Hello everyone I am selling my gaming laptop to help pay off my cars service bill. It’s a Acer nitro 5 with a 3050 and 32gb of ram and internal ssd of 500gb the stock ram is included with this sale in case you want to revert it back to the old ram and the box and all manual is included as well. It was bought as a gift December 2021 but later I got a series x so it has been collecting dust. I did turn it on today and it works fine it has all updates. I only used it to play all battlefield titles and star citizen but console has my heart. Serious inquiries please and thank you. Idk how to add pics so if you want pics just send me a message also I’m located in Huntington park and will do the swap at Huntington park police department for safety reasons as this is my first time selling something online.

https://www.cityofrochester.gov/gun-trace-data/
(Friday, June 9, 2023) – As a part of multi-faceted and continued efforts to address gun violence, Mayor Malik D. Evans today released a Gun Trace Data Report compiled by Brady.
The City commissioned the national, nonpartisan organization in late 2021 to conduct an in-depth analysis of firearms used in crimes and recovered by the Rochester Police Department between 2012 and 2022. Brady utilized data from the Rochester Police Department (RPD) and its open data portal, which serves as an open resource for information about RPD crime data.
The 28-page report, redacted by the ATF before its release, provides a high-level overview of crime guns across the country, and dives deeper into details around the 6,036 crime guns recovered in the City of Rochester between 2012 and 2022.
The Tiahrt Amendment to the 2003 federal appropriations bill restricts the ATF from publicly releasing disaggregated gun trace data, which is why Rochester’s report has been redacted.
“This report synthesizes 11 years’ worth of gun trace data,” said Mayor Evans. “I appreciate the work of our police officers and the RPD’s data team, and the work of the Brady team to make this information digestible and actionable.”
“In addition, I want to celebrate the efforts of community leaders – specifically the Roc Against Gun Violence Coalition and City Councilmember Willie Lightfoot – for championing this project through several years,” he said.
Rochester is among a small number of states and cities to release its crime gun trace data.
"We applaud Rochester for leading the initiative in identifying the source of crime guns in their city, and we encourage other cities and localities to follow suit," said Kris Brown, president of Brady. "Gun violence plagues every city and community in the U.S., and local officials need individualized solutions to address this epidemic. This report provides critical information about the characteristics, trends, and gun industry sources of crime guns recovered in Rochester, which is necessary to craft evidence-based solutions.”
The report notes that, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Uniform Crime Report, Rochester’s overall crime rate falls below the national average. However, Rochester’s homicides, especially firearm-involved homicides, rose between 2019 and 2022 — and at a higher rate than many cities of far greater size.
The report illustrates:

• The majority of Rochester’s crime guns come from out-of-state sources
  • 57% were purchased out-of-state
  • 43% were purchased from dealers within New York State
• A small percentage of firearms dealers sell a disproportionate number of Rochester’s crime guns
  • The majority of guns recovered by the RPD come from just 10% of dealers, and 28% of crime guns recovered by the RPD were traced to just 1% of the dealers
• Most of the dealers that sold the highest numbers of crime guns are located in Monroe County
  • Of the crime guns sold by the “top 30” crime gun dealers, 53% came from dealers located in Monroe County; 13% are/were located elsewhere within New York State; and 34% are/were located out-of-state
• Dealers with the most traces tend to be independent businesses, but chain stores are also significant sources of crime guns
• Crime guns circulate long after their dealers go out of business
• Ghost guns are on the rise

“Although there are currently no gun dealers currently operating within the city of Rochester, the city bears the brunt of the impact of gun violence in our community,” said Councilmember Willie Lightfoot. “This report underlines the importance of partnerships across jurisdictions so we can work together to address the supply side of crime guns.”
In addition, the report identifies those dealers that sold the most guns with a short “time-to-crime" (the time elapsed from retail sale to recovery by law enforcement), and identifies those dealers that sold multiple weapons that were used in homicides in Rochester.
“Even with all the information this gun trace data report provides, it will not solve gun crime in Rochester,” said Mayor Evans. “It is, however, another important piece of the puzzle, and we will use this information along with other tools and strategies to continue our fight against deadly gun violence.”
The City of Rochester continues to leverage its strong working partnerships with local, state and federal law enforcement entities, including the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office, New York State Police, U.S. Marshals Service, the ATF, and probation and parole offices.
The new Gun Trace Data Report will be used to inform additional initiatives, and will guide City leaders in advocating for local and state leaders to identify ways to address problematic gun dealers.
###

