pjhenry1216 @ pjhenry1216 @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

938

Joined

2 yr. ago

This post has devolved into shit and filled with a bunch of whiners complaining about the same dumb shit that isn't a goal of this phone. Might as well whine the new iPhone doesn't cost under $400 for as reasonable of a complaint anything on this post is.

You can get a phone jack adapter for $5 moron.

For more cost. And again, their question was how does it affect reliability. I provided other reasons. This is like fucking whackamole. Folks just responding to the random comment that was responding to one specific thing and then pretending like it's the entire fucking argument. This whole thread is filled with idiots. Jacks have been left out of most flagship phones for a couple years now. This honestly smells like a fake grassroots attack on the Fairphone because they pay people fucking living wages instead of goddamn slave wages. The headphone jack was never a selling point of the phone. And it's not like you need to buy their headphones.

And headphone jacks are absolutely prone to failure. That's just objectively fucking false ignorant of electronics. It's an additional component. Maintainability and reliability inherently goes down if you add components. It's not magically a part of the fucking PCB. It's soldered on and then anytime a headphone plug is put in, it will put stress on the solder joints anytime it moves. Did you just fucking guess and hope you're right about "it's just as reliable"?

This thread is shit. I'm done here. Can I just block an entire post to stop seeing asinine replies from jackasses who probably don't even have a headphone jack on their current phone?

It's like complaining a new PC doesn't come with USB-A and only USB-C.

Design decisions shouldn't always be up to the end user. Every single option can't always be included forever and ever.

If you want wired for quality, you need a DAC anyway. If you want wired otherwise, leave the adapter on your headphones.

Don't let your inability to adapt stifle actual developmental progress.

Because everyone in the supply chain is being paid a fair wage and not being exploited.

Based on what? Cost? The whole premise is sustainability and ensuring the people who build it aren't working sweatshop workers like with every other major phone. I say this knowing full well I'm using one of those phones but Fairphone has only recently become available in my country.

So it depends on if you want a bad deal by parting with some extra dollars or it's a bad deal for the workers that are getting exploited so you save a few dollars.

Ok, Fairphone lied I guess. You obviously no better than the manufacturers. It's not like other phones with those jacks likely cost more to water proof those jacks or anything. Everything is always exactly the same and doesn't cost extra to do anything differently.

You have $5 options.

It allowed them to increase the IP rating, allows for simplified manufacturing, and easier maintainability and repairability.

How is not including it considered greenwashing (I notice you didn't ask about that, so I assume you know the answer)?

I despise people repeating comments. How is making the device cheaper, more sustainable, and more reliable greenwashing? I would love anybody who just loves complaining about the headphones jack to explain that. No one else has. I doubt anybody complaining really cares about the environment either. What phone do you currently have?

An article I came across said there are no plans for the 5 in the US, so not at the moment at least.

Weird. I could have sworn software comes on it too. Your phone doesn't have software?

At that point you're getting a very specific phone for a very specific purpose. It's not the rule but the exception. So it doesn't apply as a reason for any other phone. You've argued why the LG has a 3.5mm jack, not why Fairphone should have a 3.5mm jack. I'd also be curious as to how powerfully it can even drive headphones at that point. It must also have a stronger amplifier than most phones too. It'd be meaningless without it. What's the point of high fidelity if it can't drive headphones that can utilize it.

This is all getting away from the purpose of the Fairphone. It's not a dedicated music player. It's not advertising high fidelity music, psrticyij relation to other phones. I don't think anyone is calling that LG phone "green" either.

Congratulations to anyone who can think of an edge case that wouldn't apply to the Fairphone. Might as well mention a tensor chip not being in the Fairphone.

Sorry, didn't realize the world revolves around the extreme minority when discussing what's good for the human race as a whole.

You're right. How could anyone ever make any argument against anecdotal case by case stories. Obviously the entire collected data on human nutrition is useless as a whole because it doesn't apply to small percentages of the population. Oh silly me and not understanding that general concepts aren't important.

You're just describing American children raised in a poor diet. Beans are a staple food among not of the world population, including their children. They're super easy to prepare as well. Talking about the extremely fatty and unhealthy cheese like that is probably one of the many reasons the US is obese and unhealthy.

Cheese is not a healthy part of a diet in any quantity where it provides a significant protein of the person's protein needs.

I mean take it in context to who I replied to.

Ok, leave a note behind to explain to your children's family why they're in extreme poverty because some folks didn't want to gradually remove a subsidy in a controlled fashion. Again. You're just punishing more future people. But I guess since you don't have to meet them, you're ok with sacrificing their livelihood.

You will never get a UBI while large amounts are subsidizing specific industries. Wanna know where you can get that money though?

The thing is, I don't even think we disagree that much. You just are taking the one approach I advocated against (but still argued would be better than doing nothing; ie keeping the subsidies) and pretending that's my whole argument. I argued for gradual removal of subsidies to correct the market over time. You are advocating for a scenario that likely will never occur without some other large scale disaster or giant swing in public consciousness (UBI will never occur prior to ag having a market bubble pop.... one will never happen during our life, one has a chance to).

Because it supports middle rural America and that's where conservative strongholds are.

I've never heard any politician say the subsidies exist because people like it. It's always in support of jobs, etc. Are you daft? Point to one politician or lobbyist claiming subsidies are needed because folks like the flavor.

There is freedom of selection, but it's not a free market. We're literally discussing that in this post. Milk is substantially cheaper due to subsidies. Many people can't afford to simply purchase the more expensive one when a cheaper version is available. However, in a free market, it wouldn't be that much cheaper.

New products take time to surpass old products. You have false advertising and bad information floating around as truth and people think milk needs to be had to be healthy. It was so heavily advertised to boomers through millennials and even some of gen z, that I'm not surprised many have fallen for the marketing like you so heavily did.

For someone who gets paid hourly, I'm only willing to go so far with unpaid work past when I'm supposed to stop.