I think most tech is bullshit. 4k screens, multi-camera phones, new gadgets. Bullshit. I have a 6 year old laptop, and an external monitor someone threw away. I have a 30 Euro 18 buttons mouse, from a non-brand, and a 20 Euro pair of headphones that are some 5 years old. All good. Am working on a multi hour documentary with these. My phone is 7 years old. My desk is made out of an old closet. My electric scooter is 8 years old. Not made out of an old closet!
Audio systems....bullshit. Microphones...mostly bullshit. Cameras, pretty bullshit.
What I mean is the difference between brands and prices is almost non-existent in terms of quality + what you do with them matters. The reason people are obsessed with these is because companies are great at selling illusions and useless features, plus blowing out of the water tiny miniscule differences to make them look important. Hard truth to swallow if you are a techy-guy/girl. But that's the truth.
like this
reshared this
Earthshine
in reply to Tio • • •like this
Tio and clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 like this.
Raphael
in reply to Earthshine • • •That is not the case with computers and phones etc
(Not saying tech vs non tech bc technically a wrench is tech)
Luna Saphira Dragofelis 🐱 likes this.
Santiago
in reply to Tio • • •billy joe bowers - Harris2024
in reply to Tio • • •Which is like me deciding I need a Formula 1 car to go to the grocery store.
nickapos :clubtwit:
in reply to Tio • • •Luna Saphira Dragofelis 🐱 likes this.
Theodore John Kaczynski
in reply to Tio • • •albi von skládka 🇨🇿
in reply to Tio • • •Tio
in reply to albi von skládka 🇨🇿 • •albi von skládka 🇨🇿
in reply to Tio • • •Tio
in reply to albi von skládka 🇨🇿 • •They exaggerate claims...for instance they may advertise a 4k camera on a phone, and you may think it is the same as a professional (or normal) 4k camera. Not at all. My 2015 phone has a "4k camera". If I compare it with a normal camera that has proper 4k filming capabilities, it is....well...my phone one is complete shit. And I compared with new phone models too, same....
4k, 8k recordings are a scam for phones. Maybe for other cameras too. Also....you need a 4k screen to see a 4k video and take advantage of that. This is another BS. Most people don't have a 4k screen, let alone 8k one. And the difference in video quality is minimal.
albi von skládka 🇨🇿
in reply to Tio • • •Tio
in reply to albi von skládka 🇨🇿 • •Health Is Wealth
in reply to Tio • • •Tio likes this.
Tio
Unknown parent • •like this
wizzwizz4, pintoo, Rokosun and Roma like this.
reshared this
wizzwizz4, pintoo and Rokosun reshared this.
Tio
Unknown parent • •Tech is one domain where this kind of BS is spreading, of selling very similar products every year or even month, for the sake of selling them, not because they are better. They invent a lot of bs features that are useless, and exaggerated claims about the "new features". This is ofc true for clothes, food, and pretty much everything.
I write about these in detail here tromsite.com/books/
www-gem likes this.
www-gem
in reply to Tio • • •Tio
Unknown parent • •www-gem
Unknown parent • • •Tio
Unknown parent • •www-gem
in reply to Tio • • •Christina Sørensen
in reply to Tio • • •> What I mean is the difference between brands and prices is almost non-existent in terms of quality
you had me in the first half not gonna lie, but this take is so wrong, everything else was okay, but brand vary WIDELY, both in quality and in value/price.
If you have ever worked with e.g. blender or had to compile large projects, it's also obvious that hardware matters, it can be the difference between days or minutes.
Yes they market it over the top. Yes, I'm on hardware mostly from 2012 and I have basically no need to upgrade anything, only repairs. No, a 750w power supply would not meet the needs of my system, I need one with 1500w, that's not an useless feature, that's how much power it can provide to my system.
Denying that there are objective measures of hardware quality really dilutes you message that I actually agree with somewhat.
