For me I say that a truck with a cab longer than its bed is not a truck, but an SUV with an overgrown bumper.

  • Xandolas@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Those big SUV like Ford f150 should be illegal, for real. They are super long and tall, the driver can barely see what’s right in front, it’s dangerous for everyone not in the car. Cars should have stricter limits on size, if it’s bigger, you need a special license.

    • Riskable@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      In the US anyone with a basic driver’s license can drive a huge Recreational Vehicle (RV) the size of a bus with 7 passengers. They’re super dangerous and it’s insane!

      A 2,500-pound car and a 10,000-pound RV are the same from the perspective of the vehicle “class” on the driver’s license. This is not OK.

    • Jaded5450@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m 6ft/183cm and those things are taller than my shoulders. If I can’t see the drivers, there’s no way they can see children. Ban these trucks!

    • Chobbes@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Let’s go one further and just… basically ban all cars. Almost nobody should be driving all of the time in a city, and when you start to think about how many problems and how much of a nuisance cars are it seems painfully obvious.

      Yes, there’s problems that we’d need to solve in order to do this, and some things would just be a little less convenient… But cities would be so much safer, quieter, and have much better air quality if fewer people were driving. Bikes are very effective for getting around for most people (especially if you don’t have to worry about cars murdering you), e-bikes make it a little more accessible, and you can’t tell me we couldn’t have an absolutely bitching public transit system if 1) we didn’t have to account for so many cars, and 2) even a small fraction of what everybody spends on their own personal motor vehicles went towards public transit infrastructure.

      Sometimes we need cars to haul stuff, it totally makes sense to have motor vehicles for emergency situations and stuff, but pretty much nobody needs a giant SUV to commute to an office job by themselves. The amount of huge cars you see driving around with only one person is super depressing when you start looking for it.

      • Dash@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        For the United States, I agree mass Transit should be a much more prominent thing than it is, but suburbs and mass transit is difficult to deal with. 50% of the U.S. lives in suburbs, 20% of the U.S. lives in rural areas.

        I couldn’t live where I live without a car, and we literally have no mass transit. My nearest tiny grocery store is 3 miles away. I’m not putting a family of 4 on bicycles to make a run to the store to buy groceries, loading it on a bicycle, then hauling it home.

        Part of the issue of mass transit, cities, and cars, is if I’m in a suburb 5 miles from a proper urban area with access to amenities, and I have no mass transit to get there, I have to take my car. And if I have my car when I get to the city, why would I park it to then take mass transit?

        Mass transit actually has to become a realistic option for the 30% that live in a city before we even start to talk about mass transit for the other 70% of the U.S.

        • DaleGribble88@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          And realistically, those cities need major redesigns to support a mass transit-style system. The fight for public transportation starts with zoning and districting. Get mixed-use neighborhoods up and rolling, some medium-density housing developments with townhouses, duplexes, and triplexes. The fight for a bike system (Why do we need bike lines along car road? Screw bike lanes, I want bike networks.) and buses come shortly thereafter.

        • Chobbes@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yes, obviously with how things are currently it’s not always practical to live without a car, but I don’t think it means we should be defeatist about it and assume that that’s the way things have to be. Yes, change will have to be gradual, but I think it’s reasonable to look into changing zoning laws so suburbs don’t have to be barren wastelands without any nearby shops. Yes, biking to get groceries is a little less convenient, but realistically many people and families can manage this just fine (especially with a bike trailer), and a 3 mile bike ride is like… 10 or 15 minutes?

          Obviously things need to improve for these to be more reliable options for more people, and there will be inconveniences along the way, but I kind of think it’s worth thinking about shifting things in this direction, instead of cementing things the way they are? Like, walkable neighbourhoods are great, and having good public transit and biking infrastructure makes a city more accessible and gives people more freedoms and makes it so not having a driver’s license or car (e.g., due to disability or finances) isn’t a death sentence… And it’s probably better for the environment and people’s happiness and safety too. I’m really just kind of tired by how much money and effort is spent on catering to cars, which in my opinion makes our public spaces so much worse.

          And if I have my car when I get to the city, why would I park it to then take mass transit?

          I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have to do this? From an individual perspective it’s obviously better to just be able to drive everywhere and park near your destination, I can totally empathize with you there… But there’s plenty of situations where you end up with sub-optimal solutions when everybody tries to follow their own self-interests. When everybody drives into the city all of the time that’s more carbon, more vehicles, more pollution, more noise, you need more infrastructure, more maintenance, and more parking… Things have to get further and further apart to support all of this infrastructure, and there’s more traffic and congestion which makes everything less efficient.

          I mean, to be clear, I’m not saying this always makes sense… And I don’t want to see you suddenly have a 3 hour commute either. I want you to have good options for getting into the city… But I also don’t want you to be trapped in the suburb unable to come to work if you lose the ability to drive all of a sudden either, and I don’t want you to have to deal with finding parking or sitting in traffic either.

          I get that these are unpopular opinions — people like their cars and they’re convenient for many things, and the thought of transitioning away from needing them as much seems scary because cars are basically people’s life blood at the moment… But I kind of feel like cars are killing us (often literally) with how expensive they are, how they limit access for people, how they shape our cities and make communities more isolated, and how they damage the environment.

          • Dash@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Don’t mistake me, I would much prefer to just hop on public transit and get to where I want without having to drive. Whenever I travel I take great pleasure in being able to use public transit that actually just “works” and not having to rent a car or drive my own car around

            That being said, I think bicycles and “walkable” cities are the stupidest pursuit people who want to change the system pursue. It’s easy to make a bike lane to point to and go “see! progress!” when no one will end up using the bike lane with any real consistency because the city is still laid out like garbage and getting from one end of even a small city to the other by bicycle lane is frustrating at best and dangerous/suicidal at worst.