The Dutch independent investigative journalism platform 'Follow the Money' wrote a article about Patagonia.
"Sustainable clothing brand Patagonia manufactures in the same factories as fast-fashion; textile workers are being exploited"
Clothing brand Patagonia seems to be doing everything right: for its employees, for the people who make the clothes and for the environment. The company’s image – they say they’re in business to save our home planet – is very different from fast-fashion brands like asos, Primark and Nike. But Patagonia’s clothes are manufactured in exactly the same factories and under the same deplorable conditions.
When Yvon Chouinard started creating climbing equipment in his parents’ backyard in Burbank, California, he used steel. Soon he earned a reputation for making the ‘best’ climbing equipment in America. But every time a climber slammed one of those steel pegs into a rock, the gap got a little bigger and eventually unusable. Chouinard realised he was making money by destroying the rocks and therefore also the sport. And so he switched to aluminium blocks, which did not damagethe rocks.
The change was expensive and risky for the young company, but the moral dilemma was reason enough for Chouinard to implement the change. And to be very outspoken about it. It was a success: within a year, 40 per cent of the US climbing community stopped using steel.
Chouinard applied this experience when he started the outdoor brand Patagonia in 1973. He wanted to make only high-quality clothing that would last. And limit the impact on the environment as much as possible. In 1996, the brand switched to 100 per cent organic cotton, only to increasingly replace it with recycled materials. But the responsibility that Chouinard attributed to the company extended further.
In 2002 he decided to give one per cent of sales to environmental organisations every year. In 2011, Patagonia placed a full-page ad in the New York Times calling on consumers to ‘not buy this jacket’ in order to draw attention to the problematic nature of overconsumption in the clothing industry.
In addition, the clothing had to be manufactured fairly: in 2012, the top of the company made paying living wages to everyone who makes Patagonia products a ‘priority’. In 2020, Patagonia launched a campaign encouraging consumers to demand more from clothing brands: ‘Demand recycled. Demand organic. Demand Fair Trade,’ Patagonia urged its viewers.
In 2022, the then 84-year-old Chouinard caused worldwide astonishment, when he gave away 98 per cent of his shares to a newly formed NGO, the Holdfast Collective, which is ‘committed in its fight against the environmental crisis and protecting nature.’ Henceforth, the company’s profits would no longer flow to himself or his children but to the climate. ‘Earth is now our only shareholder,’ Chouinard said. Billionaire gives company away to climate, newspapers like The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Guardian reported*.*
This construction saved the NGO an estimated 700 million dollars that Chouinard would have had to pay in tax if he had sold the company and donated the proceeds to the same NGO. But according to Chouinard, this option allowed him to do something else: protect Patagonia’s values. Because he did not give the voting shares to Holdfast Collective but to a family trust. This allows his family to continue determining the company’s direction.
The company’s turnover – its European headquarters are in Amsterdam − grew by more than 50 per cent that year to about 1.5 billion dollars.
The actions earned Patagonia an image as being the ultimate sustainable frontrunner. In April, Time Magazine named Chouinard one of the world’s 100 most influential people. ‘Patagonia is a company people look up to in awe,’ the magazine wrote.
The complete opposite of Patagonia is a company like Primark. The Irish retail chain is known for selling on-trend low-quality clothes at low prices. Its revenue model is based on mass: high volumes with low margins.
Primark continuously creates new garment collections designed to be worn only a few times, after which they fall apart. The company uses advertising, clearance sales and influencers to urge consumers to keep buying as much as possible.
Media regularly report on the subsequent consequences. One, in particular, is that the people who make the clothes suffer from high production pressure at low cost. ‘Primark supplier accused of locking up factory workers in Myanmar protests,’ The Guardian headline read in 2021. That same year, The Clean Clothes Campaign NGO wrote: ‘Primark uses pandemic to put further pressure on factory workers in manufacturing countries.’
Patagonia and Primark seem like two extremes on the slow versus fast-fashion spectrum. Yet the brands have something in common. Some of their clothing is manufactured in the exact same factory.
PATAGONIA IN AMSTERDAM In 2014, Patagonia moved its European headquarters from Annecy town in the French Alps to Amsterdam. Reflecting on this, current CEO Ryan Gellert told the city marketing website I Amsterdam: ‘We established headquarters here in 2014 because we wanted a place where we could attract and retain pan-European and global talent, [...] and where there was an active community working on sustainability issues. As we searched potential locations across Europe, Amsterdam remained high on our list.’
According to Tax Law Professor Jan van de Streek, tax benefits may also have played a role in the choice of the Netherlands. This is because Patagonia did not register in the Netherlands as a BV but as a cooperative with two US members: Patagonia International Inc and Patagonia Global LLC. ‘Why choose something as strange as a cooperative structure?’ Van de Streek remarks to Follow the Money. ‘Because it is exempt from dividend tax. I think it’s naive to think there’s any other reason for that.’
Responding to questions about this, Patagonia said: ‘Since its inception, Patagonia Europe Coöperatief has paid regular corporate income taxes in all European countries where we do business, including the Netherlands, and has never used the tax efficiencies of a cooperative.’
‘At the suggestion of our advisors', Patagonia chose a cooperative structure ‘because it's the most flexible type of entity that suited our business purpose. However, Patagonia has chosen not to pursue any of the tax advantages available under the cooperative entity type. Patagonia Europe has not paid dividends to its parent company.'

