Ehm, no.
Please don't apply your own opinion to all Apple users...

Apple users (I am one of them) didn't all choose the iPhone because it has a closed Apple Pay system that you can use.
They chose it because of a myriad of reasons, including, but not limited to, aesthetics, ease of use, available software, links with other appliances (like Mac), etc.
Now a significant number of those users (me included) want freedom of choice with regards to their financial transactions AND be able to use the hardware they paid hundreds of euros for to the fullest extend. And Apple does not let them, because they want to earn money from those financial transactions WITHOUT ADDING ANY VALUE to that service. In the meanwhile they get to collect information about my finances and I cannot stop them because they allow no alternative for offering this service by my bank (and those guys are perfectly capable of doing that in a secure way, it is their core business).

This business practice is against the law. It's really that simple. It is against the law, because it disadvantages customers.
You and I simply differ in our needs and the EU ensures Apple operates within the law and therefore we both get what we want. You can continue to use Apple Pay, if you want. I can use my bank's offering. I really don't see what the issue is with that.

.. as they duped another story.
In the meanwhile Elan Schmuck tweeted "can they make news for nerds at least 'mostly' news!"

Not sure about Spotify's rules, but if they are what you describe then Spotify is abusing their market power as well.
However, that does not, at all, make Apple's behavior ok. Spotify should just get the same treatment from the EU as Apple.

Apple is using it's dominant position in one market (iPhone, iOS) to squeeze extra revenue out of the products others make in another market (Apps).
To me, this is a very clear example of abuse of market domination (and no, the possibility of switching to Android doesn't make it right).

Also, the App Store is NOT a store, because Apple do not buy the apps from developers and resell them. Spotify are selling their app and subscriptions directly to customers.
Apple has just made themselves the go to for handling the financials and download and are asking a premium for that. Even worse, Apple do not add ANY value to subscriptions, and still want a cut of those sales.
And no, if I have the choice to buy from Spotify directly and pay them directly, it does not make the platform less secure. I do this now and have no issues at all.

I really like my Apple products (I have loads), but I feel Apple apps are either more expensive than they should be, or other developers are making less money than they should be. Spotify is big enough to make a wave, so all the better for al the smaller developers that maybe van earn some more if the EU steps in.

This is just FUD ahead of implementing the DMA.

But, very problem has a solution.
I invite everyone on Slashdot to post possible solutions.

Two I can think of in seconds:

1
Part of interoperability could be agreement about a shared security/privacy/encryption protocol.
With the advantage that Meta/Facebook is not able to snoop on all WhatsApp messages anymore (which they can do now).

2
Every messenger app shows whether the message is certain to be properly encrypted end2end (ie between two Signal clients) or not (ie between Telegram and WhatsApp) and you are able to not send it if you really want the encryption.

Don't be so sure he is being played.
Putin and Russia are used to demanding the most they can think of, because in general the west is perceived to be weak and can be played. Until now they have been pretty right.

In this case Putin wants Crimea, Donbas and some other regions and he wants Ukraine not ever join NATO.
I'm pretty sure he will get what he wants once he either takes Kiev or starts demolishing it.
The cost will be huge though. Triggered by this war Europe is making a major shift towards renewables and in about 10 to 15 years Russia will be mostly without their cashcow. I just hope that European leaders will stick to this strategy of abandoning oil and gas once there is a truce or agreement on ending the war.

In case of soldiers on the battlefield you may be right. People should be able to defend themselves against aggressors, and, within the EULA of social media, use social media to express their feelings about that.
However, the EULA of FB is probably more strict than international law, so I suspect that even when at war, you are not allowed to call for the death of anyone on FB.
Also, FB is an international platform. Since I am not in Ukraine, I am not at war with Russia and I should probably not be able to call for the death of anyone on either side of this conflict, even according to international law. Same goes for most of FB users outside of Ukraine or Russia.
Maybe FB took this into account, but I am guessing they did not.

No, this will hopefully only show how Google complies with laws in the countries on both sides of this conflict.

Google should be neutral grounds, and anyone should be able to post their opinion on YT, as long as they stay within the law(s).
You know, freedom of speech and all that...
I disagree with the invasion of Ukraine, but I agree with people being able to have a different opinion.

Censoring them now means someone might censor you tomorrow, for no good reason other than disagreeing with you.

Thanks for the advice, much appreciated :-)

I actually have been using one for slightly under two years now. It really helps in the majority of nights, but for me it is off and on. In general I can now work a full day and stay alert.
I just have been having mostly bad nights for about three weeks though and it is beginning to take it's toll. Like experiencing all the symptoms mentioned in TFA.

Later this month I will go to hospital to get a mandibulair advancement device (MAD), a sort of brace that helps keep the throat open for breathing.
Because this will allow free movement I hope this helps even better than the CPAP.

Being really grateful for the excellent healthcare where I live :-)

Sleep hygiene explained here https://www.sleepfoundation.org/sleep-hygiene/

For the last few years I have been struggling with getting quality sleep (partly because of mild apnea) up to the point that I needed a nap-break at 10 in the morning.
Having good sleep hygiene really helps (although, alas, in my case not consistently).

Spinal Tap

>>> It does not. The ruling singles Google out: "Google, ein Unternehmen, das bekanntermaÃYen Daten über seine Nutzer sammelt und das damit vom Nutzer empfundene individuelle Unwohlsein so erheblich, dass ein Schadensersatzanspruch gerechtfertigt ist". Translation by Google: "Google, a company that is known to collect data about its users and the individual discomfort felt by the user is so significant that a claim for damages is justified". This would not apply to CDNs in general.

The ruling does not apply to CDNs in general, but as much as I applaud the ruling (bye bye Google, FB/Meta, Amazon tracking in Europe) I would be surprised if this holds.
It is not clear what, in general, are the grounds to allow or not allow a link to an external website. Google may be an obvious example, but other sites/companies may not be.

Then again, if I was Google (or Amazon, or FB/Meta), I would certainly be worried about this ruling. It gives a lot of perspectives for extending this to other links/sites/companies.

It would be good if this ruling is challenged but upheld in European court. That way tracker companies are out of business in Europe.

Apple may have created markets, but that is totally irrelevant to the issue.
Apple may not have a monopoly, but that is totally irrelevant as well.

One issue is that they own the iOS market and at the same time compete in it, which is stifling competition.
Second issue (which is what the article is about mainly) is that they force developers to use a payment system because it generates money for Apple, both in sales of apps and sales of subscriptions, where it is totally viable for other to use another payment system. It reduces choice for end users and increases cost for end users.

They do not have to be a monopoly to abuse their power. And nobody cares whether they created a market or not when assessing when they are stifling competition.

This is their website https://www.aircar.aero/ I like the design. I don't see how it would operate on the road though (no images with wheels....).

That means it is a big No from you.
They will never be able to adhere to condition 2. The information about your interests is linked to IP address and all sort of other data that is used for fingerprinting, so it will be used to track you.

I think you are partly correct. The GDPR is about personal data, which can be aggregated to personally identifiable information (PII).
'Topics' are shared with Google and/or the website a user visits, together with stuff like IP address, etc. so it is very likely that in that case the data is still PII.

The GDPR says you have to clarify the purpose for which you collect personal data, and you cannot change the purpose later on without consent from the user.

My interpretation is that the 'topics' cannot be anonymized the way the GDPR describes. So Google cannot collect 'topics' without a user's consent.
But Google can use 'topics' to track a user, if that is what they stated they would do with the data when the user consented.