XIIIesq @ 13esq @lemmy.world

Posts

12

Comments

940

Joined

2 yr. ago

True, but that's not the point. It'd clearly be unrealistic to equate the crime to things like rape or murder.

The man's obviously sick in the head but at least didn't attack a child irl.

It's my understanding that it's actually a pretty typical sentence. He's obviously sick in the head but has been judged as little risk to children.

To be fair, some phones already have that but they have much lower spec cameras/lenses, so it's currently a trade off.

If a flag ship phone were to find away to implement a flush top spec camera, it would still only be an incremental improvement rather than a great new technology or a substantial innovation.

Yh, I'm not for bailing out companies that are "too big to fail", I see it as socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor, but that's a separate debate.

Tech stocks were a interesting case as they bloated far beyond their actual value during COVID, what happened in 2023 was probably somewhat of a renormalization and now they're back to business as usual. There will always be peaks and valleys, but I'd be very surprised to see tech stocks fail in the long term.

I'm not going to argue that there has been no progress, just that it's not on the same scale.

Look at the difference between phones from 2004 to 2014, then from 2014 to 2024 and surely you'd have to agree. We're looking at huge leaps in tech and innovation Vs much smaller incremental improvements.

And I'd once again like to state that this is not a complaint, just a point of view showing that astonishing amounts of technological innovation are not necessarily required to keep companies in business.

On the contrary, I absolutely appreciate it. I was about 15 when mobile phones first became a thing that everyone owned, so I've lived through the entire progression from when they were something only a well to do businessman would have all the way through to today. The first iPhone was 2007, 17 years ago btw.

When mobile phones became popular, each new generation of phones saw HUGE improvements and innovation. However, the last ten years has pretty much just been slight improvements to screen/camera/memory/CPU. Form wise and functionally, they're very similar to the phone of ten years ago.

I understand that some technophiles will always be able to justify why the new iPhone is worth £1600 and if that's what they want to spend their money on then good for them, but I personally think that they are kidding themselves. Today you can get a brilliant phone for £300 or even less.

In more recent news;

BBC News - Samsung profits jump by more than 900% on chips https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68738046

I agree. Smartphones, for example, have hardly changed at all over the last ten years, but you don't see Apple and Samsung going out of business.

I remember when running counter strike at 30fps on a 480p monitor meant you had a good computer.

Modern graphics are amazing, but they're simply not required to have a good gaming experience.

I'd ask how much your parents helped you.

Murder implies intent. If the assailant, knowing they had COVID, purposefully coughed in to the face of the victim with the intent of infecting them, then you have a point. But the article does not imply that is what happened.

The hostages were hamas

You can be as bitter about it as you like but it absolutely is required. You could come up the most obvious sarcasm you could ever imagine, and I'll find you people that believe you're being sincere.

We live in the post satire era.

I'm not sure how your idea for a sarcasm tag is any different to /s, it seems to be a roundabout way to achieve the exact same thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law

Thank you and good riddance to @beaver@lemmy.ca, when you look at the amount of subs she is modding, it's quite worrying. It makes me wonder if she does anything else with her time.

We're talking about u/beaver aren't we?

One of the things I disliked about Reddit was the self righteous power mods that turned the site in to an echo chamber.

If you can't handle a counter point that's been made in good faith, then get off of the soapbox.

If you can't handle good faith arguments then you should get off of your soapbox.

You are now banned from c/vegan

You are now banned from c/vegan

Imagine un-ironically believing that's what they're saying.

Banned!!!

She banned me for a well written post that I made in good faith. I wasn't saying "veganism bad" or anything like that, I even wrote that I was in huge support of the lab grown meat industry with a view to ending the demand for traditional meat farming. I was just putting my pov forward and suggesting a better way to engage with people who aren't vegan.

Didn't even get a message saying why I was banned, I can only assume she wants her communities to be echo chambers. It's such a shame, many of us left Reddit to get away from self absorbed, power hungry mods like her.

If you can't handle the opinions of the general public, you should probably get off of the soapbox.