The point is your gained wisdom through experience. That’s what the old people always tried to tell us.
Are you going to solve any of those problems? No. Are you going to be able to join some organization or movement that solves them? Probably no. Will you be able to affect any change that the world will take notice of? Probably not.
But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be a part of it. Not everything that has value makes meaningful changes on the world. There was a French artist, Marcel Duchamps, who once exhibited a urinal. This was clearly not an attempt to move art in any direction, or change public perception, he was kinda just being an asshole. But it had that effect anyway. People still get pissy about it, in the form of, “Is it art?” conversations. Is it? Doesn’t matter. It was a low effort one-off idea that has lasted for decades.
Life isn’t actually a race to see how much you can achieve. And if it was that, then it wouldn’t be measured by money. It wouldn’t be measured by “legacy,” the way we use that word for rich people and sports stars. If it really was a contest, then it would be based on how much good you can manage in the face of constant depressive onslaught.
The world has never seemed like it has a point to most people. But they try their best, and they make meaningful impact on the lives of others, often without intention or even knowledge of having done so .
One of my most influential people has no idea that he did anything. He’s around somewhere, although I haven’t seen him for 20 years. All he did was treat me like a person when I was a dumb teenager (not to say all teenagers are dumb, but I was). It really wasn’t much. But I hadn’t been treated that way before, so to me it’s influential because it was something he did that he didn’t have to do.
That guy is not going to be lying on his deathbed thinking, “At least I was a good influence on scared of planes.” For all I know, he doesn’t remember me. Doesn’t matter. He spread some good into the world. That’s your job. That’s your point.
Just be a better you tomorrow than you are today, as many days as you can manage. Know that no one does that every day. And you’ll live a meaningful life that maybe has influence. Your legacy is you.
OP I would read the above comment a couple times and anytime you’re feeling down. Especially the part about just being a positive influence on those around you, that’s all most of us can hope for. Be the light in the darkness, as they say.
In addition to these methods of finding some peace within, I’d also say that the world is not as bad as it sometimes seems. It’s difficult because “bad news” generates more outrage and clicks. And as you said the world is indeed run by money, so we get it shoved in our faces a lot. But there is always good too. By my estimate, I’d say about 2/3 of people just want to live a life of peace and fellowship with their neighbors, friends, and family. The other third kinda suck. But hey, they scream the loudest and seek out positions where they can abuse power, so we end up hearing about them and being influenced by them more.
The world has problems, no doubt. Climate change is real and it’s going to affect our lives for a number of generations, but it probably won’t be the end of humanity. We’ll adapt, and with any luck the technology that is being worked on today will save us from the worst of it. Species going extinct is sad, but it’s also a normal part of evolution and has happened for millions of years without our help. Our ignorance and negligence has exacerbated the problem and is directly responsible for the extinction of many species, I get it, that sucks. But we’ve also rescued many from the brink of extinction. Most folks aren’t evil, we’re just a little dumb, and greedy.
War, poverty, corruption, again big setbacks to humanity, but, whether it makes you feel any better or not, these things are consistent throughout all of human history. Remember, 1/3 of people kinda suck. However there’s an argument to be made that none of these issues are as bad today as they have been in the past. I think of all of the above as our room for improvement as a species, something to be hopeful for.
It’s important to be mindful of our shortcomings, but don’t beat yourself up by focusing on them all the time. Instead, consider all the good that we’ve accomplished. Medicine, civil rights, scientific discoveries, technology, art in its many forms, advancements for the disabled, we’re coming up on robotic limbs and hands controlled by your mind, that is simply incredible. In nearly every way the quality of life today vastly exceeds what it did even just 150 years ago, and the average person today lives better than kings of yesterday. Air conditioning? Cold, clean drinking water? A hot shower??! If I were shoved back in time and couldn’t ever take a hot shower… well I’d be very very upset.
TLDR; Yea, sometimes we suck pretty hard. But there are people doing good in the world every single day, and we have come a long way already from our worst habits and living conditions. It’s entirely fair to be optimistic about and fight for the future you want to see.
Well said. I would also add that for me, stopping my consumption of news has dramatically increased my happiness. The news outlets only spread negative fear mongering bs. Most of it you can't change. I stopped consuming negative media and its helped a ton.
