Sorry to spoil the party. Unfortunately, this news was based on a letter from the State Secretary, trying to tell the House that all is well. But it isn't. Here is https://berthub.eu/tkconv/document.html?nummer=2026D48732 that letter, in Dutch. Reading carefully, the news isn't all that good.

“On-premises solution in combination with open source” = a proprietary solution.

“As many [...] existing licenses as possible” = Microsoft.

“In 2027, the on-premises email and calendar service will be implemented. European open-source solutions for personal storage and collaboration features will follow later in 2027 and in 2028” = email and calendar will be proprietary.

“That is in line with the Advisory Council’s recommendation not to rely on a single solution from a single vendor, but to explore alternatives for each function” = for functions other than email and calendar, we’re doing something other than Microsoft.

So the migration from (brace yourself...) Lotus Notes (!!) to Exchange will continue and there really won't be any open source in this migration. The letter is just openwashing to make a good impression on the House.

Gee, even the Wikipedia page doesn't survive Slashdot's ancient commenting. That's pathetic. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=L_with_stroke this one.

BartÃ...omiej = BartÅomiej although I'm not sure my comment will survive the recoding. It's Bartlomiej with a small / across the "l", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Å this one.

The real deal, of course, is that users should not have any "raw text" files to edit anyway. Those that do may, sooner or later, want to do other things outside the Microshop.

Office, Onedrive, Outlook - the world is wonderful but don't even think about changing a settings file, dear customer.

For those unfamiliar, "DRM" refers to Digital Rights Management. Basically, DRM tech prevents you from playing back any content on devices that have not been explicitly authorized to do so by large media companies. Of course, free playback still exists, but these days, most officially distributed movies, TV shows, games, etc., all involve some form of DRM unless explicitly advertised as DRM-free. (FTFY)

Dutch motorist Tim Hanssen (double s, ends on single n) wrote a blogpost about it. And here it is: https://nippur.nl/tim-versus-politie-algoritme/ (go find a translator als je geen Nederlands kunt lezen)

Linking to a random international site (jpost) that quotes (but not links) another random site (HLN, not exactly know for its fine journalism) without trying to find the original is beyond bad journalism.

https://github.com/SamiaKabir/ChatGPT-Answers-to-SO-questions

That "solution" is wrong. It would mean that anyone (and any corporation) could get away with "oh it's not my fault, we're not liable, it's an open source component that did it".

The law should help corporations take their responsibilities (i.e. help fix open source components) without putting the burden on devs that are not paid by these corporations.

https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.15.21249885 , principal author is Daniel Ayoubkhani (ORCID: 0000-0001-6352-0394). (Why is Slashdot citing Yahoo citing The Telegraph?)

(See subject)

I'm using Unicode to get an upside down text. (Unfortunately, Slashdot seems not to want to show it, but see here https://www.fileformat.info/convert/text/upside-down.htm?text=upsidedown). As a bonus, it is a passwordless AP but uses a modern way of upside-down-ternet (see https://openoffice.nl/2016/01/01/upside-downternet/ for a howto) to flip any non-https-page.

As this links to a paid publication by Elsevier, I can't say anything about it. I can, however, link to another article, only months ago, and it's debunking (latter in Dutch, sorry) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/18/warning-of-ecological-armageddon-after-dramatic-plunge-in-insect-numbers and https://www.nemokennislink.nl/publicaties/ernstige-zwakheden-in-alarmerend-onderzoek-naar-vliegende-insecten/

As said, I can't say anything about the Elsevier article and frankly, I don't think it serves a purpose to link to articles we can't read. Thinking of it, this would make a great business model: perform research with alarming outcome; get paywalled article linked on Slashdot... Profit!

Mass extinction in a few thousand years and a single species responsible - I see a parallel. It isn't mass extinction exactly, but mankind has caused quite some disturbance in both land and sea ecosystems already. A few thousand years should be plenty enough to cause real mass extinction.

The original article at http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/neil-young-trademarks-new-audio-format-20120403 Rolling Stone says that Pono is "a revolutionary new audio music system" and "a modern-day iPod for the 21st Century". I'm not sure why that would include a new audio format - although Rolling Stone's URL seems to suggest that. I have seen this article misquoted all around the globe, though - everyone pointing at the same old Rolling Stone page, some mentioning "new audio formats", others mentioning "patents" for a new MP3-format - etc etc..
I'd say hoax. Educated hoax, with press releases and trademarks and the lot, but still a hoax. Wake me up when the Pono system is for sale at the Neil Young Store.

Tequila
Ouzo
Vodka
Water
etcetera. (I voted "functional names").