Risc v is an instruction set architecture not a chip design, the actual hardware implementation of any given risc v processor won't necessarily be open source and available to all, it's just a guarantee that if the spec is implemented then code compiled for risc v will run on a RISC V processor.
China has had access to x86 for years, they've not been able to implement a chip on par with current gen AMD or Intel chips.
Genuinely curious, is it just as a side effect of appearing to come from an EU server that means you trigger automated privacy systems? Or is there a legal basis by which you can say "I routed this through an EU server therefore I'm subject to EU privacy law" (maybe there isn't even a difference)
I've no real preference so long as my PC starts stuff. The reason I avoid flatpaks is because I have at some point acquired the habit of anything I install that's not an appimage I pretty much launch from the terminal and I remember trying flatpaks and them having names like package.package.nameofapp-somethingelse and I can't keep that in my head.
Doesn't the appellate court only accept the case if there's an issue with the ruling in a lower court? It's absolutely loaded, but it's hard to see an alternative without giving up the right to appeal.
Surely god will just bestow upon you a dong as unto a donkey and abs ripped like the parting of the red sea.