poopkins @ poopkins @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

347

Joined

2 yr. ago

I've not tried it with a stylus, but Google Keep is my preferred way of keeping notes and supports handwriting.

What an absolutely absurd position you've chosen to take on this. I can only hope for the sake of compassion that this is not what you actually believe.

The argument I've made is that I don't wish to personally suffer psychological damage because of somebody's death. We don't allow others to inflict harm in other ways, and this is in my opinion no different. It has nothing to do with tyranny.

This debate sure took an unexpected turn.

…until you're personally involved in a fatal accident—even if by no fault of your own—where the other party would have survived. Post traumatic stress is no joke. I don't think we should aspire to have a society with more suffering.

The analogy would not be to ban driving cars, but ban the resale of cars. The incentive for theft is the value; if you remove the value, then there is less incentive to steal it.

So to answer this hypothetical question, should we ban the resale of cars? No, because the owner can be insured for the monetary value of their stolen vehicle. What is the monetary value of a pet? I don't believe this can be quantified.

Which country is this?

That's ironic, because Google Chat to this day has migrated chats over from Hangouts and effectively served messaging for over a decade. But even Hangouts migrated chats over from Google Talk, which I personally used at least as far back as 2010.

To put that into perspective, Apple's iMessage has only been around since 2011.

I should, you're right.

This grinds my gears. Apple does the same: my work MBP nags me daily to enable iCloud backups but I have no way of doing it because Apple login is disabled by my administrator. Consequently, I cannot reach the settings page to tell Mac to fuck off.

I find this nothing to scoff at. At our current rate of consumption, estimates range from between 80-250 years [1] [2], unless we can find more phosphorus sources. In reality, our consumption is increasing and we are trending towards a shortage by 2040. Putting aside the resource shortage, we will need to double production to maintain our current simulated requirements by 2050 [3]. Increasing production in itself has significant climate and environmental pollution impacts.

All of this is to say, this is just one example of the complexity of the human footprint and sustaining ourselves as a species, in particular the challenges we will face as a consequence of overpopulation.

Nobody ever said we needed to "kill half the human population" or "keep people from reproducing." Please be civil and don't put words in my mouth.

Holy hell this is such a naive take that it makes my head spin. Phosphorus is an absolute essential for life on our planet and cannot be replaced or synthesized by something else. Currently it's literally running off farm lands and into the deepest depths of our oceans.

This is just one of the many examples of resources that are being depleted and will need a comprehensive and horrendously expensive global effort to be addressed, all while the world population continues to grow and increase in demand.

My point here is that there are ongoing costs for purchasing more entertainment value and it's not a one-off expense. I am not jealous about how much you have spent on your computer—in fact I think it's great and hope you get a lot of enjoyment out of it. You have unfortunately completely misinterpreted the essence of what I have written in my comments.

There is no need to be rude. I was simply referring to your own declaration of your intents.

Correct, a nearly seven year old PC that you never actually played a game on. Except maybe Fortnite.

That may be so, but then we are comparing apples and oranges: for $4000, OP can still not stream any content unless they pay more for the services, which sort of defeats the entire argument. After all, they haven't bought any games yet.

Which brings us to the essence: this comment thread was never here to actually discuss gaming or streaming content. OP didn't even attempt to shroud the fact that they will continue to enjoy everything as they please by pirating it all.

Thanks for your thoughtful and detailed response. I genuinely agree with effectively everything you're saying.

As an aside, there is another way of looking at your same examples: effectively all of the services you listed continue to exist, sometimes even after 20 years, albeit repackaged or renamed with only in the worst case a hiccup for users to migrate. In the case of the chat functionality from G+, it simply evolved to what it is today. Perhaps I was too harsh and strung up on the remark about discontinued services.

Certainly we have different needs and consequently a different perception of what a stable product entails.

Nevertheless, from a product perspective, the variety of what Google offers is simply so broad that of course it will always mean that things are discontinued. Google builds and maintains a wide variety of products, from word processing, file storage, communication and creativity apps and services, to fully fledged operating systems and browsers, hardware including phones, tablets, watches and laptops, and of course web mastering tools for discovery and monetization.

Inevitably there will be gaps in individual needs when a product portfolio is so broad. (As an aide, I'd even argue it does so unrivaled since other tech giants don't dabble in nearly as many areas.) My take on this is that the frustration scales with that breadth.

Equally so, there are ample examples of stable products at Google. There's a strange sentiment on the web to make a tally of those that were discontinued, no matter how unused or irrelevant they had become. (I would challenge you to review that list and identify a handful that you would genuinely use today.)

None of this is to say that I mindlessly support this tech giant. I just find it so odd how this community continues to be an echo chamber where everybody just repeats something to the effect that everything used to be better. The mantra of this community appears to be the prophecy that every single household name in technology is currently in the process of certain death. In the case of Google, I personally find today's Gmail, Calendar, Drive, YouTube Music, Pixel, Android, Android Auto and effectively every other Google service that I use to be the best version of that service and sufficiently safe, stable and reliable for my needs. In any case, I don't aspire to go back to whichever early-2000s variant existed before.

I understand the point that you're trying to make, but you are inflating this tremendously to exaggerate the evolution of these products.

First of all, you're talking about the progression of products over the course of nearly 20 years. For some perspective, that was the era of Windows XP. You can take a similar exercise to explore the discontinuation of software on other platforms, including those that don't exist at all any more.

Secondly, you've combined app categories that don't fit. Google+ was a social network, Hangouts was a chat app and Duo was a video calling app. Simply saying that Hangouts and Allo combined to become Chat and Hangouts Meet and Do combined to become Meet wouldn't quite have the same ring to it, I guess.

Finally, you've conflated technologies. Android Automotive OS is an entire OS running in a car that is maintained by the OEM in much the same way as Android is on phones. The availability of Google services is mandated by OEMs, so I'm not exactly sure how this even ties into the argument you're trying to make. Incidentally, this has nothing to do with Android Auto, which is an extended display for your phone.

Google has been around for 25 years and always has chased innovation. They create a ton of things, see what sticks, then iterate or pivot. While I too have been frustrated by the discontinuation of service I liked, I can appreciate that much of what we have today is thanks to this very culture.

Whenever I hear this kind of complaint, it sounds to me that people just want Google to be more like Apple or Microsoft and churn out minor improvements to their existing money makers with minimal innovation.

One side is right and the other is wrong… I suppose nobody considered this possibility and the answer was in front of us all this time. Looks like we found the key to fixing the Middle East. Well done!