I did interview with a company in the Twin Towers ~1999. Didn’t take it, wasn’t that interested in continuing to sysadmin. Assuming I’d still have been there a couple years later, that could’ve been the worst day ever.
When I was a teen I worked as a waiter at a dirty smokehouse/bbq place.
One of the kitchen staff there would make sexual comments about me. Say things like “You’re lucky you look good because you’re so stupid.” And would ask what kind of underwear I was wearing.
I told my parents about it, and the advice they gave me was “Deal with it. You need a job.”
Within a month that kitchen staff member had started to grab me and sexually assaulted me.
Use a decentralized SearXNG instance and have it query every search engine that exists on the internet, or host your own of you're really actually worried about privacy, and never look back.
I just tried two of the instances listed with a search for “how to filter mineral spirits”, and they both gave me errors. Both Google and DDG gave me an answer. Is there some trick I’m missing here?
+1 for SearXNG… I run my own instance in docker, and host it through a cloud flare tunnel. I set all my “web browser bars” on all my devices to auto use its address, so I don’t even have to think about it, and all my searches are auto routed through my instance. It’s Great!
I think the features I’m missing are easily adding more engines (haven’t looked much into it), and automatically blacklisting domains from coming up in searches.
That is why I fell in love with shrooms, TBH. Psilocybin has resurrected a curiosity in me that I haven’t felt in years. I just seemed that at 40 years, there aren’t many situations that I haven’t seen or experienced in daily life. As a side benefit, I have learned how to grow mushrooms.
The “midlife crisis” is real. For me, it’s looking for new things to do, cutting out bad habits (drinking) and am trying not to think about how life is actually all downhill from here. I am not going to buy a sports car or anything, but some healthy experimentation with psychedelics does seem to scratch that itch.
I think I rationalized my fear by understanding just how much shit I have seen and I still have another 30 to 40 years left, which is a good thing.
If people who break laws can’t vote, and the government decides what the law is and appoints the judges who enforce those laws, then the government currently in power can decide who gets to vote. Obviously there’s an incentive there to make laws that disproportionately affect those who weren’t going to vote for you, and thereby remove most of your opposition’s votes. That way lies dictatorship.
It also makes it hard to change bad laws. For a random example, there used to be laws against homosexuality. How do you think LGBT acceptance in law would be doing if anyone who was openly gay or trans lost their right to vote? How do you improve access to abortion if anyone who has an abortion, provides an abortion, teaches young people about abortion, or seeks information about abortions becomes unable to vote? How do you change any unjust law if the only people who can vote are those who are unaffected - or indeed, those who benefit from the status quo?
The GOP has been working towards making the US a dictatorship since the 60s. We passed the civil rights act and the right was so appalled that they had to treat people of color like, well, people, that they’ve been coming up with new ways to ensure progress never happens again ever since.
I don’t think a phone where the battery is welded to the body exists.
I know you’re probably being hyperbolic, but sealing a phone’s body construction to make it waterproof is very different from ‘welding’ the battery in.
The point is that virtually every mobile on the market has a non-replaceable battery, and that’s a huge factor driving over-consumption via planned obsolescence.
They do? That sucks. I've only had iPhones and have gotten the battery replaced in both of them. It's increased the lifespan of my phones by a couple of years, but it doesn't double it. I usually start to sick of my hardware after about 5 years.
Your iPhone is the same and requires you to take it to a service center and pay someone else to do something that we’d been doing ourselves in 5 seconds for the previous 30 years.
The person you’re replying to is trying to push the narrative that modern smartphones (iPhones in particular) have bodies that are sealed with adhesive in order to force people to upgrade sooner, instead of to provide waterproofing/dustproofing.
That claim makes no sense in light of how Apple meaningfully supports phones for significantly longer than any other major OEM and goes to great lengths to preserve the usability of older devices. That doesn’t deter people from making that claim because they’d much rather believe apple bad, and other phone manufacturers bad because they’re trying to copy apple.
Inb4 but x phone from 2016 had a removable backplate and was “waterproof,” or but y phone with 0.01% market share is serviceable with a spudger and is “waterproof”.
