I think that’s the surface level, rational reading, but I think the realistic reading is it was simply a kickback to fortune 500 companies that got these politicians elected. Haven’t we already funded at least one factory that ended up being smoke and mirrors?

I mean I don’t have a laundry list but like:

• all day battery, doesn’t seem Fairphone hits this exactly. When I’m vacationing I’m using my phone constantly to map and translate and record so it’s the single biggest thing I want in a phone.
• a great camera, until I get a standalone shooter this is what I got. This is a great argument for a Fairphone because it’s on the cheaper side.
• a large screen, ideally the largest I can possibly get. I joke that I won’t be happy until I can unfold a 72 inch OLED from my pocket. So bright, colorful, OLED, fast refresh and variable refresh, and big.
• wireless charging. I really like the idea of the pixel snap feature. That would be a big selling point for me.
• great processor. I don’t play phone games a ton but my current phone turns into a toaster on an idle game and that’s unacceptable. Would like to not worry about performance.
• USB C, think everything has this these days.
• dual speakers, I listen to things when cooking so good speakers are actually nice. All the casting that used to be so easy seems like it’s gotten harder these days.
• if someone other than apple would offer the lidar camera setup they’ve got, or whatever allows them to get a good topographical scan that would be a big selling point.

Again, not really exhaustive, but I’d consider myself a pretty normal consumer with a larger budget and a recognition that I use my phone more than any other device in my life so I might as well make it good.

Fair phone is compelling, especially compared to getting an expensive folding phone, but I’m not sold yet. You guys have definitely given me something to think about though as my screen continues to dim.

Screen is dying, can’t wait for their supposed deal in 26/27 that sounds exciting.

They could have also reread my original message. They could have also commented something meaningful even with the wrong initial reading. They could have asked for clarification, additional context, or anything else useful.

Instead their comment was… Idk how I would describe it. An attempt to insult? An unhelpful observation?

Its the opposite of being an ally, of helping people break from their chains, to misread their position and then write something snarky. Idk, I think people who make online spaces exhausting or worse deserve a few more insults in their life. Especially if they’re not being helpful.

That’s great to hear! Google is a PoS for doing that.

It’s comments like this that make me worried about literacy rates and reading comprehension.

I want to replace my Pixel with a cutting edge phone that is user friendly, repairable, highly private, has all the features I like, and whose company is owned by its workers and not evil.

That phone doesn’t exist.

So now we talk priorities. With Google looking to close down android, I want something more open than stock android. My options are very limited. Graphene only works on the pixel line and not even the newest pixels, which are very underwhelming, so that’s not a great fit. LineageOS doesn’t seem to support any new phones albeit I didn’t cross reference every phone. The nothing phone, and every other competitor, seems lackluster as well.

So I’ve resigned to settling for any phone that’s cutting edge. If this is going to hopefully be my last mega evil corpo phone, I’ve been flirting with going with multiple screens because I doubt in 3 years there will be a non-corpo folding phone option if the normal slabs are still struggling. Samsung only “comes to mind”, and this might surprise or confound you, because we’re commenting on a thread about a Samsung phone.

If anyone has better recommendations for a last corpo phone out now or on the horizon, I’m all ears. And if someone wants to try and convince me there’s a great phone out there that can run a non-stock OS and still be a largely enjoyable experience I’m also ready to be wow’ed. But I’ve looked around a bit and failed to find anything.

I mean I’d love to buddy. When someone releases a phone with all the modern features I want and the best processor and a repairable battery (or any other of the consumer friendly practices we all want) I’ll buy it. But don’t act like I’m choosing to not get the ideal phone when it doesn’t exist. It’s compromises everywhere.

No word on if it’s coming to the EU :(

My pixel 6 is dying and I’d like to get something for graphene or another less monopolized distro but there’s no support for phones released this year as far as I can tell from most distros so I’m looking for one more normal phone until hopefully that ecosystem is better off.

Even the new pixels look weak from several angles It was hard to get want them after all the reviews came in.

I understand you might believe you’re simply explaining why, but based on specifically the sentence I quoted in my last comment it reads like you are explicitly justifying their actions. Again, your intent my have been completely different and I believe you when you say it was. But I would expect people to react to your writing as it was written, not as it was intended.

I’m sorry you’re getting as much flak as you are. Definitely not warranted based on the top comment alone, but I was only responding to a different commenter to explain my perspective as to why it was happening.