Some brand are also more FOSS aligned than others, and choosing those might save you a lot of hassle down the line, and help you promote you and your friends self liberation from proprietary garbage.
Christina Sørensen
in reply to Christina Sørensen • • •> If say Mozilla calls their VPN as “free” as in “the source code is open and you can ‘fork’ it”, but they charge money for the service….it makes 0 sense. I can “fork” the code, ok, but can I use it with their VPN servers? No. Then what is the point of that!? Call the VPN client as “Public Source Code Software” that can be Edited/Shared/Copied or whatever “license” you want to attach to it. And call it a day.
tiotrom.com/2022/08/free-softw…
Free as in freedom dork, please consider being a bit more informed about the things you talk about. This is so fundamentally a part of FOSS.
Free Software Nonsense.
TIOTio
in reply to Christina Sørensen • •Christina Sørensen
in reply to Tio • • •There is no discussion, you're just not aware of the definition of free software.
gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.…
> “Free software” means software that respects users' freedom and community. Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. Thus, “free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of “free” as in “free speech,” not as in “free beer.” We sometimes call it “libre software,” borrowing the French or Spanish word for “free” as in freedom, to show we do not mean the software is gratis.
> You may have paid money to get copies of a free program, or you may have obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies.
This is foundational knowledge.
... show moreThere is no discussion, you're just not aware of the definition of free software.
gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.…
> “Free software” means software that respects users' freedom and community. Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. Thus, “free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of “free” as in “free speech,” not as in “free beer.” We sometimes call it “libre software,” borrowing the French or Spanish word for “free” as in freedom, to show we do not mean the software is gratis.
> You may have paid money to get copies of a free program, or you may have obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies.
This is foundational knowledge.
What is Free Software? - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
www.gnu.orgTio
in reply to Christina Sørensen • •Yes I know very well what "free-software" is. I am saying the word makes no sense anymore since if you have to pay for something, it is not free. Yet some say it is. You also took things out of context with the quote you posted from my original post about it. Read that post and the comments on that post.
The "Free-Software" "movement" is great, but also they bastardized the word "free" and that was abused by so many companies.
Christina Sørensen
in reply to Tio • • •> I am saying the word makes no sense anymore since if you have to pay for something, it is not free.
as a left-libertarian I agree with the idea you're presenting... but that's really missing the point.
is it not free speech if it's published in a paid magazine?
maybe it's not freely available, and it would be great if it was, and personally I actually wanted a version of the AGPLv3 that was non commercial... but I fail to see how the free software foundation makes a mistake in using the definition of freedom that is most widely used.
Surely you could say that we should redefine “freedom”, but this just comes of as you wanting reality to conform to your opinion. Which is post factual in my book.
Christina Sørensen
in reply to Christina Sørensen • • •Tio
in reply to Christina Sørensen • •Cédric Bellegarde
in reply to Tio • • •Logiciel libre vs Logiciel gratuit.
No confusion possible un french.
Tio
in reply to Christina Sørensen • •Of course a great GPU is better than a very low spec one. There are differences in hardware but mostly between high end and low end ones. The rest are kinda not that important and new graphic cards, new models, are hardly improvements over the previous ones. Tiny differences are sold as big differences.
Christina Sørensen
in reply to Tio • • •AMD uses freesync which is an open standard, nvidia uses gsync which is a closed standard. That's an example of a brand being superior to another.
A samsung phone is practially impossible to root, a google pixel is recommended by graphene os.
Not even to mention that a pinephone is much more free than that still.
Brand matter.
Tio
in reply to Christina Sørensen • •Christina Sørensen
in reply to Tio • • •> The difference between AMD and Nvidia can be seen as a difference in practice
> Both are companies tho, so both are badly incentivized in their own regards.
> So the "brand" does not really matter
Ain Soph Aur 🔧 likes this.
