MudMan

Man, I’ve had two separate devices fail to install updates the last week, leading to tons of weirdness and troubleshooting. I even had to chkdsk c: /F at one point like a neanderthal.

I have enough coomputers laying around that I’d move more of them to other OSs, Linux included if I hadn’t tried that and found it as much or more of a hassle in those specific machines, be it compatibility issues or just fitness for the application. I’m not married to Windows at all, but there are definitely things that are much easier to handle there, which does justify sticking with it through the reinstalls and awkward weirdness on those.

That is most likely going to generate less revenue than promoting donations, or a comparable amount at best. WinRAR is the meme example.

From a PR and marketing perspective, if I wanted to maximize my revenue as a single developer I would set up a Patreon or encourage recurring donations through the software by providing bragging rights stuff (merch, insider access, early access to unfinished builds and so on). Single mandatory payments simply reproduce the piracy/license access of commercial software and shaming people into paying without coercion just makes you seem less appealing to people who would donate anyway.

I… yeah, what? Disney is what does it? You were cool with Tencent, Sony, Lego, the massive fine for mishandling underage information? Disney. That’s your line.

Alright.

Hah. The framing from normie news is so weird. It’s “bizarrely Disney is investing on Fortnite”, instead of “Disney buys a stake on the people making Unreal, which at this point is like half of their and everybody else’s VFX pipeline”.

I wonder if the gaming news guys will have a better picture or the “Disney Fornite whaaaa?!” angle is what people will take away from this across the board.

Wait, you get dual physical sims but they don’t repurpose one of the slots for an SD card if you don’t use it? Why? At that point it’s removing a feature just for the sake of it. Well, for the sake of making you overpay for more storage, but still.

I’m curious now that we’ve talked so much about it. Is it any good, locked bootloader aside?

Yeah, and it can get stuck in customs. It’s a good thing to do if you’re there for a bit, even for a layover, but it’s harder to buy. Still, man, for that price gap even if you get taxed you’d probably be at worst flat with the official release. That’s a 30% hike, plus 10% you’re losing in the currency exchange. It’s a lot.

I’d maybe shop around. That can’t last forever, and a cursory search right now already shows some offers with 50 euros cut off that sticker price (in Amazon.de, for one). Of course that’s also for the worst model, so… you know, modern phone pricing.

They specifically said “sub 6 inch display”, this is 5.9 inches. I’m meeting the brief here.

I mean, the other answer to that is that he could go for the vanilla iPhone, but they also said they want an Android phone, so this is the smallest thing with fairly high specs you can find right now and it’s stil a couple fractions of an inch smaller than the small iPhone.

Woof. Depending on what bucks those bucks are that’s… a weirdly large, unjustified difference. I didn’t know that was the case. I don’t get it, for that money you could just order one from the US and have it shipped. Even with customs fees you’d break even.

Still, that’s a lot and the region differences suck, but given the lack of options it’s still ticking boxes. Plus flagships are like 1.5k these days, somehow, so… that’s midrange pricing? I don’t know how we got to that being midrange pricing, but apparently that’s where we are.

Since it’s narrow it gets you most of the way there in terms of grip. You still have to wiggle it and claw your way to the top of the screen, so if you’re sensitive to that you may still miss a shorter phone, I suppose.

And yeah, no punchole, expandable storage, front facing speakers, a headphone jack and expandable storage (that you can hot swap, no less). It’s an amazing collection of common sense features you can’t get in any other flagship. I hope they stick with it for a while.

Asus makes the ZenPhone 10. That’s 6 inches. I don’t know how it stacks up to the other requirements, I’ve never used one.

I’m a bit confused about what the OP means with “premium”, but at least the price band fits.

They still have the Xperia I and V series, which is taller but not necessarily much wider. I have one. I like it.

No, hey, let me be clear, I don’t think you’re actively an ideologue, but you can absolutely disagree or actively advocate against it and still have your worldview filtered through that lens. None of us is immune to their context or their upgringing, least of all me.

What I do say is that the notion that “it’s not free, it all comes from taxes” is a very active framing, and it comes from an anarchocapitalist perspective, whether you agree with it or not. Yes, there is a cost to public services. And yes, you do have to tax people to fund the government that is meant to provide those services, but paying taxes isn’t the same as paying for a service, and public services aren’t “services you pay with your taxes”, they’re… well, public services.