Again, with evil on the rise having opinions and stances are important. You didn’t intend to relay either of those things, but I at least think you did (and I would water most of your downvoters did too). We’re all learning how to communicate effectively online. Sorry this spiraled out of control. Idk what /u/iii is on about, but I’m at least trying to contribute to the meta conversation about communicating on Lemmy better (not that anyone has to, this is supposed to be a hobby or fun or what have you, no one has to get better at communicating online).

“The EU needed to either loosen up too or accept this entire sector of information tech being foreign-controlled, which would have its own major privacy and security problems.”

This is the original commenter justifying why the EU is attempting to loosen their privacy laws. This is not factual, this is not an objective truth, this is one person’s perspective about why the EU is doing what they’re doing and in a way that defends their position.

If they had said, “Maybe the EU felt the need to… In fear of this entire sector…” That would have revealed that statement to be a less objective, more theoretical opinion - which is what it is. But they didn’t. They wrote it as a fact, defending their decision as if A) that was true B) that was the reason instead of a handful of reasons C) it was the only path forward.

I think if you’re reading that statement by the original commenter in any other way, we’re at least misaligned on what they’re saying. I would argue that statement plainly reads as defending their actions by guessing (even if reasonable or intelligently) as to their motives.

I think you’re throwing around tribal like a buzzword you recently became aware of. I like people having opinions on random comment based forums online. I don’t like when people don’t add to the conversation and yet comment anyway, allowing for wasteful conversations like this to take place. The original commenter explained a thing no one asked to be explained at best and defended a perspective that I think is objectively short sighted at worst. I have no problem with the first and I don’t like the second but also am happy to talk to people who hold those opinions if they’re looking for a safe place to discuss and debate them.

Now that’s a couple ways of interpretting what the original commenter said, both of which I think are justifiable although I lean obviously to one way. Does that read like I’m simplifying the problem reductively? Does that read like I’m asking people to throw stones at the commenter? Has anything I’ve written even read like I’m forming a group of like minded people, virtue signaling, and running the other person out of town?

I would say no, obviously not. You seem frustrated at online discourse, or maybe you’re just pro-these-actions and can’t separate them from this conversation. You wanna talk about the actions of the EU, that’s cool. You wanna talk about one random person’s perspective as to why the original commenter got downvotes, that’s cool. You want to acuse me of being simple, when I’m clearly responding to what the person wrote and only what the person wrote (both the first commenter and the person I responded to), that seems like a waste of time. It’s surely not adding anything to the conversation for me at least.

But here we are.

I mean, I like when I ask someone to explain a problem and then do. I don’t personally like it when someone explains a problem that’s pretty obvious.

My point is the original commenter, by explaining something no one asked to be explained, sort of gave away their opinion with their explanation. Actually, on second read it’s far more explicit - they’re defending why the change was made, not just explaining what happened. The downvotes were warranted (if you use downvotes as “this is a bad opinion, perspective, or contribution” which is debatably not their purpose).

But the reality is even in describing a problem you’re coloring reality with your perspective. There are facts, things everyone can agree on, but in describing those things you color them. It doesn’t have to be tribal to push back on someone coloring the loss of privacy laws for the betterment of AI companies as a good or necessary thing (like the original commenter did).

Explaining something no one asked to be explained without providing an opinion on the subject itself reads like tacit approval. On a subject such as this - "reduce your privacy for the benefit of AI companies that are some number of:

• monopolies that should have been busted many times over
• run by evil, greedy people who do not consider safety for the entire world when developing these things (reference Musk saying there’s a chance these destroy the world but that he’d rather be alive to see it happen than not contribute to the destruction)
• companies aiming not to better the world in anyway but explicitly pursue money at any real cost to the human lives they’re actively stealing from or attempting to invalidate." - it’s no surprise the comment is unpopular and gets downvoted.

If I stopped my comment there I’d get voted on based on my explanation of what just happened assuming I was pro-this process because that’s human nature (or maybe it’s a byproduct of modern media discourse where they ask questions but don’t answer them and expect you to fill in the blanks (look at most of conservative media when it’s dog whistling or talking about data around crime or what have you)).

I don’t think someone should be voted into the ground for explaining something, but I also think every online comment should do it’s best to make a stand on the core subject they’re discussing. We are in dire times and being a bystander let’s evil people win.

So practicing what I’m preaching: Privacy laws should absolutely not be reduced for the benefit of AI companies. We should create regulations and safety rails around AI companies so they practice ethically and safely, which won’t happen in the US.

