eochaid

No. Not at all.

Honestly, I hated the wire part of my wired headphones for years. I tend to listen to things while I'm doing chores around the house and I can't tell you the amount of times the cable caught on something and sent my earbuds or my phone careening to the floor. Or was forced to untangle myself from a door knob. Or forgot I had earbuds on and stood up from my desk only to throw my phone to the ground.

I went on a bit of a journey with bt headphones but eventually got a pair of Sony Linkbuds and a $30 Bluetooth thingy for my car that plugs into the aux jack, and never looked back. Every other day I plug the case in on my nightstand along with my phone. Nbd. Linkbuds don't have the best sound quality I've ever experienced in BT buds, but the comfort wins over all others.

I also recently got a pair of PineBuds Pro for $70 and man that battery case is legit. I only have to charge that beast once a week. Just waiting on someone to release a better sound profile for those things because they are BAASSSY. But beyond the bass, the potential sound quality is actually quite good. I'm looking forward to what the pine64 community does with these.

I'll also say that I have audiophile hearing (I've been tested) and I absolutely hear the difference in sound quality using BT and a good set of cans - when it comes to earbuds, the difference is negligible between wired and wireless. Given that 1. I'm more often listening to words than music from my phone and 2. The convenience, I'll go for wireless more often than not if given the option. Plus, outside of niche phones and defunct LG phones, I never saw a headphone jack that could properly drive a good set of cans. There are way more output devices I would choose over a phone to drive high quality audio.

That all said, do I think manufacturers should remove the headphone jack? No. Apple did it to sell more airpods. Everyone else did it to save a nickle on their costs. Just because I don't use it doesn't mean it should go away. If anything, there's an accessibility element. BT buds are expensive. USB-C / Lightning buds are expensive. Aux buds are cheap. And wired buds are the easiest and cheapest way for someone to get audio out of a phone or talk on the phobe without fucking holding it in the air to broadcast their conversation to the world. And for that reason, I think the jack should ABSOLUTELY come back.

If you like Bethesda games, you're gonna like this one. If you don't like Bethesda games, you're not going to like this one. I don't know what else to tell you, bud.

Don't mistake the bitching of a vocal minority of lemmy/reddit posters and YouTube influencers (who bitch primarily for clicks) as "everyone". There are actually a lot of people who like these games - myself included - and a lot of them aren't on any sort of social media. I loved vanilla Oblivion, Fallout 3, Skyrim, and Fallout 4 and love modded versions even more. I'm having a blast with vanilla Starfield right now - easily dozens of hours over the long weekend. And I'll probably love modded Starfield even more as well.

I agree totally.

I don't get people stanning NMS over Starfield. I mean No Man's Sky is alright as a tech demo sandbox but even with the latest update, I get bored so quickly. Even the stations and civilization hubs feel dead, the plot is just so haphazard and slapdash. Starfield feels so much more cohesive and....has actual characters. But they're also just very different games. Starfield is heavier on story content and NMS is heavier on procedural generation.

I loved Cyberpunk's story but I've found very little reason to come back outside of the main plot. GTA5 was a technical achievement under sweatshop conditions and while I hated the story, the world felt alive and full of things to do and places to explore. Cyberpunk feels like GTA if it was made with half the team and with one less year of development (because it was).

And you stanning Cyberpunk and No Man's Sky as polished games is hilarious to me.

It took several years of fixing No Man's Sky before it was anything more than a boring tech demo. Cyberpunk took years of bug fixes and a popular anime to break people out of the hate circlejerk and actually experience the fucking game. Starfield hasn't even officially released yet. People need to chill the fuck out.

Also what are you talking about with "the engine is showing it's age?". This is a brand new fucking engine. I'm playing the game on my Xbox in 4k and it looks better than anything I've played this year.

The movies did Faramir dirty.

In the books, he immediately rejects the temptation of the ring after Frodo tells him of Boromir's temptation, saying that a thing of the dark lord should not be used - thus proving how much stronger and wiser he was than his brother.

Faramir is one of my favorite characters in the books - a black sheep that represents hope for humanity after a book and a half of being shown humanity's failures. And he's such a badass in RotK

Peter Jackson weakened his character because of pacing and because he didn't understand that stories need occasional bright spots of hope and it's of the greatest sins of the movies IMO. Which is even more rediculous when you realize that Tolkien based the character on himself.

My wife, a couple friends, and I have all put a ton of hours into this game and absolutely love it. I put several hours into the shipbuilder alone. Every hand built sidequest I run into feels like a TNG episode. And I love the kinda Becky Chambers / Star Trek-style utopia with mystery and drama theme they've got.

This is the most Bethesda game they've ever made, for better of worse. It doesn't hand hold you. There are plenty of times where I've looked at my quest log, found nothing i could do except the main quest, and then decided just to jump to a random system - only to get pulled into some crazy new adventure for a couple hours. You're supposed to be an explorer, if you put even the smallest effort into exploring, you will be rewarded.

