Juste une idée qui est aussi une question existe t il un fond commun de soutien aux logiciels libres ? L’idée serait de donner / cotiser pontuellement ou pas à un fond aux quels les dev pourraient avoir recours pour soutenir leurs appli / logiciels plutôt que donner à 123 entités différentes. Oui je sais c’est un brin centralisateur mais quand faut manger des fois on plie (un peu) devant l’efficacité
Stai riscontrando fastidiosi problemi con Spotify su Android? L'app si blocca, la musica si interrompe o l'interfaccia è diventata lenta? Se hai risposto di sì, sappi che non dipende dal tuo smartphone. Sei in ottima compagnia: un bug sta colpendo un numero sempre maggiore di utenti in tutto il mondo. Infatti il problema è così diffuso che la stessa Spotify ne è perfettamente a conoscenza.
Analizziamo insieme i sintomi più comuni, le possibili cause e cosa puoi fare in attesa di una soluzione ufficiale.
I malfunzionamenti segnalati dagli utenti sono chiari e, con ogni probabilità, ti suoneranno familiari. Molti lamentano un'esperienza d'uso peggiorata in modo progressivo, che ha trasformato un'app un tempo fluida in una fonte di frustrazione.
Ecco i problemi con Spotify su Android più comuni:
La musica si ferma senza un motivo apparente, costringendoti a riaprire l'applicazione per farla ripartire. Purtroppo non è neanche la prima volta che gli utenti riscontrano difficoltà nell'utilizzare l'app. Se ti ritrovi in questa descrizione, continua a leggere per capire perché sta succedendo.
Il primo istinto è spesso quello di dare la colpa al proprio dispositivo. In questo caso, però, non è così. I problemi colpiscono una vasta gamma di smartphone, dai top di gamma più recenti ai modelli di fascia media più datati.
Il disagio è così esteso che Spotify ha aperto un thread ufficiale sulla sua community per raccogliere le segnalazioni, confermando che la causa risiede nel codice dell'applicazione. Curiosamente, gli utenti iOS e PC sembrano riscontrare queste difficoltà in forma minore.
Sebbene manchi una comunicazione ufficiale sulle cause tecniche, l'ipotesi più accreditata è che l'app sia diventata troppo pesante.
Negli ultimi anni, Spotify ha integrato numerose funzionalità: podcast, audiolibri, nuove interfacce e molto altro. Quando si stratificano nuove funzioni senza un'adeguata ottimizzazione del codice, il risultato è un'applicazione che richiede sempre più risorse. La gestione della memoria del client Android sembra essere il punto debole, causando i rallentamenti e i blocchi che molti utenti stanno sperimentando.
Nell'attesa di un fix ufficiale per i problemi di Spotify su Android, le soluzioni classiche possono offrire un sollievo momentaneo.
Puoi provare a:
Diversi utenti hanno confermato che queste procedure aiutano, ma l'effetto è purtroppo temporaneo. Infatti dopo poche ore o qualche giorno di utilizzo, i problemi tendono a ripresentarsi.
La risposta è semplice: queste azioni agiscono sul tuo dispositivo, ma non correggono il problema alla radice, che risiede nel software di Spotify. È come svuotare l'acqua da una barca con una falla: un aiuto momentaneo che non risolve la perdita. La soluzione vera e propria può arrivare solo dagli sviluppatori dell'app con un aggiornamento mirato.
Qui arriviamo alla nota dolente. Nonostante il problema sia noto e ufficialmente riconosciuto, Spotify non ha ancora fornito una tempistica per il rilascio di un aggiornamento risolutivo. Al momento l'azienda sta raccogliendo feedback, ma tutto tace su una possibile data di rilascio di un patch.
In un mercato competitivo con alternative come YouTube Music e Apple Music, un'esperienza utente scadente è un rischio che Spotify non ci si può permettere a lungo. La speranza è che la pressione della community spinga l'azienda ad agire in fretta.