Apple literally admitted it engages in planned obsolescence practices and has been fined in multiple jurisdictions for doing so.
Not sure why you feel the need to support shady business practices. There are designs that achieve waterproofing/dustproofing while still enabling replaceability. The obvious question then is why would the majority of manufacturers choose a design approach which restricts replaceability?
Gosh, that narrative is one of the most pea-brained things that I’ve seen circulating on the internet in my lifetime.
As the link you provided clearly states, apple was fined for not disclosing to users that iOS was underclicking the CPUs on phones that had batteries that were too degraded to provide the required power consistently under heavy load.
Anyone who used an Android phone from that era can tell you about how a >12 month old phone would start randomly powering off between 10% and 30% remaining charge. When a lithium ion battery degrades, it’s no longer able to output its original nominal voltage in a sustained way. Instead, I’ll output the requested voltage, then suddenly the voltage will drop. When the CPU in an older phone was under heavy load, it would put heavy load on the battery, and the battery would fail to provide consistent voltage, which would cause the phone to power off.
On the Android side of things, we could try to replace the battery if we knew that was the issue, but most people would just feel pressured to buy a new phone.
The obvious solution to that problem is just to undervolt the phone’s CPU if the battery isn’t capable of providing consistent peak voltage. Doing this is objectively the opposite of planned obsolescence, it lets people use older phones reliably for longer.
Ironically, a small minority of weirdos are so desperate to hate Apple that they spun a feature that’s obviously intended to increase the longevity of an iPhone into an entire narrative about apple slowing your phone down to get you to buy another one. Which doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, because not undervolting the CPU in a phone where the battery can’t provide consistent peak voltage is way more likely to push people to want to replace it.
I hate consumerism and mega corporations way more than most, and I’m definitely not suggesting that Apple is any kind of moral or ethical company. They’re a company that exists to maximize profits at the expense of anything else, on the backs of exploited workers.
But when the most widespread complaints about a company are things that make the complainers look like idiots who are desperately searching for something to complain about regardless of how disconnected from reality it is, it makes it seem like there aren’t any legitimate complaints about the company. If I were wearing my tinfoil hat, I’d be inclined to speculate about whether that’s actually intentional. The ‘Apple is slowing down my phone to make me buy a new battery’ narrative is so ridiculous that I can almost believe that Apple’s behind it to draw attention away from valid criticisms.
Gaskets, o-rings, and screws exist. The waterproof argument is a weak one that doesn’t hold water. There’s no reason why it needs to be glued together and past phones have had waterproofing with a removable back and replaceable battery.
Yeah I’m sure you’re more informed of the engineering trade-offs with regard to smartphone manufacturing than literally every major smartphone manufacturer.
Of course they don’t, I’m not saying anything about what phone companies communicate, I’m talking about what they do.
The smartphone market is extremely competitive, they are very highly motivated to find the most efficient way to engineer a device that maximizes consumers’ purchasing preferences.
A world class product team produces a design that matches customers’ preferences according to world class market research. World class engineers figure out how to maximize features that satisfy those preferences. That virtually always involves trade-offs.
When one company does a better job of maximizing features that match consumer demands, their market share goes up.
When a company focuses on maximizing features that a vocal minority of users want, they struggle to move units.
It’s not some conspiracy to provide inferior products, it’s just capitalism being capitalism. Companies make what people will buy.
Marketers do not just passively give users what they already want. They also manipulate what users want. This isn’t some conspiracy theory, the marketing discipline is quite open about this. When something is in the interest of the company making more profit, they convince users that it is in their own interest. This is just capitalism being capitalism. Not being able to easily replace your battery is as clear an example of such a thing as you could ask for.
Except it’s not, you just live in an echo chamber where people endlessly repeat the misconception that the average consumer as any interest in replacing their own battery. They don’t. Marketers aren’t manipulating millions of people into thinking they don’t, either.
If companies like Apple wanted to force people to upgrade, all they would have to do is stoop to the level of the competition by not offering 6 years of OS upgrades on new phones. Or they could not offer first-party, warrantied battery replacements for ~90 dollars. Honestly, apple constantly goes out of their way to make their devices last longer than the competition, and still the bigbrains on Internet forums walk around with their heads in the sand.