I’ve been using Kagi for more than 2 years and I’m very happy with it. It gets me great results quickly and zero ads. Sometimes I use their AI to grab a bunch of data I’d have to collect myself.

My main complaint is grabbing images with them for specific resolutions they just give up or add AI slop at the end. To be very clear, it’s amazing at finding 4k images 3840x2160. But if I flip that aspect ratio it starts to suck. That’s like… Hella niche but still important to mention.

It’s the best alternative I’ve found to the majority of options, besides self-hosting and I’m not doing that yet so I can’t comment on if it’s worth it or not.

Honestly not missing much lol. There’s like 1000 hours of good TV content in total out there IMHO.

I was going off of protondb. I can’t vouch for each game on the list’s exact state on any given day, only that according to everyone who ranks on the website it’s native or gold.

Apex Legends worked on Linux every year except this one. League I’m told dropped support only recently (in the last couple of years). Like, idk man, there’s ups and downs to this data, but the point is not all competitive multiplayer games don’t work on Linux and seemingly the majority do based on steam and protondb data.

This keeps getting repeated as a blanket statement and it irks me a bit. More than half of the top ten most played games on steam on any given day work. There’s a small handful of games that don’t work that fit into the competitive multiplayer genre and an even smaller handful that are actually popular.

To be clear, I’m not irk’ed with you, just that this myth that gets passed around a lot hasn’t caught up to reality.

Top games by player count by daily players (numbers are peak in 24 hrs)(skipping anything that doesn’t qualify as competitive multiplayer):

1. CS 2 - ✅ - 1.4 mil
2. BF 6 - ❌ - 413k
3. Dota 2 - ✅ - 761k
4. Pubg - ❌ - 620k
5. Arc Raiders - ✅ - 322k
6. Apex Legends - ❌ - 155k
7. War Thunder - ✅ - 78k
8. Delta force - ❌ ✅ (work around exists) - 182k
9. Marvel rivals - ✅ - 83k
10. Dead by Daylight - ✅ - 66k
11. Naraka: Bladepoint - ✅ - 120k
12. Rust - ❌ (some servers do work though) - 130k

✅ Top 20 total - 2.83 mil ❌ Top 20 total - 1.5 mil (including Delta force)

Idk. Having just crunched the numbers I guess it’s fair to warn people about some borked Anti-Cheat games but I wish people would caveat by saying the majority of games people play even in the competitive multiplayer scene work. And it’s only going to get better i’d argue, although games like bf6 being a recent launch that didn’t work is a bummer. As the percentage of Linux users climb they’ll be increasingly incentivized to find a solution.

League isn’t on here, that would skew the numbers pro-windows.

Dota 2 took 2k+ hours from my life. Loved every minute lol. Welcome aboard, it’s not healthier but I’d argue it’s better :D

I think that’s a very common and logical instinct/bias. I’m fairly confident you and everyone else does this as well. If someone told you two compare two drinks and that one was expensive, the expensive one gets a statistical boon. If someone says this book sucks and the author is an asshole, you’re primed to take previously neutral statements and skew them towards a negative understanding.

I always read before voting but ya, we have bias my guy and talking about them is good.

I don’t know if it’s Lemmy not standing different opinions than: A) some opinions don’t add much value to any conversation except to say “I disagree” and that’s both not super helpful and in a small community I’d argue it’s healthy for positive engagement to be more prevalent than negative engagement. B) some comments disagree or tear down a solution without offering up a good alternative - which leaves the people with solutions feeling worse for their solution, the problem unaddressed in a different way, and if someone likes their solution or even knows it’s superior to alternatives it becomes very easy to down vote a subjectively wrong opinion.

In this instance “going to the website” is not a helpful alternative for a tool who’s purpose is to aggregate many desired websites into one location only when they have new content. “Going to the website” would be less efficient both in time and effort. This person saying they don’t get them, while being on Lemmy - a site aggregator - is to me very funny.

My instinct was to down vote because it was already down voted and for the reasons above, but your comment gave me pause so now I won’t down vote but I also won’t upvote because it’s not content I think anyone should waste their time reading.

Should there be a neutral response on site aggregators for this very circumstance? Never thought about that before.

I’m not gonna shill for any company, so no worries there, but our governments aren’t breaking up these monopolies so we have to. If my options are a trillion dollar company and a 10 billion I pick the 10 billion.

I wonder if a company can get to X billion dollars in revenue and not be bad.