I love the Sony phones. If they sold the Xperia 5 V in my market (or even if the global version was compatible with my carrier’s G5 bands . . . ) I would probably buy it in a second. They seem to be deliberately betting on only releasing the 1 V in some wealthier markets though (likely because the 5 V would undercut demand) – but I refuse to spend 1 V prices with only a couple years of guaranteed updates.
Sony phones though are by far my favourite on the market these days, and it’s a shame that they aren’t more popular (or have enough developer interest to have LineageOS support).
An app called aodNotify brings this back for you if you don’t have an iPhone. May take a little tweaking to get everything how you want but it’s very customizable
I had an always on display that illuminated the outside of the display when I received a notification but otherwise stayed off, and I’m on iPhone, so I can’t imagine you don’t have more options on android than I did.
Wait they took that away? I have an S9 and I rely on this to know whos messaging me. Blue is textra, purple is whatsapp, white is insta, green is signal.
I had an S8 a couple years back and upgraded to an S10 when it first came out. The notification light went away and it was a huge bummer. I now have a Pixel 7 and it doesn’t have it either, so I’ve learned to live without it.
Agreed. Interestingly the English canal tunnel would be among the last human made structures left after everything else is gone. That and the faces on Mount Rushmore. Old steel bridges would last for pretty long too as they are extremely overbuilt. Back then they really didn’t have ways to calculate how strong they need to be so they just made everything way beefier than necessary.
If you have Paramount+, don’t mind doing a free trial, or like to sail the seven seas, you can watch The Reagans documentary series. Another documentary that gives you some insight into the type of people they were is the Rock Hudson one. The TL;DR on that one is that they had been good friends for decades, especially Nancy, and the moment it came out that he had AIDS, they pretended he had never existed.
Ronald was basically an idiot but Nancy was a truly foul human being.
Doing that for Trademark law is why they didn’t bother lobbying for longer copyright this time. They could protect their Mouse trademark without relying on Steamboat Willy like they did before.
Actually SCOTUS ruled that extending the copyright pulls it out of public domain in Golan v Holder. Congress passed a law that put some literary and musical works back into copyright from the public domain. A case was brought by some educators and musicians that the removal of these works from the public domain infri get on their free speech, but the Court disagreed 6-2.
Well, I can’t kill myself until my cat dies because he doesn’t like other people and I don’t want him to have a sad life. Some people would consider that a good thing.
Imagine someone telling you “you have to separate the product from the corporation. Yes, they lobby to permit slave labour and are directly funding the genocide in Palestine, but they make one fine chicken sandwich - and if you don’t put down your silly objections to focus on that, you have failed as a human being”.
Fuck that, fuck everything about that.
Art is political. Fiction doubly so. You cannot and should not try to rip art free from its cultural context, because that context is the perspective that gives it meaning in the first place.
And extra-splintery fuck the idea that the onus is on the audience to sweep everything under the carpet for horrible people.
We’re in no danger of running out of art. We have an unlimited supply of artists just waiting for a break in the canopy to sprout up and grow into something new and exciting. If a handful of toxic assholes get canceled despite being popular, then so much the better.
I disagree. You can both admit that the company makes one damn fine chicken sandwich and still not buy it because they support slave labour. Them supporting slave labour doesn’t make it a bad chicken sandwich, just as them making a damn good chicken sandwich doesn’t stop them from supporting slave labour. It’s the method that’s important, not the reason itself.
That's the point though, that some people will use the 'but chicken sandwich is good' as a justification to overlook the other problems and still buy them. My ex and Hobby Lobby, for instance - she'd want to go there and shop for paints because they 'might have a sale', and I was just uh, no? Fuck Hobby Lobby.
First up, fandom is free advertising; fuck them I’m not promoting their product for them, even if I don’t buy it.
But more than that, it’s sending a message that the behaviour is something we’re willing to condone, that we stand with the abuser rather than their victims.
Imagine telling a sexual assault survivor to just lie back and enjoy the masterful comic stylings of Bill Cosby, or at least to shut up and let you enjoy it, because they’re ruining the funny.
Would that person have reason to consider you a friend or ally after that?
The Harry Potter IP, for instance, is just a giant anti-trans flag now, and the people who wave it around are picking a side. They can’t pretend they’re not; pinning the logo to their chest is explicitly endorsing the author’s views, and spitting in the face of every trans person in their life.
I think you missed their point. They explicitly said that you can at something is a good product and just not buy it because fuck that company. Same point with artists, they can be talented shitbags, we avoid them for the shitbag part, no other reason.
Every work has the author’s stank all over it, it can’t not. It’s seen through their eyes and spoken through their lips (or fingers I guess).
