Depending on where they live, it could be more likely their first phone is an iPhone.

Potential fragility aside, I think flip smartphones (at least the cheaper ones without a proper outside screen) solved the problem for me since I was never really a one-handed user of my XZ1 Compact. I liked the smaller size because it fit into every pocket safely and the smaller screen was more annoying to use and therefore less addictive. Flips have a similar barrier in terms of having to physically open the device to use it. It’s a shame that even the cheaper models are getting the bigger outside screens now, though. It just makes these devices more addictive and more fragile.

Yeah I think that’s a decent comparison. There are of course still hobbyists and enthusiasts today who know a lot about cars despite not being professionals working in a related field, but it does feel like the general understanding among the public has fallen because the cultural phenomenon of a father teaching his son about cars has dissipated. Piracy has always been a niche activity but the core skills and knowledges it requires were taught more to millennials than they were to zoomers. If people have grown up with less education about motor engines or desktop computers then it’s not surprising they struggle to expand on that later in life.

Acknowledging differences is not “war”.

This was a pretty underwhelming article. Most of it is a pretty uninteresting story about how the site was founded, which isn’t really relevant to the headline.

Resolution doesn’t mean much, those sites you are referring to use extremely low bitrate encodes that look terrible. Yes, streaming services (in my experience Netflix is the main offender) can sometimes deliver dogshit quality streams too due to their adaptive bit rates, but the ceiling is way higher than those sites that pull from DDL file hosters. If you are consistently suffering from very low quality paid streams then you likely have some kind of network issue affecting the adaptive bitrate.

Most streaming services have introduced cheaper “ad-supported” tiers within the last few years while jacking up the prices of the existing tiers. There is usually a price gap designed to either make you sit through ads or overpay to remove them. Many (most?) people don’t even use ad-blockers in their web browsers and are psychologically trained to sit through ad breaks, either because of TV (older generation) or YouTube (younger generation) which is why these streaming companies can get away with such a betrayal of their original premise.

From what I have seen, most Threads users are safe-spacers who wanted a platform with heavy moderation. So I guess these are just the growing pains they’ll have to get used to in the pursuit of their circlejerk paradise, particularly since this is Meta we’re talking about who have never been reliable or effective when it comes to moderating content.

Steve Litchfield in shambles.

mLauncher is another good one if you like this concept but want an even more minimal app drawer (it doesn’t even have icons). It’s a fork of Olauncher.

This is a pretty clickbaity counter-article that doesn’t review the original in good faith. The New Yorker article is not titled ‘Social Media Is Killing Kids’ but rather ‘Has Social Media Fuelled A Teen-Suicide Crisis?’ with a lead of:

Mental-health struggles have risen sharply among young Americans, and parents and lawmakers alike are scrutinizing life online for answers.

So the implication that the premise of the article is to demonise social media is completely wrong, since it’s actually an investigation into the issue. That’s also the reason it’s long (another strange complaint from a guy whose 3000+ word response is only ever his opinions).

The “moral panic tropes” are testimony from real parents whose real children killed themselves. And these real parents think social media was responsible. It strikes me as pretty low to hand wave away the grief of these real people because it inconveniently feeds into a narrative you have some instinctual problem with.

The author tries to frame the balance of the New Yorker article as some kind of gotcha. Like it’s somehow a bad thing that this other writer took the time to consult with and quote experts who provide a different opinion. Personally I would much rather read that then something like this which was basically the equivalent of a reddit eXpOsEd thread.

This is not a leak, it is just a prediction from some random based on their weird analysis of the market. Pure clickbait.

So yes the Motorola synthetic back is definitely more durable than glass.

I was thinking more in terms of durability relating to general wear and age rather than short-term drops, scratches, etc. I’ve seen some images of people claiming their Motorola back wore out within months (could be a problem on their end, mine is fine after a year) and we all remember those older plastic devices with the soft touch finish that “melts” after a few years.

I have a Sony Xperia XZ1 and the aluminium finish on that is so good. Definitely my nicest feeling phone, though it is still slippery of course. In terms of modern phones I like the textured backs Motorola has been using. Not sure about their long-term durability but they are very grippy and comfortable.

Part of it (at least historically) was also related to wireless charging and reception.

The third panel turns it into a proper 16:9 display, like you would find on many tablets and laptops. The pointless part is the second panel, which has a weird aspect ratio that is not natively supported by media (letterboxing in basically all videos) and many apps.

The FE series doesn’t make much sense to me at that price. The A55 is already a really good phone and it’s much cheaper with some extra features like an SD card slot. How many people are there in the world who cannot afford an S24+ but for whom the A55 is not good enough? I feel like the FE series cons people into thinking they’re getting value for money (because it has an S in the name) when they’re actually overpaying for a phone that isn’t much better in day to day use than the top A series model at half the price.

As in, you regularly see the same art? Or you just find the style repetitive?

I use Muzei, so it’s a different work of art every day.

As much as anyone, I get wrapped up in an enthusiast’s mindset, falling prey to aggressive update cycles and phones offering “new” features.

Too many users upgrade who don’t need to, and more extended software support will eliminate people feeling pressured into spending money they don’t have to.

Okay, so it matters…just not to you. But you’ll still write an entire article about how the rest of us should be using our phones for longer. Rules for thee, but not for me?