And in the same vein, having an industry built on tipping is not sustainable and yeah, it’s a fairly (anarcho)capitalist perspective. Screw tips. You can contribute to an open source project, be it with cash, work, promotion or whatever, but you’re definitely not obligated to do so and that systemmust work within those parameters. FOSS is not software paid in tips, that’s not the point. It may be crowdsourced, but that’s not the same thing.

So hey, I get it, you don’t ideologically support those things, consciously. If you take anything from my comment let it be that you’re still thinking about it from that framework and there are other ways to frame it. You’re right that eventually the money has to come from somewhere, but how you frame the situation impacts which somewheres you’re willing to explore.

Yeah, for sure. I’m just wary that the line between cynicism and defeatism is thin, and defeatism leads to conformism.

If the system relies on integrity, it will fail. If it relies on shame or moral obligation it will fail. There is a reason on the other side of the fence they couldn’t root out piracy until they started providing more convenient (but more expensive) alternatives. If you rely on people feeling “obligated” to pay, they either won’t pay anyway or won’t use the software. That’s not a viable option.

So you’re left with the other option. Whether one agrees that FOSS is “broken” or not, the only way to make the system sustainable is… well, to make it sustainable. If that means enacting political change, then that’s where the effort should go.

It’s not a strawman argument. My response (which wasn’t to you) was triggered by the notion that we “need to normalize paying for foss”. I don’t think that’s true, and I do think it’d lead to generating a “tipping system”. Plus, again, not what the linked article is driving at.

I’m also not fond of “we live in a system” as an argument for playing by the system’s rules. I mean, by that metric people should just charge for access and call it a day, that’s what the “system” is encouraging. We need sustainable flows of income towards FOSS, but that doesn’t mean step one is normalizing end users feeling obligated to pay.

We absolutely must financially incentivize software developers. But charity is not a substitute for financing in a healthy system. The sources of financing can’t rely on badgering individuals to feel guilty for using resources in the public domain (or at least publicly available) without a voluntary contributions. I agree with the OP and the article in that the support system shouldn’t be charity. Tax evaders, redistribute wealth, provide public contributions to FOSS. We should create a sysem where FOSS is sustainable, not held up by tips like a service job in an anarchocapitalist hellscape.

No, it’s not, and it’s not the argument the article is making. The article is arguing for developers receiving public supoprt financed by taxing corporation who are currently evading massive amounts of money.

This is not a case of “no one”, anyway. Throw a coffee if you can is already how this works. And it’s not just “a coffee”, plenty of openly available software has alternate revenue streams, support from corporate backers and other sustainability tools besides voluntary crowdsourcing. The OP is pondering a systemic solution, not a moral obligation based on capitalist conceptions of how much time is worth and charity.

I hate this argument so, so passionately.

It’s the argument you hear from anarchocapitalists trying to argue that there are hidden costs to the res publica and thus it should be dismantled. Yes, we all have a finite amount of time. Yes, we can all quantify the cost of every single thing we do. That is a terrible way to look at things, though. There are things that are publicly available or owned by the public or in the public domain, and those things serve a purpose.

So yeah, absolutely, if you can afford it support people who develop open software. Developing open software is absolutely a job that many people have and they do pay the bills with it. You may be able to help crowdfund it if you want to contribute and can’t do it any other way (or hey, maybe it’s already funded by corporate money, that’s also a thing). But no, you’re not a freeloader for using a thing that is publicly available while it’s publicly available. That’s some late stage capitalism crap.

Which, in fairness, the article linked here does acknowledge and it’s coming from absolutely the right place. I absolutely agree that if you want to improve the state of people contributing to publicly available things, be it health care or software, you start by ensuring you redistribute the wealth of those who don’t contirbute to the public domain and profit disproportionately. I don’t know if that looks like UBI or not, but still, redistribution. And, again, that you can absolutely donate if you can afford it. I actually find the thought experiment of calculating the cost interesting, the extrapolation that it’s owed not so much.

I’m curious about the details, yeah. Maybe they’re plugging into some API or something? Breaking some safety measure? Otherwise I really don’t see how these threats aren’t empty. Suing somebody for breaking EULA terms does not have a great track record, and neither does modifying things you buy or making unauthorized software for computers.

But hey, if the guy says the project is coming down, then I guess the aggressive language did the thing they wanted it to do, even if it’s relatively toothless.