Tio
in reply to Christina Sørensen • •www-gem
Unknown parent • • •www-gem
Unknown parent • • •www-gem
in reply to www-gem • • •www-gem
Unknown parent • • •Tio
Unknown parent • •People have traded for thousands of years. Sure, what you call as "fashion" may not have started with trade, but trade for sure promoted and abused the concept. You can call "fashion" anything and sell infinite stuff based on that. In this regards, "fashion" is a very harmful practice/notion.
I do not know, but the amount of BS in advertising in general is astonishing. Actually advertising is all about selling you false or exaggerated claims.
That's what I spent the last decade trying to figure out. The short answer is to move past a trade-based society, towards a sharing-society. So that people are not incentivized to promote false products and so forth. The long answer resides in this book I wrote "The Origin of Most Problems".
Tio
Unknown parent • •Tio
Unknown parent • •www-gem likes this.
Tio
Unknown parent • •It is true that one may be biased in sharing their own things (books, videos, projects, whatever) but when they sell these products (thus relying on an income that's generated via these products) the likelihood for them to lie, exaggerate, deceive and so forth, is far greater.
To put it simply, if I were to sell my book, and that money helps me pay my rent or buy food and so forth, then I will be more aggressive in "promoting" my book simply because I need to pay my rent and need food to eat. However, because I do not trade my book for anything, I am a lot less biased in sharing it with people. I have nothing to gain personally if you read it.
So yes, trade has a very bad influence and makes things a lot worse in this regards.
Tio
Unknown parent • •We should not exaggerate of course. But right now we can see that taking the trade away creates a lot more honest beings. We provide lots of examples in that book that I "advertised" :D - plus we have this directory here directory.trade-free.org/ full of examples like that.
So I think we have enough to prove that humans would behave a lot, lot better if they were not engaging into trading this for that.
You assume there is a "void" that needs to be filled. But why should that be?
... show moreThis perhaps goes hand in hand with trade-advantages. Kings, Musk, and others, have a lot of power and power trips, simply because they can take advantage of poor people who do as they say. If people were not so poor, and they had access
We should not exaggerate of course. But right now we can see that taking the trade away creates a lot more honest beings. We provide lots of examples in that book that I "advertised" :D - plus we have this directory here directory.trade-free.org/ full of examples like that.
So I think we have enough to prove that humans would behave a lot, lot better if they were not engaging into trading this for that.
You assume there is a "void" that needs to be filled. But why should that be?
This perhaps goes hand in hand with trade-advantages. Kings, Musk, and others, have a lot of power and power trips, simply because they can take advantage of poor people who do as they say. If people were not so poor, and they had access to at least their needs as trade-free, likely they would be harder to manipulate, and thus grow this "power". In other words, a boss is powerful only when the employees need the job he/she offers and have no other alternative, else these people can leave, and the boss will have no more power over them.
Are traded nowadays, this is why I'd argue they are a result of the same system of trade. Why people want to become famous? Likely because fame means money, thus access to the things you need/want. Also because celebrities are sold, traded, and thus they become popular (on tv, magazines, online) promoting that lifestyle. Again through trades (they pay people to do marketing and all that). Then people see it and want to become like them. Classic value influence.
Education is very important. You cannot have a different kind of society with people who are adapted to this one. No more than bringing someone from a tribe to live in NY.
Georgi likes this.
Tio
Unknown parent • •These masters had power over slaves because they were supported by a system of trade, where authorities (paid by the state) would protect them. It is not like those white folks were so karate-kid that they could beat those black-guys into submission. It was because those white folks were supported by a system (police, military, guns) that forced those black-dudes to conform. So, the gathering of power is again exemplify through trades. Not all cases can be explained via trade, but most seem to be.
More to the point, slaves were/are needed because of....you guessed it: trade. To produce sugar, cotton, electronics, etc.. To then be traded to the rest of the world. And thus, the incentive to have slaves, comes from the incentive to trade en mass.
... show moreHow do you know that?