You go ahead and do you homie, nobody is going to be able to change your mind from something you’re so desperate to believe.
Implying manufacturers want us to be able to repair our devices more easily yet can’t design them that way because of some impossible feat of engineering required to add an o-ring and some screws? Give me a break dude. None of this is groundbreaking territory.
Manufacturers want to give consumers a device that meets consumers’ purchasing requirements better than their competitors’ products do.
They only want us to be able to repair our phones inasmuch as consumers will buy more easily repairable phones instead of more tightly sealed phones, which is absolutely not the case. Sealed phones consistently sell waaay more than non-sealed phones, likely because they can be slightly thinner with marginally larger batteries. Every once in a while an OEM will release a phone that has a hot-swappable battery, but nobody outside of niche online electronics communities cares.
What I’m debating is the idea that there’s some nefarious conspiracy to withhold hot-swappable batteries from consumers to force them to upgrade their phones. That’s ridiculous. OEMs make sealed phones instead of easily disassemblable phones because consumers buy sealed phones instead of disassemblable ones when given the choice.
And it’s not that hard to figure out why, honestly. Personally, I would rather take my phone to an Apple Store and have them swap the battery for what I can be certain is an OEM replacement for $90 than spend $50 on eBay on a probably fake battery, take time out of my day to swap it myself, and assume the liability in the event of an improper seal. And consumer purchasing patterns show that I’m in the company of the majority of phone buyers in the US.
Sealed phones consistently sell waaay more than non-sealed phones
OEMs make sealed phones instead of easily disassemblable phones because consumers buy sealed phones instead of disassemblable ones when given the choice.
Give some examples of the phones you’re referring to here because I’d bet you’re referring to recent phones like the XCover Pro which use ancient hardware that appeals to nobody.
For 30 years, manufacturers sold phones with replaceable batteries and consumers gobbled them all up with nobody demanding that they instead glue phones together.
You claim phones are thinner when glued yet my Note 4 from 2014 is thinner than my current Galaxy S21 Ultra even though the former had a removable back and replacable battery.
The reason why they’ve all gone to sealed phones is because they ran out of innovative ideas years ago with the yearly release cycle and have now resorted to raising revenue by making phones harder to repair yourself, removing accessories, locking down firmware, and building them with more fragile materials. It’s the same enshittification that we’re now seeing in social media and streaming services. Don’t fall for the marketing propaganda that these companies are pushing because it’s all bullshit.
My guy, you’ve got absolutely no idea what you’re talking about and it’s embarrassing.
Manufacturers used to sell phones that you had to have plugged into the wall at your house, and consumers gobbled them up. The market has innovated, and now consumers expect something different. How is “consumers used to buy x when it was all that was available so obviously they must prefer it over y” anywhere close to a rational argument?
My claim was that phones are thinner with bigger batteries. Your s21 ultra has a 5000 mAh battery, the note 4 had 3200 mAh battery. The s21 ultra has a much bigger battery in a smaller footprint.
The smartphone market is insanely competitive, if any manufacturer were deliberately making their phones worse, other manufacturers would be capitalizing on that and taking their market share. Phones are easier to repair today than they were 3-5 years ago, you can check out the ifixit repairability scores if you want. Phone firmware is no more locked down now than it has been in the past, unless you’re specifically talking about how much worst modern pixels are than they and nexus’s were in the past. I don’t know about Androids since 2020, since that’s when I switched, but the steel bezels and flat glass on iPhones since the 12 pro make them FAR more durable than any phone I’ve used. Haven’t had my phone in a case for 3 years, and there have been a handful of times it’s fallen out of my pocket while getting into my truck. The stainless bezel doesn’t deform like aluminum, so side impacts aren’t transferred to the glass. Countless drop tests corroborate this.
You think phones are getting worse because you want to think that, despite the objective reality. You personally want a feature set that’s not widely popular, and you’re mad about it. Which I actually totally get.
So your argument is that consumers expect their batteries to be glued inside the phone because it’s “something different?” That doesn’t make much sense.
How is “consumers used to buy x when it was all that was available so obviously they must prefer it over y” anywhere close to a rational argument?
