivenSupports mobile versions of many popular Linux appsIt can be used as a desktop computerLinux Mobile ConsPoor battery lifeSlowUnstableKaiOSPreinstalled or self-install: Preinstalled on feature phonesLicense type: Open sourceNoteworthy devices: Nokia 6300 4G, Nokia 8110 4G, Alcatel Go Flip 3KaiOS is a Linux-based mobile operating system aimed at feature phones. KaiOS tries to do something interesting: provide the simplicity and intentionally limited capabilities of a feature phone along with the apps we’ve all become dependent upon, like WhatsApp and Google Maps. It comes preinstalled on hundreds of budget feature phones.It’s a promising idea, and KaiOS enjoys many supported devices and apps. Unfortunately, the execution isn’t brilliant. KaiOS is often slow, and apps can be buggy or broken. Reddit’s /r/KaiOS community has a pinned post titled, “Is KaiOS dead? (maybe not, or maybe)” with comments like:“I bought my wife a KaiOS flip phone once, but it was rather buggy and unstable so she got rid of it. I was impressed how well the interface, even Google maps, was tailored for keyboard.”“I wanted kaiOS devices and had two KaiOS Nokias, but the terrible typing experience, and the buggy whatsapp support was the killer for me.”“I used a KaiOS device for a while as I dislike touchscreens and techbloat. However, it was buggy as hell, and was missing a lot of basic functional apps for things like GPS. I went over to a rugged android device, and in reality, despite the issues with Android bloat, privacy and the drawbacks of touchscreens, it proved more effective.”KaiOS ProsWide variety of phone styles: flip phones, bar phones, keyboard phones, etc.Cheap phonesRich app ecosystemKaiOS ConsBuggy and unstableSailfish OSPreinstalled or self-install: Self-installLicense type: Open source with closed-source componentsNoteworthy devices: Select Sony Xperia devicesCost: 24.90 €Sailfish might be the oddest duck of the lot. It’s produced by the Finnish company Jolla, originally for its 2013 Jolla Phone. That phone failed commercially, but the OS lives on. However, it only supports certain Sony Xperia phones. Furthermore, while you can try Sailfish OS for free, the full version requires buying a license. Sailfish OS is based on Linux but has an Android compatibility layer to run Android apps.Sailfish doesn’t include Google services and places a heavy emphasis on privacy. Unfortunately, while it was ahead of its time years ago, it’s now getting a bit long in the tooth with its minimal device support list.Sailfish OS ProsCommercially supportedLinux based with Android compatibilitySailfish OS ConsLimited device supportRequires a paid licenseWhat to know before making the switchAndroid and iOS dominate the mobile market for some very good reasons. They’re fairly easy to use, well-supported, and have vast libraries of apps. By and large, an iPhone or Android phone just works.When you switch to an alternative operating system, especially one that’s developed by a volunteer community, you trade convenience and user experience for the sake of sticking it to the man. Many of these operating systems require a complex installation process, and the user experience and app support may be janky when compared to Apple and Google’s offerings.My recommendation is to try these alternative operating systems on an inexpensive spare phone and not your daily driver. Many Android alternatives support the Google Pixel phones — buy a used one — and the PinePhone gives you a cheap way to try mobile Linux. That gives you a risk-free way to try out these operating systems and see if you can get by with their limited capabilities.

Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari has been trending on X this week. He's the spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces. You've possibly seen him in press conferences, interviews, and video clips trying to show the world what Gaza really is like — the terror tunnels under the houses and the streets, hundreds of miles long, filled with weapons and workshops and schools.He talks about the ties between United Nations facilities and Hamas, the command posts under the hospitals, missile launchers in residential neighborhoods. He’s done incredible work exposing the true nature of Hamas and the war, and he seemed really solid — until this week. Hamas is not just an idea. It’s not just an entity now. It’s a government!In an Israeli TV interview he said that it’s impossible to destroy Hamas because “Hamas is an idea.” I want to touch on a few serious problems I have with his statement. First, Hamas isn’t just an idea. Ideas grow and grow until they become almost an entity. Hamas is the demonic embodiment of the continuation of timeless, ageless hate. It is a culture of death and child sacrifice. It is one of the worst evils humanity has ever produced.Nazism was more than an idea articulated in Adolf Hitler’s “Mein Kampf.” Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union was more than Marxist ramblings. Yes, all the ideas were at the core of these regimes, but ideas are embodied and adopted by people, who turn them into entities. Should we have given up on eradicating the Nazi part of Nazi Germany? Should we have stopped at Berlin’s gates? Should we have allowed Stalin to take over the world? Should we end all policing — like they’re starting to do here in America — because someone will always steal and murder?I'm up here in the Mountain West, and we just mowed the front of the lawn so no rattlesnakes come up close to the house. There will always be snakes — but does that mean we shouldn't at least try to keep the snakes away? Couldn't we at least remove the snakes that are right at the feet of our children? Or will you just say, "There are always snakes, so there's no point."Are you seriously suggesting that we would be better off had we left the Nazis in power, or if the USSR hadn't lost the Cold War? The ideas behind these evil regimes are not dead, and maybe they will never be. But Nazi Germany is dead. The USSR is dead. And the world is immeasurably better for it.How about Hamas? It’s not just an idea. It’s not just an entity now. It’s a government! Should we not try to take out every last member, deny it both rule over territory, and eliminate its ability to harm anyone ever again? Do you think that when Hamas is done with Israel, it'll stop with the Jews? I believe Hagari's statement is a huge boost to Hamas’ morale — along with its friends in Hezbollah and Iran — and poison for Israeli morale. What does that communicate to IDF soldiers when one of their leaders says they are fighting a war they cannot win? If you’re fighting and don’t believe that you can and will prevail, then you will not prevail.Think about all of those who have fought and died and bled, the hundreds of thousands of Israelis still displaced from their homes almost nine months in, the millions who fear and pray for their relatives and friends in uniform, the millions more who understand that if Hamas doesn't die today, if they don't take out this snake and mow the lawn, it will come back tomorrow — and maybe bring some friends. Maybe next time will be even worse than the last. Was his message approved by his government? Because the government is supposed to be in control of the army, and the security cabinet, chaired by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has defined the destruction of Hamas military and governing capabilities as one of the goals of the war. The IDF, of course, is committed to this. The rear admiral’s message should terrify everybody, not just Israelis. At best, this is just politics. Israelis trust the IDF to the rank of colonel. Anybody above that is a political appointment. They don't trust them just like we don't trust ours. We trust our soldiers, but when you get to the top of the Pentagon, it’s all politics. The same thing applies to Israel’s military.At worst, this is a sign of one more very serious breakdown in the West's moral fiber. This isn't about refugees. This isn’t about territory. This is about good versus evil. This is about the existential questions facing our civilization, not just for Israel but for the West. The West is riddled with supporters of Hamas and their clones. They’re marching in our own streets!Do you think a re-energized Hamas is good for America? Our common enemies are openly stating their intention to take down the great Satan. They say Israel is the little Satan. We are the great Satan, and they will soon come for us, too. If Israel fails in this war, the world will be darker for it. But it will not stop there. They will come for the rest of us. We must stand. We have to take out the monsters and defend the house.Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

The Supreme Court neither opened the door for taxing unrealized gains nor slammed it shut. But the concept should be rejected on the merits.