These masters had power over slaves because they were supported by a system of trade, where authorities (paid by the state) would protect them. It is not like those white folks were so karate-kid that they could beat those black-guys into submission. It was because those white folks were supported by a system (police, military, guns) that forced those black-dudes to conform. So, the gathering of power is again exemplify through trades. Not all cases can be explained via trade, but most seem to be.
More to the point, slaves were/are needed because of....you guessed it: trade. To produce sugar, cotton, electronics, etc.. To then be traded to the rest of the world. And thus, the incentive to have slaves, comes from the incentive to trade en mass.
How do you know that?
Fame? Makes you feel competent and welcome? Maybe you understand something totally different by fame....but anyway, fame is a symbol promoted by trading agencies: magazines, movies, books, songs....of course people want that and flamethrowers. Whatever is promoted...
Free access to healthcare, food, shelter gives us that. Taking care of people gives us that. Fame makes you a prisoner in a prison you don't control. One made of followers, money, influence. No wonder most famous people end up druggies and have fucked up lives.
Tio
Unknown parent • •That was an example since it involved millions of slaves. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic…
Yes there have been slaves in the Roman empire and further down the line. Many, I would argue, supported by power that was gathered via trade or other abusive means. Like soldiers are paid or give certain advantages to then respect whatever the kind says they should do.
In any case, I am more curious about today's society where indeed slavery is a result of trade in most cases. I exemplify that greatly in the books I wrote here tromsite.com/books/
... show moreI am unsure what you talk about, but these are soft sciences that heavily rely on oversimplification and interpretation. Anyway, what is not oversimplification and interpretation is that humans need food, shelter, healthcare, an
That was an example since it involved millions of slaves. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic…
Yes there have been slaves in the Roman empire and further down the line. Many, I would argue, supported by power that was gathered via trade or other abusive means. Like soldiers are paid or give certain advantages to then respect whatever the kind says they should do.
In any case, I am more curious about today's society where indeed slavery is a result of trade in most cases. I exemplify that greatly in the books I wrote here tromsite.com/books/
I am unsure what you talk about, but these are soft sciences that heavily rely on oversimplification and interpretation. Anyway, what is not oversimplification and interpretation is that humans need food, shelter, healthcare, and care in general, for their bodies and mind to survive and thrive. How can we provide that for them? Well certainly not by throwing them into a trade-game frenzy where they are forced to trade even for their basic needs. This makes them crazy. We need to provide the basic needs for all humans, as trade-free. At least as a start-point.
Tio
Unknown parent • •Removing the need for trade will greatly improve our society overall. I am not just "pure guessing". I spent at least 15 years digging into this. I wrote over 30 books, made a 14 hours documentary and working on a 6h one now. Made many videos and so forth. Thousands of sources, plenty of examples. This is the main project that's all about this work tromsite.com/
From all of that, I can strongly argue that yes, trade is the source of most (not all) problems. That includes slavery, poorly made products, waste, struggle for power and so forth.
I have looked in depth at communism, socialism, technocracy, metabolism, the evolution of trade, money and more. Self sustainable communities, cases of abuse and slavery, corruption and so forth.
So I can say with confidence that my comments do not simply come out of "pure guessing".
Tio
Unknown parent • •Ever Beedle
in reply to Tio • • •To say there’s no difference is just sour grapes IMO. My $400 1440p IPS monitor with a wide color gamut and accurate colors is a much more pleasant experience than my basic 10-year-old 1080p one next to it. Same with the $200 mechanical keyboard vs a mushy rubber dome setup, and $350 headphones vs some $30 Amazon special.
It’s true that cheap tech can still be “fine”, but to say the expensive stuff isn’t actually better is just cope IMO.
Tio
in reply to Ever Beedle • •Sure you can find some differences, but they are either shallow and hard to notice, or they would not reflect the price difference. I'd like to see a blind test of super cheap vs super expensive tech. May end up like the wine tests....even experts can't tell expensive vs cheap wine apart when blindfolded. At least not well at all.