Per ora, non resta che armarsi di pazienza.
L'articolo Problemi con Spotify su Android: app bloccata o lenta? Non sei solo proviene da sicurezza.net.
Texas state Rep. James Talarico voted in five elections using his parents’ address after purchasing a home for himself nearby, a practice that may have violated state voting laws, ProPublica and The Texas Tribune found.
This comes weeks after Talarico accused Attorney General Ken Paxton, his opponent in the race for U.S. Senate, of voter fraud for similar actions. The news organizations reported in July that Paxton voted using an address where his estranged wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton, said he hasn’t lived for two years.
Paxton has made eradicating voter fraud a cornerstone of his time in office by advocating strict enforcement of the law, including in cases against voters who allegedly used false addresses when casting ballots. Paxton’s campaign has said he is a “lawful, registered Texas voter” but has repeatedly declined to answer detailed questions about his residency and voting history.
Piecing together Talarico’s voting history is more difficult than it is for Paxton. Talarico, unlike the attorney general, redacts his address on the Travis County voter rolls under a state law that allows some public officials to shield personal information for safety reasons. But unredacted records Talarico’s campaign provided the newsrooms show that he listed his parents’ address on his voter registration in November 2021.
He purchased a home in June 2022 but did not change his voter registration address until September 2024, the news organizations’ review of Travis County records shows. The new address is redacted, but Talarico’s campaign previously told the newsrooms that he currently lives and is registered to vote at the north Austin home he owns.
Talarico’s campaign declined to answer questions about his residency and voting history, including when he began living at the home he owns. Campaign spokesperson JT Ennis said “right-wing actors” had made “credible threats” about trying to locate Talarico and his family.
Texas law requires that residents register to vote where they live. This ensures they are voting for those who actually represent them. The provisions of the law, however, are “broad and vague,” said Andrew Cates, a Texas ethics attorney.
Courts have previously ruled that there is no single way to determine a voter’s residence, and prosecuting such cases requires proof that a voter “knowingly” or “intentionally” broke the law.
Given this, Cates said he doubts that either Talarico or Paxton committed voter fraud, but he said Paxton should be held to a higher standard. As the state’s top lawyer, Paxton is responsible for enforcing election laws and has aggressively pursued alleged violators.
“When the top officials go looking for people to skewer for it, and then do it themselves, it really smacks of hypocrisy,” Cates said.
In 2024, Paxton helped oust judges on Texas’ highest criminal court who prevented him from unilaterally prosecuting election crimes. And, two weeks before this year’s primary election, Paxton announced the creation of an election fraud tip line. His office warned Texans that “it is illegal to misrepresent your residence on election records or to establish a residence for the purpose of influencing the outcome of an election.”
Paxton’s unyielding stance on election crimes fueled charges from Talarico and other critics that he considers himself above the law.
“Our Republican secretary of state here in Texas has already said that our elections are safe and secure,” Talarico said at a Houston campaign event last month. “But as our state’s attorney general, Ken Paxton has gone on a voter fraud witch hunt. Turns out, he was committing voter fraud the whole time.”
Last week, Paxton hit back.
In a news release and on social media, Paxton said Talarico broke state law, citing reports from conservative news outlets suggesting the Democrat had not lived in the district for at least a year when he was elected to the Texas House in 2022. Talarico, Paxton said, “blatantly committed election fraud showing a complete disregard for Texas residency requirements.”
Records provided by Talarico’s campaign appear to show that he did comply with residency requirements during the period scrutinized by the conservative outlets.
In October 2021, Talarico announced he would move to the area where he grew up after Republicans redrew his Texas House district to favor their party.
Talarico updated his address to his parents’ home in the new House district on his voter registration, on his driver’s license and with the U.S. Postal Service on Nov. 5, 2021, according to records his campaign provided. Those include a photo of his voter registration application and screenshots of receipts from the Texas Department of Public Safety and USPS. Talarico also rented a 10-foot U-Haul moving truck for six hours that day, according to a screenshot of a receipt.