‘No difference’

That factory is called Regal Image and is located in Sri Lanka. To be precise, in the Free Trade Zone of Katunayake, less than two kilometres from the international airport. The industrial estate is guarded 24/7 by Sri Lankan police. Access is only possible with a special pass.
In the factory hall, there are long tables with pieces of white fabric on them. An employee walks past with sea-green paint and a stencil forming the letters ‘asics’. Further along, a machine prints a grey logo on a purple tank top for Decathlon.
‘So far, we don’t really notice any difference between working with Patagonia and working with Primark or Decathlon,’ says Kevin Fernando. Fernando is the manager at the factory, which dyes, prints or embroiders logos and prints on fabrics. Regal Image was recently approved as a supplier to Patagonia, a process that took nine months. Fernando shows the designs for the 2024 summer collection. Light blue fabric features ‘Patagonia’ in pink letters, and a rainbow is printed on orange fabric.
‘Like most clothing companies, we do not make our products, nor do we own any of the factories that do,’ Patagonia writes on its website about the decision to outsource the manufacturing process. ‘We design, test, market and sell Patagonia gear. These are our areas of strength. We pay other companies [...] to produce fabrics and do the actual cutting and sewing.’

‘No control over working conditions’

Patagonia promises to only partner with factories that are ‘like-minded’ and who share their ‘philosophy.’ Patagonia has found sixty-one suitable factories: two in the US, one in Portugal and the remainder in 12 different low-wage countries. The bulk of the products are made in Vietnam and Sri Lanka.
At least two-thirds of the factories that manufacture Patagonia clothing also work for clothing brands that, according to the consumer website Good on You, have little or no sustainability policies in place (Patagonia itself is touted by Good on You as sustainable). This is evident from an analysis by Follow the Money based on data from Open Supply Hub, which aims to make supply chains in the clothing industry more transparent.
One day people make clothing for Patagonia, and the next day, they make items for brands such as GAP, Levi Strauss, Calvin Klein, Hugo Boss, Tommy Hilfiger, Nike, Amer Sports, Asics, US department store chain Target, e-commerce platform Amazon, supermarket Aldi and fast-fashion icons ASOS, Boohoo, H&M and Zara.
‘How is this possible?’ visual culture professor Anneke Smelik responds. Smelik researches sustainable fashion at Radboud University. ‘I know Patagonia as the most sustainable brand out there. I expected them to manufacture in small factories close to home. This means they have absolutely no control over working conditions.’
PATAGONIA IN SRI LANKA Patagonia works with 14 factories in Sri Lanka that are part of (or partner with) two companies: MAS Holdings and the Hirdaramani Group.
MAS Holdings was founded in 1987 by three brothers: Mahesh, Ajay and Sharad Amalean. The company began manufacturing lingerie and later expanded to sportswear, swimwear and T-shirts. With factories in 17 countries and roughly 2.4 billion dollars in turnover by 2022, MAS is Sri Lanka’s largest clothing manufacturer. The Amalean brothers are among the wealthiest men in the country.
The company emphatically presents itself as a sustainable clothing manufacturer. For instance, the company promises to emit 25 per cent less CO2 by 2025 than in 2019, and CEO Suren Fernando expects the group to earn half its revenue from sustainable products by then.
In May 2023, MAS received a Presidential Environment Award from President Ranil Wickremesinghe for the company’s commitment to the environment. The company describes the welfare of its employees as ‘its top priority’. On the subject of paying a living wage, the company makes no promises.