Talking about monitors....look....I have a projector that is not nearly as "color correct" as my 1080p laptop monitor. Because it is a projector...cannot be as good as a monitor. However I love watching nature documentaries on my projector. Big and wonderful. These "color differences" make 0 difference. I work on my computer almost nonstop, and I worked on HD screens, Full HD ones too, and you forget about these when you work on them. And I do video editing a lot. The slight differences in colors and resolutions are really not important.
My phone has a 2k screen. I was testing with random people at one time, changing the res between FullHD, HD and 2k and asking them which one is....no one could tell on such a small screen.
I think these
... show moreSure you can find some differences, but they are either shallow and hard to notice, or they would not reflect the price difference. I'd like to see a blind test of super cheap vs super expensive tech. May end up like the wine tests....even experts can't tell expensive vs cheap wine apart when blindfolded. At least not well at all.
Talking about monitors....look....I have a projector that is not nearly as "color correct" as my 1080p laptop monitor. Because it is a projector...cannot be as good as a monitor. However I love watching nature documentaries on my projector. Big and wonderful. These "color differences" make 0 difference. I work on my computer almost nonstop, and I worked on HD screens, Full HD ones too, and you forget about these when you work on them. And I do video editing a lot. The slight differences in colors and resolutions are really not important.
My phone has a 2k screen. I was testing with random people at one time, changing the res between FullHD, HD and 2k and asking them which one is....no one could tell on such a small screen.
I think these slight differences you talk about got tattooed into our brains by marketing and they made us believe they are more important than they really are.
Spooky Johnny Peligro
in reply to Ever Beedle • • •Tio
Unknown parent • •Tio
Unknown parent • •Tio
Unknown parent • •David de Groot 𓆉
in reply to Tio • • •Tio likes this.
Tio
in reply to David de Groot 𓆉 • •You're missing out on smart fridges that can tell you what's inside even without opening the fridge door ytb.trom.tf/watch?v=3PYCWsjTlw… - how cool!?
Look at the updated version ytb.trom.tf/watch?v=uWRTVSs82D… - amazing! Your fridge can't do that my man!
4-Door Flex™ Refrigerator with Family Hub™ | Samsung
InvidiousDavid de Groot 𓆉
in reply to Tio • • •Tio
in reply to David de Groot 𓆉 • •Tio
Unknown parent • •Kit Rhett Aultman
in reply to Tio • • •clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 likes this.
clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 reshared this.
Tio
in reply to Kit Rhett Aultman • •sj_zero
Unknown parent • • •I have a gaming PC at home, and for that there's a reason to update every few years since video cards do change. For anything else? Nope. A 10 decent year old laptop with a bit of ram and an ssd is basically going to run perfectly for most tasks.
And as for video, unless I'm specifically looking at something, 480p is just fine. Who needs that detail for most things?
I think that changes a lot for a lot of people. It's great that we can have more power, but we are unlikely to need it for anything. At that point, making stuff that lasts sounds like a better deal to me.
🌲-alist likes this.
Spooky Johnny Peligro
in reply to Tio • • •Ji Fu doesn't like this.
Tio
Unknown parent • •And this feeling for sure comes from the ads-industry. From youtube reviews, to TV ads, online articles, and so forth. Everyone screams at you to buy the new tech, because they say it is so much better....
Tio
Unknown parent • •I am doing documentaries/videos on a 17inch laptop + a 23inch (quite bad) external monitor. I do really fine with that. I edit 4k videos too. But when editing it is not advisable to edit the raw 4k for example - use proxy clips. Makes editing much faster.
So I personally do not understand the use of 4k screens for video editing. Also, since pretty much no one has a 4k screen, and on 20ish inches and lower screens seems to not even make any difference between that and fullhd, plus all online 4k videos are extra-compressed.... is it worth it?
I am again extremely skeptical about these practices. I suspect it is the ad-market that made people think these differences are important.
Carl Southern
in reply to Tio • • •MeLe
in reply to Tio • • •Tio
in reply to MeLe • •