The changes happened three days before the one-year cutoff, making him eligible to run for that seat.
The records also contradict a claim by one of the conservative outlets that there was no evidence Talarico moved to his parents’ house when he registered to vote there. Paxton seized on that report to accuse Talarico of voter fraud during the 2022 election.
The newsrooms’ findings about Talarico are different because they analyzed the period after the lawmaker purchased a home and found that he continued to vote using his parents’ address. Talarico’s house is in the same county as his parents’ home, which is about 6 miles away. It is in the state House district he represents but in different jurisdictions for some local elections.
Asked about the apparent discrepancy in Talarico’s voter registration and residency, his campaign shifted blame onto the attorney general.
“This is a lame attempt by Ken Paxton to deflect from his own hypocrisy and career of corruption,” Ennis said in a statement, nodding to Paxton’s legal troubles.
Paxton was impeached by the Texas House in 2023 and investigated by the Department of Justice over corruption charges. The state Senate acquitted him, and the federal government dropped its case. Paxton also spent nearly nine years under indictment for felony securities fraud charges that were dropped in 2024.
For his part, Paxton and his campaign on Monday again did not answer questions about the news organizations’ finding that he voted six times over a two-year period while registered at a Collin County home where he appeared to no longer live. It is unclear where Paxton lived during that time, but the publications’ reporting has linked him, and a woman believed to be his girlfriend, to a home in neighboring Denton County since February. As the home is in a different county, voters there select an entirely different slate of local officials than in Collin County.
Paxton spokesperson Madison Cercy doubled down on accusations that Talarico was ineligible to be elected to his seat and also committed voter fraud.
“The only person who has committed voter fraud in the Texas Senate race is James Talarico,” she said. She did not provide evidence of Talarico’s alleged lawbreaking beyond the reports from the conservative outlets.
Matthew Wilson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University, argued Paxton’s and Talarico’s cases highlight how easy it can be to “run afoul of the letter of the law,” even as Republican lawmakers push for more stringent enforcement of voting restrictions.
“I think it could be reasonably used as a charge of hypocrisy against either of them because both of them have condemned the other for an action quite similar to what they themselves appear to have done,” Wilson said.
The post James Talarico Accused Ken Paxton of Voter Fraud. His Own Voter Registration Is Raising Questions. appeared first on ProPublica.
In the last 10 months, residents in neighborhoods across Omaha, Nebraska, have contacted the city and federal government after tests by the Flatwater Free Press and ProPublica showed they had enough of the toxic metal in their yards for the dirt to be dug up and replaced under Environmental Protection Agency rules.
But the responses they’ve received have been inconsistent.
Three of them received new testing and were promised additional cleanup. Yet others were denied a new cleanup or told the news organizations they never heard back.
One resident said the city tested her yard, found it exceeded the EPA’s lead contamination level and sent her a letter saying cleanup was necessary. Months later the city backtracked, saying she did not qualify because she lived outside the primary cleanup zone. Another said she called 14 times before the city told her it would not retest because she hadn’t built or demolished anything in her yard since the EPA replaced the soil in 2012.
The EPA and the city have spent decades cleaning up residential properties in east Omaha after a century of pollution from a lead smelter and other factories downtown. The EPA had set a lead level that it uses to determine which properties to clean up, and the news organizations’ tests found these residents’ yards were over the limit.
But the city said that according to EPA rules, it can’t rely on testing by the newsrooms or any other groups to drive testing and cleanup decisions.
Peter Olson thought he was one of the lucky ones. His yard was one of thousands that the federal government had dug up and replaced since cleanup began in 1999. But a Flatwater Free Press and ProPublica soil test conducted in September showed he had too much of the toxic metal in the yard. When his wife contacted the EPA, Olson hoped a federal employee would offer another test and cleanup.