Once you know what it is, it will - and should - colour your perception. If it turns out to be something toxic, then you’re allowed to be viscerally repelled by it. It’s okay. It’s not intellectual dishonesty to have an emotional-based opinion on art ffs.
Now if you let your opinions on engineering get affected by emotion, that’d be another matter. When deciding whether a bridge is safe to carry traffic, you absolutely should not let your personal feelings about the architect factor into the decision.
But this is art we’re talking about. Entertainment. Works designed specifically for emotional impact, with no value outside of that. How you feel about them is the only valid criterion.
If a work squicks you out because the author is a piece of shit, that’s a genuine, valid and authentic opinion - it’s pretending otherwise that would be dishonest.
And in my experience, the ones shouting the loudest about the intellectual integrity angle tend to be fanbois with a huge emotional attachment to the work from their adolescence. Buncha simps, in other words.
Which fine, feelings are valid - but they should damn well own it. If nostalgia > victims, then have the balls to just say it, don’t try to well-ackchewally it into some lofty principle, because it isn’t.
I am a fat guy, there sandwich is only marginally better than the lowest end stuff, any fast casual local place is going to do it better. You can trust a fat man about fried meat.
Right except we can’t apply this evenly. You can go right now to any big museum, see elegant wood carvings from like 800 years ago, and we know nothing about the artist except his name. How do you know he wasn’t a murdering psychopath? You don’t. What you do know is Rowling said some shit on Twitter. We are holding more modern work to a higher standard compared to older work simply because we can document the lives of modern artists better. If you can’t enforce a moral principle with anything resembling consistent application I question how good it is.
A good moral principle is ‘don’t do things that needlessly harm people’, but unintended consequences are everywhere. By delaying a passerby two seconds while you give a homeless guy $5, you might end up causing them to get hit by a garbage truck that would otherwise have missed them.
You can’t enforce the principle consistently, but that doesn’t make it worthless; you give it a good-faith, best-effort go, and that’s all you can do. If your best efforts turn out to be disastrous, that’s shitty, but life’s unfair like that.
Also, whatever else was going on with the person 800 years ago, JK is right now causing ongoing harm in her relentless campaign of hatred for trans people. Waving her IP around is promoting her cause, and so harming more people, right now.
If nobody knows whether the 800-years-ago guy was a piece of shit or not, then promoting their work isn’t supporting some piece-of-shit cause and harming people.
As for chicken sandwiches - without explaining why you think my analogy was inapt, calling it bullshit is no more of a slam-dunk rebuttal than if I called you a poopoohead.
Entity X makes product Y and does shitty horrible thing Z. By being a product-Y fanboi and promoting Y all over the internet, you’re expressing approval for X and condoning Z (at least enough to cut them slack for it).
What difference does it make whether Y is a media IP or a food product?
Don’t muddy the water: you were talking specifically about chick-fil-A, even though I was using it as a generic example of a product people might get attached to. The ‘separate the art from the artist’ crowd would have you ignore any unpleasantness on the part of the producer, so long as the product is enjoyable in isolation - and hold it a moral failing not to do so.
And your entire point was that you couldn’t be consistent because you werne’t all-knowing; not knowing the character of your 800-year-old artist is no different in this instance from not knowing the future: to perfectly apply the principle would require full knowledge of every situation where it could possibly apply (which is of course impossible). This does not, I contend, render the principle, or attempts to apply it as consistently as your knowledge allows, worthless.
It allowed me to actually sort through all of my mental health problems and confront myself on who I was and who I wanted to be
Not to mention how much my physical health has improved
It was honestly the hardest thing I’ve done as well given that I started drinking when I was 12.
I’ve been sober now for 6 years
Edit: In 6 years it will go from “the longest I’ve been sober since I started drinking” to “The longest stretch of time I’ve been sober in my whole life”
Hey congratulations! Addiction is like an onion: it has so many layers! You’ll likely shed a tear or two once you decide to cut it open, but once diced and sauteed (i.e. overcome your addiction), it will add so much flavor to life!
Getting sober is my pick too. Im just over a year in from my last drink. Ive excelled at work, had 3 raises, finished my degree, made quality new friends, met a beautiful woman who is now my best friend, took a chance and kissed her one night, and she kissed back. Life is great.
Just like they’ve always done, they’ll throw a couple of their own to the wolves to distract the pitchfork weilding townsfolk (that’s us) just long enough for us to stick our heads back down into our smartphones and gadgets and forget the entire business.
Just like the sacrificed Weinstein and Spacey to our public ire and then quietly stayed under the radar long enough to forget how many other celebrities are doing the same thing.
The powerful stay powerful by distraction and subterfuge. This will be no different.
asklemmy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.