In the early 1900s, Parmanand Hirdaramani, then 16 years old, started a clothing shop in Sri Lanka’s capital Colombo. Today, his great-grandson Aroon Hirdaramani runs the Hirdaramani Group, which has grown into an international clothing conglomerate with factories in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Vietnam and a turnover of around 900 million US dollars.
Hirdaramani also presents itself as a sustainable producer. The company’s website states: ‘At Hirdaramani, we do the right thing. We have always done that. It’s about making good decisions today that benefit everyone in the long run.’
Since 2019, all Hirdaramani factories in Sri Lanka have been producing climate neutrally. For 2025, the company has set several targets on material use, water use, waste and leadership. Paying a living or higher wage is not a target.
In 2016, Aroon Hirdaramani and his wife Mona surfaced in the Pandora Papers. It emerged that Hirdaramani owned two investment companies in the British Virgin Islands. The reason for this is unclear. The fact is that companies based there do not have to pay tax on income, profits, dividends and interest, among other things.

Sixteen-hour workdays

Eligibility to manufacture Patagonia products requires a supplier to meet a list of sustainability criteria. Those criteria are set out in a code of conduct for suppliers. For example, child labour, forced labour, or physical, sexual or verbal harassment are not allowed. All national laws must be respected. Suppliers must respect workers’ right to freedom of association, may not force workers to work overtime and must ensure healthy working conditions. Working weeks of more than 60 hours or more than six days in a row is not acceptable to Patagonia.
Patagonia checks whether a factory complies with these standards through independent auditor visits at least once a year, says the brand after being questioned by Follow the Money. Checks are also carried out by the Fair Labor Association (FLA) and FairTrade: two NGOs that provide Patagonia’s manufacturing process and clothing with a sustainability label.
A part of those audits is public. Since 2016, the FLA has publishedassessments of seven Patagonia factories, including three in Vietnam, three in Sri Lanka and one in China. During those inspections, auditors found dozens of violations, varying greatly in severity.
For instance, almost 2000 employees at a factory in Vietnam were paid less for their overtime than what they should have received and employees’ ages were not recorded (thus child labour cannot be ruled out). Another check found out that applicants had to provide their menstrual date. Employees told the interviewers they were not allowed to become pregnant in the first six months of their employment. Less serious violations dealt with issues such as working without protective equipment, blocked emergency exits, or a lack of policies on harassment or discrimination.
One problem crops up in every report. Textile workers in factories manufacturing clothes for Patagonia work far longer hours than legally permitted: up to 17 hours a day and more than 80 hours a week, well beyond what is permissible according to Patagonia’s code of conduct.
‘Long working hours with insufficient breaks often lead to health problems,’ the Clean Clothes Campaign recently wrote about this issue. ‘Managers pressure employees to work 10- to 12-hour and sometimes even 16- to 18-hour days. The number of hours increases as the deadline approaches. Those who protest are simply fired. Moreover, workers depend on overtime to supplement their low wages.’
At the Regal Image factory in Sri Lanka, manager Fernando assures that his employees work a maximum of five days a week and 10 hours a day. But during the tour, a line manager starts talking about the duration of his shift: from eight in the morning to a quarter to 10 in the evening – almost 14 hours. ‘It’s busy,’ says Fernando, casually.
‘This is what the fast-fashion model does,’ says Smelik. ‘Brands want their products to be in store within a few weeks. So when a factory receives an order from such a brand, the production targets and overtime skyrocket.’

