• 0 Posts
  • 290 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: February 20th, 2025

help-circle




  • I think the answer is yes. Last time I did a survey of options a lot of them seemed highly unreliable. Framework was one exception but… unfortunately I think you kinda just have to like the framework idea. The massive premium you pay there just doesn’t make financial sense unless you actively (ab)use your hardware such that it might really fail within the useful lifetime of the processor. (Ie I can buy two laptops for the price of one framework, so…why not just do that if the first fails?)













  • easily3667@lemmus.orgtolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldPosting for a friend lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This seems more like correlation than anything else. Not that it’s necessarily wrong but it seems very abstract. For example it says an hour of tv time is bad, but that’s just consumption and it also doesn’t mention, for example, engagement. It says some types of content can reduce focus, sure, but people usually don’t offer that type of nuance when they say “screen time bad!”. It also says clearly that there are other types of content that are valuable. It doesn’t have an explanation why reading a book is more or less engaging and helpful than say, watching the same story on tv?

    Point is im 100% confident there are specific things that are bad, but the blanket ban seems silly and ineffective, potentially harming the child.


  • It’s not diluting its answers, it’s making them softer to accommodate the interests of many customers and to the detriment of others.

    This is more analogous to Firefox semi-deprecating compact mode and marking it as unsupported. It hurts some users. It helps those with poor vision and motor skills by making everything 10 sizes too large. I will never forgive them, but Firefox is in the mode where it’s actively hurting it’s own product in an attempt to mimic it’s competitor.

    In neither case is this objectively hurting customers to benefit investors. In fact they’ve already stated that making the AI softer is more expensive. The reddit change was making it’s product worse for customers in a pre-IPO cash grab. The shift from treating customers first to treating investors first to treating founders/ceos first is enshittification. A change to a product you don’t like isn’t enshittification.



  • overuse of enshittification. It soon will lose all meaning, like the word meme, if you just use it to describe everything you don’t like.

    Initially, vendors create high-quality offerings to attract users, then they degrade those offerings to better serve business customers, and finally degrade their services to users and business customers to maximize profits for shareholders.

    If it’s enshittification it’s still stage 0 where they are trying to figure out how to attract people to the service (ie the good times, ie not enshittification)

    You aren’t locked in. You don’t materially lose anything by switching services. And it has options to change the conversational style.

    It’s not enshittification.