Instead, all the agency could do was examine a small area in the backyard where a deck once stood, according to an email Olson shared from an EPA project manager for the site. The rest of the yard, including an area that was high for lead in the news organizations’ tests, was ineligible, the agency said without explaining why.
The city told Mary Royers it could test her soil because a shed had been demolished and a garage had been built in her backyard, which could have disturbed or uncovered contaminated soil. Unlike with Olson, the city analyzed the whole yard and agreed to clean up several areas around her house.
Olson said he and his wife agreed to the more limited testing the EPA offered them, though they worry about what might be in the rest of their yard. They’re currently waiting for the testing.
An Omaha lead smelter spread dust that seeped into the soil and bodies of many residents. The EPA spent decades cleaning up the surrounding area — but not Council Bluffs, Carter Lake or Bellevue.
Omahans’ dirt generally qualifies for cleanup if it has more than 400 parts per million of lead in it — about the equivalent of a marble dispersed in a 10-gallon bucket of soil. The EPA adopted that standard in 2009. To date, contractors have dug up and replaced nearly 14,000 yards, mostly in a 27-square-mile area on the city’s east side, which has been declared a federal Superfund site. In 2015, the agency handed over remaining remediation work to Omaha.
Asked about the different responses residents have received, EPA spokesperson Kellen Ashford said in an email that each property is unique, and new sampling depends heavily on whether site conditions have changed because of construction or demolition that might have disturbed or exposed the soil.
“EPA strives to be fair and equitable in its decision-making process while adjusting to changes in agency policies, funding, and cleanup approaches,” he said.
Steve Zivny, who leads Omaha’s Lead Information Office, also said these decisions are made on a case-by-case basis. The city is able to test and clean up within the site but must seek approval from the EPA before doing any work outside those boundaries. The city is paid with settlement money from the smelter and other polluters.
Recently, the city sent letters to some residents outside the boundaries of the Superfund site saying they needed cleanup but reversed course after the EPA said the homes would not qualify, Zivny said.
Amy Haney lives about a half-mile outside the site’s western edge, a boundary the EPA drew by estimating where only a small percentage of homes were likely to have high lead levels. As a result, Haney’s home was never tested. But a Flatwater Free Press and ProPublica test found it had nearly 1.5 times the level that would qualify for a lead cleanup.
The result felt like a “kick in the gut,” she said. The news organizations tested 35 properties within a three-quarter-mile radius of Haney’s home. Four, including Haney’s house, were above the cleanup level.
Haney contacted the city, which told her the EPA would retest her home this summer.
While the EPA has cleaned up homes outside the site in the past, Ashford said any sampling beyond the site’s bounds right now is for investigative purposes only, and those homeowners may not be eligible for remediation.
The agency’s priority is cleaning up within the Superfund site as well as properties that impact children, he said.
Even when kids test high for lead, however, the city and the EPA don’t always retest yards.
Sabrina, a north Omaha resident whose soil we tested, said doctors found lead in three of her children. (She asked that her last name not be published to protect their identities.) In 2020, after her daughter’s blood-lead test, the city and a nonprofit replaced windows that contained lead-based paint. But they didn’t test the yard.
The only information Sabrina said she received about the dirt was the EPA test results from 2003 that showed the yard didn’t qualify for cleanup.
“I felt like that was kind of a lazy response,” Sabrina said. Despite the window replacements, doctors have found lead in her other kids’ blood.
The Flatwater Free Press and ProPublica tested her soil in May and found the lead was over the cleanup level and twice as high as the EPA’s 2003 test records showed.
Sabrina requested a new test, but the city denied it, saying no work had been done on the property and it couldn’t rely on the newsrooms’ results.
Zivny said the city has asked the EPA to revisit that decision in light of her children’s blood test results.
The post Lead Contamination Is Still a Problem in Omaha. Why Is the City Cleaning Up Some Yards and Not Others? appeared first on ProPublica.
Accedi