That’s the argument you made in your previous comment, that people are buying up phones with sealed batteries because that’s what they want even though that’s the only option available. I’m still waiting for your examples of two comparable phones being sold at the same time, one with a sealed battery and one without and the sealed phone selling better. I suppose you skipped over that because it’s never happened.
The s21 ultra has a much bigger battery in a smaller footprint.
You claimed that phones are thinner now because they’re sealed. The S21 Ultra is larger than the Note 4 in every dimension. It has a larger footprint to accommodate the larger battery.
If any manufacturer were deliberately making their phones worse, other manufacturers would be capitalizing on that and taking their market share.
Based on what? There is barely any competition these days. Two companies control a majority of the market.
Phones are easier to repair today than they were 3-5 years ago
So what? Phones were much easier to repair 5+ years ago. Why did you choose 2018 as your cutoff when smartphones existed for an entire decade prior to that?
Phone firmware is no more locked down now than it has been in the past
False. Most phones can’t be rooted these days when it used to be a common thing.
the steel bezels and flat glass on iPhones since the 12 pro make them FAR more durable than any phone I’ve used.
Well based on your prior comments, I’m assuming you’re fairly young and didn’t have a smartphone prior to sometime around 2018. I’ve had smartphones since the original Android on the HTC G1 and it wasn’t until getting my S21 Ultra that I’ve had to buy a case since Samsung and Apple decided to encase their phones in glass. I’d hate to break it to you but glass is not in fact a durable substance. I still have my 9 year old plastic and aluminum Note 4 running with zero damage and it never once lived in a case and has been dropped hard enough to leave gouges in the aluminum. That isn’t possible with glass encased phones regardless of how much you want it to be true. Deformed aluminum was an issue with the iPhone because they cheaped out on the materials and made them so thin that you could fold the phone in half with your fingers.
I think smartphones are getting worse because I’ve been using them for 16 years and can tell the difference. I’m sure if all you use your phone for is checking social media and snapping photos of your lunch for Instagram, you wouldn’t notice the difference, but some of us actually want more out of a $1500 computer.
Consumers used to expect their phones to be attached to the wall with a wire, the market innovated, now their expectations are different.
… which is exactly what I just said, but you’re apparently dead set on interpreting every bit of information you run into in a way that supports your worldview, which honestly is consistent with your whole argument here.
You presumably have access to the internet, you’re capable of doing 10 minutes of research for yourself to find the numerous phones released in the past 5 years that have easily serviceable batteries. I could not care less if you do so or not. I’ve had this exact conversation half a dozen times, I already know what that list will look like. If you want to know what the list looks like, you can do the work yourself, I don’t care either way.
The s21 ultra has more mAh per cubic mm of phone, which is a more explicit way to say more battery in a smaller size. Regardless of that, the fact that you’re resorting to pedantry shows me that you know that you can’t respond to my point in a meaningful way. I claimed that sealing smartphone internals allows manufacturers to fit larger batteries in smaller form factors, the fact that a phone with a 30% larger battery is 5% bigger than another phone isn’t a refutation if that.
There’s plenty of competition globally, but less so in the US. Regardless, there was a ton of competition when smartphones first started having sealed internals. Interestingly, the two manufacturers that leaned the hardest into sealing the biggest possible battery in the smallest possible footprint are the two manufacturers that currently dominate the market, which is another point against you.
5 years was an arbitrary number highlighting the fact that manufactures are trying to make phones more repairable within the same dimensional constraints, which would not be the case if they had an agenda to force people to upgrade by making phones less repairable. Again, your only response to my argument is pedantry.
And finally, thanks for yet another wildly off-base assumption. I’m a 32 year old SWE who works in mobile app development. I’ve had probably a dozen android phones over the past 15 years. I could enthrall you with anecdotes about how much more durable a modern iPhone is than any flagship android phone that’s been made, but I don’t have to. There are plenty of reasonably high quality drop tests that paint an objective picture.
Smartphones are immeasurably better than they were in the past. They’re faster, have multiple days of battery life, have incredible displays, and vastly better software.
I am certain that you don’t use smartphones in any way that’s more demanding than the way I use smartphones, so you can take that whole condescending monologue and shove it right back where it came from.
They’ve been a “not user serviceable” component since before phones got water proofing.