‘They talk to us like we are animals’

The office of Stand Up Lanka, a union led by Ashila Niroshine Dandeniya, is located just outside the Free-Trade Zone. She started working in a MAS factory, part of MAS Holdings that is a supplier to Patagonia, in 2003. Her colleagues elected her to represent them as a member of the factory’s employees council. But when she addressed the matter of wages, she was fired. She challenged her dismissal, got compensation, and discovered that there were laws in place to protect people like her.
Now, almost 20 years later, she knows Sri Lankan labour law like the back of her hand. Her office is a hexagon with five windows, all open. Textile workers from nearby factories approach her via these windows to greet her or ask for help.
When a transman walks past, she says, ‘He applied to MAS Shadowline [one of Patagonia’s suppliers, ed] a month ago. They said they didn’t want him because he is transgender. He can’t get work anywhere. And he cannot go back to his village because he is Muslim. His family will shoot him.’
When about six women wearing yellow MAS polos come and ask for a food parcel, Dandeniya shakes her head. ‘We don’t have enough. Since the country’s economic crisis, some families barely eat two meals a day. How am I supposed to choose who can eat and who can’t?’
That evening, she introduces Priya (31). Priya has been working for MAS Shadowline for almost two years, sewing the side seams on leggings or T-shirts. She makes many clothes for yoga brand Lululemon and for Lacoste (famous through the crocodile logo), but sometimes also for Patagonia.
‘The worst part is the scolding,’ she says in her home a few streets away: a room of about 12 square metres. It contains a double bed, a small kitchenette and a wardrobe. Despite the fan on the wall, it is sweltering hot inside. She shares a toilet and a shower with others.
‘My supervisor’s manager is a terrible man. He touches everyone in a bad way, and if you say you don’t want that, you have a problem. He yells at me if I have to go to the bank or the doctor. “Then who will do the work? Who will meet the target?” And he’s not the only one. They talk to us like we are animals.’
When asked about her production targets, she breathes a deep sigh. ‘The other day, Lululemon placed a huge order, and now everyone is stressed. On the first day, we had to make seventy items per hour, but on the second day, it was suddenly a hundred. Otherwise, we won’t make the delivery date.’ During the working day, she does not drink water so that she does not waste time going to the toilet. Despite this, she seldom meets the target. And that means: no bonus.
Without that bonus, Priya earns 32,000 rupees a month (97 euros). Her room costs 7,000 rupees (21 euros), and a meal 300 rupees (1 euro). She has no money left for other things.
‘Since the crisis, we are increasingly hearing stories from our members of textile workers using drugs,’ says Dandeniya. ‘Also in MAS factories that Patagonia works with. They use it to work faster. Sometimes also against the hunger.’
Chamila Thushari, union leader of Dabindu Collective, confirms the story. ‘They use Ice (Crystal Meth) or Babul.’ She points to her collar and to the sole of her shoe. ‘This is how they smuggle it in. The management knows this happens but allows it. All they care about is production targets are being met.’
An employee of a third union, GTZ-GSEU, confirms that drug use among textile workers in the Free Trade Zone is a problem.
Patagonia says these claims are ‘new’ to them and ‘serious’, but says, without evidence, it cannot comment.

