23 Aug 23. Ya, no ambiguity. /s
2023-08-23 is the way.
Honestly, I’d trust a vanilla iPhone over that hacked together mess you’ve got going there.
Dude is still simping for Musk. No sympathy.
I’m in the minority here, but I don’t think any governments should be regulating the choice of cable in smartphones. I think it’s a convenience that they can dangle in front of people so they can say they are pro-consumer, while ignoring the working conditions of those who manufacture it, the taxes paid by corporations who make the phones, the lobbying done against right-to-repair laws, and the monopolistic tendencies displayed by these companies.
The governments have a real responsibility to hold these companies responsible for a lot of things, but I don’t think the choice of one small piece of the technology pie should be one of them.
Nothing about Saudi Arabia is pro-consumer.
I’m not defending anything, other than basic usage of the English language. I’m not saying Bluetooth is better, objectively or subjectively, than a wired connection. You’re free to prefer one over the other, but any preference is just that, a preference.
Don’t think you understand what objectively means.
Not objectively
They are going to answer with some stupid reasoning like removing the 3.5mm jack.
But truly Apple stance on right-to-repair really is their only non-defendable stance. And this is coming from an Apple fanboy.
Facebook is one of the biggest contributors to OpenStreetMap and makes lots of open source software.
I'd like to know more about this.
I'm certainly not trying to be an Apple apologist here, as iMessage has plenty to critique. But it bears consideration that iMessage falling back to SMS is a certain amount of openness, is it not?
Not an unfair complaint against Apple, but ignores Google's/Android's problematic "support" for RCS, and in this context of this comment seems to imply that What'sApp isn't "closed" like iMessage.
apple hates open standards
What about WhatsApp is open?
If this is the thinking I can expect on this instance, perhaps this is not the instance for me.
I feel that maybe you're reading my question as 'critique of China is inherently support for the west/US/etc' which I absolutely do not mean. I think that it's possible that painting all critique with a broad 'xenophobia' brush (while undoubtedly warranted at times) can prevent discussion in good faith.
I am asking this in full earnestness: is any critique of the Chinese government assumed to be rooted in xenophobia?
Had a bit of a showerthought this morning. c/books could do a monthly book club pick but with the additional feature of inviting a related community to participate. For example, if the book pick was "Two Wheels Good" by Jody Rosen, !bicycles@lemmy.ca could be invited to participate. Seems to be a great way to encourage more people to read and more people to subscribe to the sub.
I have an instance running (blitzen.org), and right now just two other instances are in my white list (lemmy.ml, lemmy.ca). If I wanted to mirror, say, lemmy.ca's white and black lists, is there a way to export/import such a list?
Say what you will about reddit, at least an established subreddit was the place to gather on the topic, ie r/technology etc.
With Lemmy, doesn't it follow that similar communities on different instances will simply dilute the userbase, for example !technology@lemmy.ml and !technology@beehaw.org. How do we best use lemmy as a (small c) community when a topic can be split amongst many (large C) Communities?
This is an earnest question, in no way am I suggesting lemmy is inferior to reddit. I'm quite enjoying myself here.