A lot of people complaining were never going to like this game or any Bethesda game and I don't know what to do with those people. The amount of constant negativity on the internet makes me really appreciate stories like TNG and writers like Becky Chambers and Cory Doctorow, because they're so positive and affirming and optimistic and when they criticise, they also offer solutions. And this game really scratches that itch for me.

And after almost 40 years of life dealing with the constsnt cycle of negativity and hatred and anger and frustration and drama, on the internet, a global scale, and in my own life.....I'm just tired. I can't play games with "edgy dark stories" anymore. I can't go back to New Vegas because its bummer after bummer. And i know a lot of people thrive on that "scortched earth" bullshit but I just can't anymore.

I just...wanna sit down and play a game. And maybe one where everything is okay for once. And this is that game for me.

First of all, 99% of YouTube videos are there to drum up controversy and provide an "uneducated" reaction to get clicks. You have to dig to find an unbiased and educated perspective, especially for ergo stuff, on YouTube.

That said, we have two types of content about ergo keyboards: uneducated inpatient crap like this and reviews targeted towards existing ergo keyboard fans.

What we need is a midde ground. Ergo stuff takes a lot of time and patience to get used to. Plus, most ergo stuff is highly configurable, which can be both a double edged sword anf overwhelming. We need less content convincing existing ergo fans to buy new ergo gearb and more content to help the ergo curious and newbies fully transition into ergo fans.

Fuck yes, this movie is amazing

Lol....really?

You forgot the piece after what you quoted

Because that's literally what OP is arguing for, no assumptions needed, a position you were defending above?

And the fact that you haven't made any comments about Islam for me to call racist.....

The piece you quoted above is me noting that you appear to be agreeing with OP's assertion that he should be free to criticize Islam without being called racist. Then you claim you are open to all criticism. But if you agree with OP, then that means you're open to criticism until someone calls your criticism of islam racist....right?

I never called you racist. If I implied anything its just that your claim about being open to criticism breaks down as soon as you're called racist. And these recent replies seem to confirm that....

Strange how you have ignored all context of what you were originally arguing for and are now completely focused on what you perceive as a personal attack as if asking for me to apologize for it.

I never called you racist, bud. If you think I did, maybe you need to evaluate that.

Well, as always, context is king and stating that "Islam is not a race, so therefore criticizing Islam is not racist" ignores the content of the criticism as well as a lot of social context..

As to the content, we don't really know because OP didn't tell us. He's asking for blanket acceptance of the premise that nobody should be allowed to call him racist for criticising Islam - and I'm not willing to give him that.

I firmly believe that anyone who wants the freedom to say whatever they want has to give the freedom of criticism to their audience. That means, if one cares enough about being called racist that one posts a meme calling those critics stupid, maybe one should instead endeavor to ask and learn why their comments seem racist, rather than dismissing it outright.

As to the context, I am a white American dude and though I try to educate myself on all perspectives, I don't pretend to understand what a Muslim goes through. That said, I do know a few pieces of context that shoot holes in the premise:

1. Racists absolutely use "muslim" to refer to a generalized swath of "brown people" from the middle-east, balkans, and part of eastern europe. Racists often use "muslims" instead of ethnicity because they don't actually know the ethnicity they're attacking and just want a word other than "those brown people that blow themselves up."

2. Negative atheism is often used as a straw man for racism. A lot of neo-nazis are actually atheist and will post racist and hateful rhetoric that's disguised as "atheist criticism against Islam" so that it doesn't get taken down by mods or so the author can fall back on "its not racist because its a religion."

3. The vast majority of criticism against Islam ignores a ton of sociopolitical history and attribute acts and practices to the religion that are actually more regime-based than anything. Islam is America is VERY different from Islam in Iraq or Afghanistan. The religion is used as a tool for oppression in some regions, but that is no different than if any other religion were dominant. That is absolutely a problem for religon, but it not just an Islamic problem. Most muslim women in America that wear hijabs do so because they want to. American mosques are generally a more welcoming, generous, and peaceful place than many Christian churches. The majority of Muslims across the world actually describe themselves as passivists and condemn the acts of fundamentalists. Criticizing the sociopolitical practices of a few regions as a specific feature of Islam simultaneously insults muslims, ignores real historical factors, and ignores the true plight of a wide swath of ethnicities that - tbh, western countries absolutely contributed to. It's hard to know what exactly that is, a racism is at least one of them.

I have no idea if any of these things apply to the comment that got OP called racist. But if they do, I think getting called racist would be justified. That said, it's not for me to decide. It's for the responder to decide. OPs job is either to hand wave it and move on, or to find out why his comment was called racist and reevaluate whether his criticism is aimed at the right people.

Um.....unless it's to call your criticism of Islam racist, right? Because that's literally what OP is arguing for, no assumptions needed, a position you were defending above? Do you even know what you're arguing with me about?