A living wage

That Patagonia, known for being sustainable, has its clothes manufactured in the same factories as other much less sustainable brands is seen as an advantage by the company. ‘Patagonia has a powerful brand voice, but we are a quite small player in the apparel sector. Therefore, we are always looking for ways to scale our impact and to elevate the industry standards across the board, bringing other apparel retailers along on the journey with us. So, continuing to engage in shared production facilities is crucial to this work.’
Patagonia wants all people who make clothes to earn a decent wage. In 2015, the company promised that within 10 years, all employees in its supply chain would be earning a living wage that would be enough to live on. That is, enough for food, water, housing, education, healthcare, transport and other essential needs.
With 18 months to go, only 40 per cent of its factories pay a living wage, according to Patagonia. They would not reveal the factories concerned. Suppliers reportedly ‘have the right to maintain their factories’ wage data confidential’.
Patagonia wants all people who make clothes to earn a decent wage. In 2015, the company promised that within 10 years, all employees in its supply chain would be earning a living wage that would be enough to live on. That is, enough for food, water, housing, education, healthcare, transport and other essential needs.
With 18 months to go, only 40 per cent of its factories pay a living wage, according to Patagonia. They would not reveal the factories concerned. Suppliers reportedly ‘have the right to maintain their factories’ wage data confidential’.
To determine a living wage, Patagonia uses the Anker Research Institute’s calculation method. According to that method, you can live decently in urban Sri Lanka if you earn a minimum of 83,231 Sri Lankan rupees (263 euro) a month. Priya’s salary does not even cover half that. And at the recently approved Regal Image print factory, the basic wage is even lower: 21,000 rupees (66 euro), says Fernando.
Thulsi Narayanasamy is frustrated by Patagonia’s approach to sustainability. She is director of advocacy at the Worker Rights Consortium, an independent non-profit organization that monitors and investigates labor conditions in the global apparel and textile industry. ‘Patagonia spends millions on green initiatives. Why can’t they pay the people who make their clothes properly?’
Patagonia says it ‘has no authority over how much textile workers get paid, as they are in no way, shape or form the employer of these workers.’ Narayanasamy, however, is convinced Patagonia can pay a living wage, if the brand would want to. ‘They could bring production in-house or pay more to suppliers that’s ringfenced for wages high enough to achieve a living income. It’s so well established that brand’s pricing practices directly impact wage levels, it’s a fallacy to deny this.’
‘I think we should ask ourselves: why don't clothing brands have their own factories?’ She asks the question, then answers it. 'Brands don't want to be responsible for the people who produce their clothes. All brands benefit from that, including Patagonia.
RESPONSE FROM PATAGONIA When asked why it does not pay its suppliers more for decent wages for workers, Patagonia replied: ‘Relying on one brand to simply cover the gap is a band-aid solution and does not serve the factory in the long run. If the one brand that pays the gap were to leave the factory, then those wages for workers would go away, leaving the factory with a shortfall they would not be able to cover. Additionally, if the brand just writes a check to the factory, then there is no guarantee that the money would go towards workers’ wages. The brand has no authority over how much workers get paid as they are in no way, shape or form the employer of those workers.’
About the long working hours, Patagonia says: ‘Excessive overtime is pervasive globally, which is why it is audited regularly. If we find a problem that can be resolved, we work with our factory partners to implement sustainable solutions. This can take many years, but we find this is the best outcome for the workers and the factory.’
In response to the allegations about drug use among textile workers, Patagonia says: ‘These are serious and new allegations, however without evidence, we are not able to comment on them. We are continuing to conduct our ongoing monitoring program and we remain committed to addressing systemic issues to ensure workers’ wellbeing across our supply chain.’
Link to the article: https://www.ftm.eu/articles/sustainable-clothing-brand-patagonia-uses-same-suppliers-fast-fashion-brands-do-workers-exploited?share=p8cq84oSmbUiJtEQUObUZSPZh8ZNReEKHj0wGJnBMQUMqLcwK9PC1kpMJCev5Mo%3D%26utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebuttonnietleden&utm_source=linkbutton
​
​
​

