Not for the corporations that make money off of extorting a basic necessity from poor people! Won’t someone think of the corporations?

My argument was that you can’t claim the moral high ground based on legality alone. I understand that nuance exists in the context, but moral high ground does not come from whether or not it’s legal.

I see what you’re getting at, but I think ‘moral high ground’ might not be the phrase you’re looking for.

Laws and morals are explicitly different. That’s why juries exist, so that a law may be put against the morals of a situation and the morals may prevail if need be.

Breaking the law isn’t necessarily immoral. It’s just illegal. So it isn’t like someone breaking the law is seeking to take the moral high ground in the first place, nor does that mean that someone who only ever follows the law always has the moral high ground. Lawful-evil does exist.

You are a god among men

This is the natural progression of the games-as-a-service model. Any game that relies on online support of some kind just to function will eventually cease like this.

Is it stupid that a vr game about a pet relies on online support to function? Absolutely. But it is what it is. Buy more offline games.

Maybe that’s the point. Unity caves immediately to the big lawyers and says “Sorry guys, we tried. Looks like all you little studios will have to pay up after all. Blame Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft”

I bought my oneplus 10 pro for sub $500 during a sale, and it has usb3.1. It’s last year’s model. You can get a pixel 6 with usb3.1 for less than $400. A Galaxy S21 has usb3.2, less than $500.

That’s almost every major android brand for $500 or less with 3.1 or better. The cheapest you can buy an iPhone 15, the one with usb2.0, is $800. What are you on about?

And soon, the carrier pigeon breeders will start tagging them with tracking chips…

deleted by creator

It’s psyops, nothing more. They perceive it as “playing the west’s game” in a double bid to stoke their own citizens and trip up NATO counterparts by using “western” language against them.

The right in this context is invented: A projection of hard power through the lip service of soft power.

This is a form of slippery slope fallacy. Rich in this context refers to portion of society contributing to pollution on a massively higher scale than even an upper middle class American. How many ‘rich’ Americans regularly fly private jets or take yachts? How many average joes own and operate a cruise line or a refinery?

I think with regards to poorer people in other countries, they’d be on the same page with 99.99% of Americans about who’s considered so rich that they alone pose a threat to global health.

Modus operandi for apple, too. “Get one because everybody has one” is one of the biggest marketing tools they push to sell their tech.

I’m not disagreeing with you. But the trade off is price. When you pay $2.5k more for a phone/tablet/laptop/desktop/watch/tv/speaker setup than you would for all of those things individually with industry standard features, they freakin better work together seamlessly.

Well designed and beautiful are two very subjective words for a discussion about objective differences.

I think that iphones are bland and kind of ugly for their caliber of technology. My last phone was the sage-back pixel 5 and I absolutely loved the design of that thing. The thing is, looks alone don’t constitute superiority.

I’m on the same page as you. It should be noted, however, that the kind of exclusivity you find repulsive actually works as a selling point for apple. It’s like, “Buy an iPhone! All your friends have them and you want to be able to talk to them right?” Peer pressure is a hell of a drug

I’m personally so tired of defending android to iPhone users. At the end of the day, it’s personal preference. IPhone is a walled-garden, curated and closed system that has features that are more uniform and well developed across the whole brand. Android has custom options for a huge variety of things that iPhone can’t match simply due to the nature of android’s open system. Android also tends to have significantly cheaper modern options, but iPhone tends to get OS and security updates much longer.

They both have huge market shares and neither can fill the other’s niche well enough to bump the other out. It’s not a competition, it’s just preference. Is it really such a big deal to point out that teens prefer one over the other? Once the next generation comes to an age of owning phones, we might just find that they find iphones lame and old and swap back to android. That’s kind of how generations tend to work.

Get a different keyboard, bro. Changing your default keyboard has been a thing on Android for like a decade and a half. Even so, most keyboards these days have a shortcut that’s basically ‘long press the wrong prediction -> don’t predict again’

Also, the android settings menu has had a search function for a few years now. You don’t have to know where to look to find most things.

Oh, like a little kiss

The first step is to make it illegal to sideload “illegal” apps. It’s the step that sounds reasonable that less informed people might agree with or at least not protest. The next step is to arbitrarily decide what makes an app illegal. By that point, it’s too late to protest the actual law.

It’s like the law in Florida making the punishment death for sexual assault on a child. That sounds fine until you realize that their legislature has announced their intent to make wearing clothes opposite your gender in public into sexual assault on a child.

Unilateral restrictive laws, without specific stipulations or conditions, even innocent sounding ones like this, are one bad actor away from being changed to a political weapon.

Is it just me, or am I finding that the default sort of “hot” (lemmy.world, not sure about other instances) sorts a little more like “controversial” on reddit does, in that I still see heavily downvoted stuff before mildly voted stuff at all?

Any insight on how that works?