Still to be realized - as so frequently happened other bills and emergency expenses took priority. I'll get there eventually, as with the migration..... Watch this space! 😄
@everardoVV, maybe, but it's not possible to switch a browser engine, because it would mean having to develop the browser from scratch, requiring years of work to get back to the level reached.
I’m more supportive of open-source, privacy-focused email systems. Here are some personal recommendations for email services you can sign up for:
6. Gandi.net
If you have a domain with Gandi, their included email service is really good.
If you think it’s good, give me a thumbs up!
I was a long time Gandi customer, but suddenly they changed the pricing radically. The email service is no longer included in the domain registration fee. Also the domain renewal fees have skyrocketed. For example, a .com domain today costs 11 eur to register and 31.98 eur to renew.
@LonM, well, but these are not investors, they only pay an revenue when the user use these, if not, not. It is not that they are paying Vivaldi by contract to be, yes or yes, included in the browser as default, like Google does in Firefox.
It's not the same dependency, Vivaldi don't sold it's independence, like Mozilla. Partners are not investors, they cannot influence Vivaldi's decisions.
Andi's Writeup about the question, adding all sources for further research
The debate over solar farms on British farmland has intensified since Labour's Ed Miliband became Energy Security Secretary in 2024, approving several controversial large-scale projects[^1][^2].
Key developments:
The government aims to triple UK solar capacity by 2030, from 16.6 gigawatts to 45-47 gigawatts[^3]
Currently solar farms occupy 0.1% of UK land, projected to reach 0.3-0.6% under government plans[^3]
Major approved projects include the 2,500-acre Sunnica solar farm on the Cambridgeshire/Suffolk border[^4]
The core tension is between:
Supporters argue:
Solar is now the cheapest form of renewable energy[^5]
Farmers can still graze sheep under panels while earning stable income[^6]
Even ambitious solar expansion would use less than 1% of agricultural land[^7]
Critics argue:
Prime farmland should be preserved for food security[^8]
Local communities lose rural character and views[^9]
Large projects bypass local planning control[^10]
Recent policy changes:
Labour government consulting on removing protections for high-grade farmland from planning guidance[^11]
Local councils advised to reject solar farms on prime agricultural land if they threaten food security[^12]
Government promoting "agrivoltaics" - combining solar with continued farming[^13]
I saw on another platform the CEO's post, but I failed to see how it was a problem. The original tweet/post seemed pro-Bernie Sanders (and anti, what he called "corporate democrats") to me. Did you see that post? People seem all-to-quick to put words in the mouth of anyone saying anything remotely kind toward the Trump administration.