Again, I’m not saying it’s a good thing. But the original person said they paid Google for getting GrapheneOS on their Pixel and thus they should get GrapheneOS, all of which I’m saying is that they did not pay Google for that and thus this specific argument is invalid.

But that’s the thing, this only affects GrapheneOS, GrapheneOS was never even implied to be supported. The Pixel default OS still works perfectly well and is getting updates and everything.

The person said

paying money for something should get you the thing you paid for

what exactly did you pay for when you bought your phone is my question. The Pixel keeps working doesn’t it? Did the purchase contract state that you get perpetual open source access to any further updates of the Android operating system?

I’m not saying that Google is doing anything good here. I’m just saying that the argument of “get the thing you paid for” is not applicable here. You paid for a phone, you got the phone. You can still put any software you want on it. You just don’t get the newest development in an open source form, which was always just based on Google’s goodwill and never part of any purchasing agreement.

Um, does the Pixel not work anymore? Did you pay for open source access of the device code?

Lol, as if a stock iPhone was any better than a stock Pixel?

Now you can look at actually better alternatives (privacy/whatever wise)

Relying on Google was always ridiculous. People thought they could have their cake (a device with cutting-edge hardware) and eat it too (not be spied on for ads to support this). It was always clear that Google will eventually fight against custom OS on their phones.

I fear this is a problem that may never be solved. I mean that people of any intelligence fall for the mind’s biases.

There’s just too little to be gained feelings-wise. Yeah, you make better decisions, but you’re also sacrificing “going with the flow”, acting like our nature wants us to act. Going against your own nature is hard and sometimes painful.

Making wrong decisions is objectively worse, leading to worse outcomes, but if it doesn’t feel worse (because you’re not attributing the effects of the wrong decisions to the right cause, i.e. acting irrationally), then why should a person do it. If you follow the mind’s bias towards attributing your problems away from irrationality, it’s basically a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Great article.

You’re absolutely right, but the average person does not think like you. Most people don’t ever think about stuff like this.

And so you currently have a very “high-level”, rational view of technology, that makes it amazing specifically for you.

However, you either disregard or lack contact with people that are (vastly) different. When looking at a technology in relation to the world, like you want to know about in this topic, you have to view the effects on those different people from you as well. And what other people in this thread said is simply observable and happening. A very small percentage uses the internet/technology like you do. The overall effect on the population is not solely amazing.

Why the fuck would you go for Backend in C++ and frontend in Java 🤣 just the wrong way around

Actually, we see the world in

What do the numbers mean?