- 0 Posts
- 24 Comments
Besides cost, we should probably at least entertain the idea that we are a vocal minority. I’d be completely unsurprised to find out that the majority of people hardly ever touch the controls that got moved to touchscreens and, if they do, they don’t really care - they can set them before they set off, or do it while driving and wobble all over the road, but hey everyone does it so what does it matter?
So countries are pouring investment into charging networks… it would be interesting to know the thinking behind that versus this approach. One thing is certain though: this can only work at scale if manufacturers agree on standards for battery modules so that they can be swapped out by the same machinery. Notice that this is only for one specific model - the machine which removes the battery knows where the battery modules are and how to remove them. There would also presumably be some tradeoff for battery form factors which are designed to cram more in at the cost of making them harder to remove.
Damn this couldn’t have come at a better time for me. I’ve been thinking a lot over the past months how it used to be that when you disagreed with someone, you’d still have something shared with them. Not quite the same as the social media aspect, but when TV was all broadcast on a few channels, you’d probably find a show in common. When the only news was national newspapers and broadcasters, you might both be reading the same paper but disagreeing on the articles. My thinking was going down the lines of “this meant everyone had a shared truth” which is kind of like the social media bubble that the research seems to disagree with, but also down the lines of “this meant everyone had, to an extent, a shared identity” at least within a large group like a country, linguistic or ethnic subdivision.
There was something special about the old internet. The idea that the acrimonious disagreements might have been less bitter due to their nature is tantalising. There’s also something to bear in mind for Lemmy: the old internet, as much as the interest groups it spawned, was united by a shared interest in the internet specifically - and technology in general. The internet wasn’t as necessary and ubiquitous, so most people there had to have some other motivation to be on it. That itself was a shared interest that allowed people to find commonality. Lemmy is the same: people here are a subsection of the internet, brought here because they’re drawn to openness not provided by unfederated platforms. That is its own commanlity, and it won’t exist if Lemmy outgrows those other platforms.
The hiring process for their AR/VR division is also different than it is for the rest of the company - even when the general rule was to hire without a specific role in mind, that was not the case at Reality Labs. But yeah, the big issue is that you can’t absorb 10,000 people into the larger organisation that easily even if they were all generalists.
No, I am aware that they’re sadly the majority. Hence why I specifically said “anyone who cares enough to know better”
I see, I thought you meant by that “anyone who knows about what Google is doing with personal data”.
“terminally online” (which is a slur invented by the wilfully ignorant to denigrate people with different interests and priorities than them, no matter how much you try to reclaim it)
I use it self-deprecatingly. Calling it a “slur” is overblowing it, and even though it’s used as an insult - I don’t care. To be insulted by someone I have to value the person’s opinion.
If not for near-monopoly market share and therefore everything being integrated with and “optimised” for both, nobody who cares enough to know would use that crap willingly.
Chrome built its market share on desktop up over many many years.
I also think you’re underestimating the number of people who couldn’t care less if a company harvests their data for ad personalisation - by this point the majority of people understand Facebook’s business strategy, but they still have over a billion users. The preferences of us terminally online folks are not the preferences of the population at large.
Next year the city park will be forced to close down after the council was sued for by a woman who was allowed to meet a paedophile in it as a child.
Children need to be taught how to not get abused by strangers offline and online. If they aren’t, it’s not the fault of the place that allowed them to meet. When I was a child I was using the internet to talk to adults and had a great time. (The adults who had to deal with my crappy attitude before I learnt some netiquette probably had a less great time…)
It’s not about being informed; it’s about general knowledge.
If it were about being informed, the plaintiff could attest “I was not informed” which would be reasonable in a court as they’re talking about what they have direct experience of. But they defence is saying “you may not have been specifically informed, but you should have known anyway because it was in the news.”
The plaintiffs did not say “there was no general awareness of these problems” - had they done so, maybe that would have been sufficient, or more likely they would have needed to enter evidence like statements from a sufficiently broad body of customers. But they didn’t do that, so they didn’t contest the argument which the judge decided was at least enough if was true.
The real question here is whether “general awareness of issues” is enough to defend cases like these.
Yeah, which is why it’s the reasonably wealthy people who have cars and not bikes. But that includes almost everyone in developed countries.
E-bikes are kind of a red herring here anyway; there’s little practical use-case for them that isn’t already covered by unpowered bicycles unless you live somewhere very hilly. (Even in moderately hilly places you get used to hills quite quickly). It’s not unreasonable to do a shopping run on a bike as long as the shop isn’t far away… But if it is, an e-bike won’t help you get there in a reasonable length of time.
If you’re not that wealthy you might be able to afford a car but not want to buy a car and an expensive e-bike. A car is useful for short distance trips in bad weather, longer trips that might not be the majority of your travelling, and transporting stuff that won’t fit on a moped (or an e-bike unless you get a trailer… or bigger stuff than that.) In that case you’re going to buy the one tool that covers your needs.
It’s like any number of blog hosts that have gone before it.