Additionally plenty of things can be disassembled with screws and such, that are waterproof… Watches come to mind.
The fact that they’re making it impossible for we the people and owners of the products, to change the battery isn’t a technological limitation, nor a practical one. They did it so people will be forced to seek help to get a new battery, at which time, the vendor/carrier/whomever, can simply upsell the end user.
They did it to sell more phones. If you believe anything other than that, I have some land in Alaska to sell you.
Yeah, of course they did it to sell more phones. Phone OEMs sell more units when the units are as compact and water/dust proof as possible. Sealing phones with adhesive maximizes both of those metrics, with virtually no (non-hypothetical) trade-off to the vast majority of users.
Maximizing profits by maximizing the characteristics of smartphones that customers care about is not only a perfect explanation for sealed internals, but it’s the only explanation that stands up to any amount of critical thinking.
The “they want to force you to upgrade” narrative is popular because people want to believe it. I mean, obviously they want you to upgrade, but they also know that consumers are more likely to buy their products over competitors’ if the product has a reputation for longevity. Which is why OEMs like Apple support their devices for as long as they do, and even tailor software to provide a consistent experience with a degraded battery. If they wanted to plan for there devices to become unusable after a certain time, it would be a lot more straightforward for them to just stop doing the things they’re doing to make sure devices are usable for 5+ years.
The literal second sentence of my comment clearly demonstrates that I understand the point that the other commenter was making, that I’m aware that they’re being hyperbolic, and gives a direct response to the point being made.
If you can’t manage reading past the first dozen words of a comment, maybe you’d be better served by keeping your reply to yourself.
Luckily for us Americans, the Europeans have their head on straight and can force companies to fix this by the end of the decade. So that’ll be nice at least
Working in a financial call centre, a certain type of person considered us to have stolen their money if they sent us an funds for an investment and refused to send anti-money laundering documents with it, because we also couldn’t return the money without them. Sorry, buddy.
That honestly should be the law. If you can’t accept it without documentation, you should be required to return it. Of course you can also report it, but that’s separate.
No, since people can just wire you money. Then, if you return it, they can attempt to use that transaction to prove dirty money is clean. If it is clean in the first place, they should be able to provide documentation.
I’m not seeing how that proves the transaction is clean.
If I put money in a bank account, then transfer it to another account, then back to the same one, the transfer back doesn’t obfuscate anything. If it’s not caught on the initial deposit in the banking system, then I’m not seeing how any subsequent transactions matter.
OK, well I disagree that it ‘doesn’t obfuscate anything’. Additional transactions are in a launder’s interest.
But also consider that If unknown monies can just be returned, then a launderer can keep trying, with multiple institutions in multiple ways, until they are successful in investing it.
Speaking for the UK, that’s every financial institution. The whole point is that everyone is required to complete checks to make sure you are who you say you are, if you refuse them then that is an indicator of money laundering. Even just receiving and returning money helps a money launderer establish a paper trail and assists in layering to legitimise the money they gave you. That’s a big no-no, obviously, so it can’t simply be returned without risking significant legal implications from the regulator. All expectations are set up front on this when beginning transactions.
I understand that’s the law as it currently is. I’m saying that it shouldn’t result in any legal ramifications.
It seems they weren’t well setup, if they were then he wouldn’t have gotten to the point that he wired money before filling the required paperwork out.
Okay, do you work in the UK financial services industry, or an associated regulatory body? Because this was an infrequent circumstance that came as a result of the inattentiveness and belligerence of specific customers. There’s no industry wide issue and this was whilst working for one of the largest investment platforms in the UK.
If you don’t like how things work, then that’s fine, but it was working as intended and would have been no issue if the client had just followed the required, and explained, process. I feel it goes without saying that it is very important to maintain anti-money laundering processes in our financial systems, both legally and conceptually.
I’m not saying it’s a common issue. I’m saying that something like this should never occur.
I’m also not saying that I don’t value anti money laundering process. I agree those are very important.
However, I also think it’s even more important that people aren’t deprived of their money without due process. If you can’t accept it, because they’re not proving the required evidence then you should be required to return it unless there’s more to it. In order to keep the money, there needs to be some form of evidence showing money laundering not just an absence of evidence altogether.