B1501.2 - Inefficient Light Bulb Ban Bill - Second Reading

A
B I L L
T O
Ban the sale and use of environmentally inefficient light bulbs.
BE IT ENACTED by the King’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—
Section 1: Definitions
(1) "Incandescent light bulb" means a general service lamp that produces light by heating a filament in a glass bulb filled with an inert gas or a vacuum.
(2) "Halogen light bulb" means a type of incandescent light bulb that uses a halogen gas to increase energy efficiency and lifespan.
(3) "Fluorescent light bulb" means a type of light bulb that uses an electric current to excite a gas, which then produces ultraviolet light that is converted to visible light by a phosphor coating on the inside of the bulb.
(4) "LED" refers to inorganic light-emitting diodes, and means a technology which -

(a) light is produced from a solid state device embodying a p-n junction of inorganic material, and (b) the junction emits optical radiation when excited by an electrical current

Section 2: Ban on Incandescent, Halogen and Fluorescent Light Bulbs
(1) The import, manufacture, distribution, and sale of incandescent, halogen, and fluorescent light bulbs shall be prohibited.
(2) No later than three years after the date of assent, the use of incandescent, halogen, and fluorescent light bulbs in all public buildings shall be banned.
Section 3: Exemptions
(1) This Act does not apply to incandescent, halogen or fluorescent light bulbs specifically tested and approved to operate --

(a) in potentially explosive atmospheres, (b) for emergency use, (c) in radiological installations, (d) in or on military or civil defence establishments, equipment, ground vehicles, marine equipment or aircraft, (e) in or on motor vehicles, their trailers and systems, interchangeable towed equipment, components and separate technical units, (f) in or on civil aviation aircraft, (g) in railway vehicle lighting, (h) in medical devices.

(2) For the purposes of this paragraph “specifically tested and approved” means that, in relation to an operating condition or application, the light source or separate control gear—

(a) has been specifically tested for that operating condition or application, in accordance with standards produced by an international standardising body; (b) is accompanied by evidence in the form of a certificate, type approval mark or test report that the product has been specifically approved for that operating condition or application; and (c) is placed on the market specifically for that operating condition or application, as evidenced by (i) the information in the technical documentation; and (ii) except in a case to which sub-paragraph (1)(d) applies, information on the packaging and any advertising or marketing materials.

(3) The government may grant exemptions to this Act for certain areas or industries where alternative options are not yet available or would impose undue financial burden.
(4) This act does not apply to sodium vapour lamps.
Section 4: LED procurement
(1) Subject to Section 3, replacement of light bulbs as required under section 2 shall be of LED-type.
Section 5: Penalties
(1) Any person found guilty of being concerned in the import, manufacture, distribution or sale of any goods prohibited in this Act, shall be liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to a penalty of £20,000 or of three times the value of the goods, whichever is the greater, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months, or to both; or (b) on conviction on indictment, to a penalty of any amount, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years, or to both.

Section 6: Extent, commencement and short title
(1) This Act extends to England only.
(2) This bill shall come into force six months after receiving Royal Assent.
(3) This Act may be cited as the Inefficient Light Bulb Ban Act 2023.
This Bill was written by Ruijormar, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change on behalf of His Majesty’s 32nd Government and was inspired by the real life Ecodesign for Energy-Related Products and Energy Information (Lighting Products) Regulations 2021
Opening Speech:
My Lords,
As of today, close to two thirds of light bulbs sold in the UK are LED lights. These have, on average, a 5 times longer lifetime and 80% less power consumption than the alternatives. A complete shift to LED would reduce carbon emissions by 1.26 million tonnes per year, while also saving consumers an average of 75£ per year on energy bills. I urge the House to support this bill, so that we may turn off the power on inefficient lighting and shine a light on a more sustainable future.
Lords can debate and submit amendments by the 12th of June at 10pm BST.

Bruh the Toyota in dash on my 2019 Camry ducking sucks major big ones. Alexa for Toyota doesn't work, the volume gets turned down automatically, scout gps doesn't show an actual map, I can change the screen/background color, let's see what else. Can't customize anything really and shit takes forever to load and then I have to have the app open on my phone. No remote start.
How can I upgrade my in dash navigation system/stereo?
2019 Camry le hybrid