If you receive money without verification and return it no questions asked, then you are opening yourself up as an avenue by which people can launder money. Every receipt and retransfer of that money legitimises that money further and makes you party to the crime. The money is in limbo and can be returned as soon as the regulatory needs are met, but to do otherwise just voids the whole process.
At this point they are depriving themselves of the money by refusing to verify themselves, it’s a basic identify and address check. This is an investment company, they weren’t sending us their rent money, they wanted to invest it. They were just pissed that we expected them to follow the same process that every client needs to follow when investing.
It doesn’t void the whole process. It may very slightly increase the degree to which it’s easier to launder money (I’m not convinced on that aspect since the money already originated from within the banking system).
Rather it prioritizes people’s right to their own property.
What you’re saying makes sense to me if you’re talking about a deposit of cash that was mailed. It doesn’t make sense to me for a wire or electronic transfer.
I feel like when I was younger and phone tech was changing a lot in the early days of the iOS and Android the difference even 1 year made was sometimes huge. Nowadays it’s much more incremental. A slight processor boost here, a couple GB of Ram there. I think a large part as to why that is is two things.
One, the tech has stagnated to some degree. Innovation doesn’t exactly sell a phone to regular non tech folks, a stable “don’t have to think about it” experience is what most people are after.
Two, a lot more issues with the cell phone platform are solved with software rather than throwing around more powerful hardware.
All that being said when I was younger I loved the idea of bleeding edge tech in my pocket, I upgraded all the time. The appeal was more customization at a lesser cost to performance, I wanted all the bells and whistles and less of the jank that came with it. I’m a little older now and lean much more towards the “give me something that works and doesn’t crash for the 10 minutes I have to look at my phone” club.
For those that upgrade to the latest iPhone/Pixel every year no matter what, I chalk that up to lots of expendable funds. It doesn’t appeal to me any more but I can also recognize that there are probably plenty of people out there now, like I was 10 years ago, so it could also be a general interest in the tech and how the bleeding edge keeps pushing for faster, more efficient technology.
While I fell into a pattern where I intend to upgrade every 2 years maybe 5 or 6 years ago, I’ve noticed in that same time frame that both the cost of new devices has gone up significantly and the durability of those devices has dropped.
I’m very easy on my phones. They spend a vast majority of their time on my desk, or plugged into my car. I’m old and boring enough that “going out” involves sitting down at a table at a nice dinner with friends and then going home. That said, the battery life on my phones starts to degrade after about a year. Various flaws start to creep up in the device. I’ve already had to replace the screen on my Pixel 7 Pro once – though, to be fair, it took a tumble from the couch onto a hardwood floor, but even that, really, shouldn’t turn the screen non-functional.
It’s disappointing to see that planned obsolescence rearing its head.
Pixels have extremely thin screens, apparently. I tried to get the battery replaced on an otherwise perfectly functioning Pixel a few years ago, but it ended up being cost prohibitive because replacing the battery also required replacing the screen which was “potato chip thin” according to the repair guy, and it was almost impossible to swap the battery without breaking it.
Has never bothered me and I do it myself sometimes. I don’t make generic “thank you” type comments usually, I just upvote people instead. So I won’t reply unless I actually have something worth saying. Usually I will have something to say, but not always.
Also depends how many replies. If I ask a question and one person provides the answer, I’ll say something. If I start a thread and it takes off though, I’ll just observe. And I think most people are that way, just because a popular thread can be a little overwhelming.
Interesting to hear your side of it. I’ve just responded to a few posts in a row that responded zero times, but ran off to post elsewhere. People worked hard in them so its worth an opinion or two.
I know it can be a bit awkward too, to respond after so much is said from so many people.
Getting zero upvotes after writing a ton of text is a bit… not fun.
I got invested in a thread from a guy being eaten alive by mosquitoes and posted a joke, but then realised i didn’t read it well and he seemed serious, so i replied properly. He ended up with a ton of replies and didn’t say a word lol. Not saying there can’t be valid reasons like going to bed or ducking out to the shops in a fit of rage to get equipment for the mosquitocaplyse. Seeing it happen more than in one post is the part that’s really getting me curious now.
asklemmy
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.