            • Chobbes@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t think bicycles and walkable cities are a stupid pursuit at all, but I do agree that often times bicycie infrastructure isn’t given the care or respect it deserves! That said, I think sometimes these changes are incremental progress that can get better over time… Sometimes you end up with bike lanes that aren’t great to get to for instance, but they’ll eventually make more sense when the network expands (and each additional bike lane makes this exponentially better). Plus, I get the sense that drivers often don’t have a good sense of how much other transit infrastructure is used and relied upon by other people. I’ve often heard complaints about having to wait for trains at lights, for instance, and it’s a bit silly because the trains have hundreds of people on them, so they really should take priority, even if the traffic waiting at the light looks bigger because it’s so much less space efficient. I suspect in a similar way the usage of bike lanes is often underestimated because they’re quite efficient at getting people through in a small amount of space with little congestion. Bike lanes support some pretty serious throughput, so even if they get some pretty heavy use they might seem empty and unused… You just never really have a traffic jam or anything on them because they’re so effective at moving people through.

    • limeaide@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I kinda agree and disagree with this POV. I think it’s more of a cultural issue and not a legal one. At least in the US, people think it’s trendy to buy a big truck, but as someone who worked in a blue collar field for years, a lot of these people that drive trucks do it because they need it for their jobs. Trust me, most of these people don’t like spending thousands on repairs and $100+/weekly. for gas

      Not sure what the solution would be, but I don’t think banning them would be it. I think it would mostly affect the blue collar worker and not the people who are actually the problem.

      Also, I used to drive one of those big ass trucks for work, and I can assure you that visibility is not an issue. They are tall, open, have huge mirrors, and have seats that are high up. I could see a lot more and a lot better than in my current sedan.

      • Daeraxa@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        What kind of jobs mandate the use of a pickup instead of a regular old van? Maybe tree surgeons and gardeners? Not sure who else specifically requires an open bed. Even then the open bed vans are far more spacious and practical so still not sure where a pickup is ever the correct choice.

        • Dash@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Anyone who lives in the suburbs where doing lawn maintenance, tree trimming, and other such stuff is required due to HOAs and other such nonsense typically requires either owning a truck, or having a friend with a truck, because every now and then you have to pack it full of lawn crap and haul it off. I have to do yearly fire protection on my property, that includes cutting out bushes, trimming trees, and creating defensible space. Loading that into a van would be a pain in the ass, loading it into an SUV means I’m never getting the sap out of the carpet. Throwing it in the back of a pickup bed means I don’t even have to think about it.

          I don’t own a pickup, but I have multiple friends with pickups, and you get into a beneficial “I’ll buy you a tank of diesel if I can borrow your truck for an afternoon” relationship. They get 100 bucks in fuel, I get my lawn crap taken care of.

          • that_one_guy@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            In many places outside the US, people just rent a trailer or a truck if they need one once a year. Obviously people who need these vehicles for their daily work should be able to use them, but driving a massive pickup truck because you have one task for it annually doesn’t seem like a good solution.

            • blindsight@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              People go camping twice/year and buy a trailer and F350 to haul it, leaving the trailer vacant 50 weeks of the year and using the F350 as a commuter vehicle. But they nEeD a tRuCK fOr HauLiNG.

              It’s insanity.

          • Daeraxa@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I understand the general use case what I don’t get is where a pickup is more suitable than something like a flatbed Transit - https://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTAyNFgxMDI0/z/VmIAAOSw6DNcrKoD/$_86.JPG

            Which has a bigger bed, a far more economical engine and is overall far more suitable as a work vehicle for carrying those kinds of loads.

            Also do you not just have garden waste collection services?

            Just hire the above for the few times a year you would need it. Honestly I do find it baffling.

            • Dash@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’d definitely consider a flatbed transit personally, but there is definitely a “cool” factor that is lost on something that looks like that. Not that “cool” factor is a good argument for something to exist, but it is what it is.

              And I could probably do that, but I’m in a pretty rural area and services like that tend to have a very long wait list around here because there’s too many people that need the same work done, and not enough handymen/services willing to do it. Not to mention the cost tends to be several hundred dollars.

  • noeontheend@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    My version of the “could care less” pet peeve (which is annoying but tolerable) is when people reverse the order of the cases in a “let alone” phrase. The entire point of “let alone” is that you fail to meet the general case, so of course you don’t satisfy the specific case.

    For example, if I asked someone “Have you ever been to Germany?” they might answer “I’ve never been to Germany, let alone Europe!” As is, this is nonsensical, but if you reverse the order, all is well. Most examples in the wild aren’t this obvious, but they’re commonplace once you start looking for them.

    • UnhealthyPersona@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I actually still don’t understand how this phrase is supposed to be used. Can you explain what is meant by reversing the order? Which parts are supposed to be switched?

  • rustyspoon@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This is more of a meta thing, but relevant to a lot of comments I’m seeing here. Having an opinion about pineapple on pizza is the most uninteresting cultural phenomenon. I’ve spent the last 4 years on dating apps, and at least 1 in 3 people write in their bio about this “issue”. It’s not something that people truly have strong feelings about, it’s like straight men saying Ryan Reynolds is attractive, or people arguing over the definition of a sandwich. It’s an opinion that people hold as a proxy for being somebody with strong opinions.

  • Undisclosed@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Vanilla is NOT a boring flavour. It is the best flavour and most versatile flavour!!! Describing things as vanilla should not be synonymous with boring and I’ll fight anyone who argues otherwise

    • nttea@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I always considered Vanilla to mean default and not “boring”. I feel like only a minority of people interpret it that way and even fewer use it that way.

  • SevenSwell@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I know it has a long history of not being used literally, but I think literally should only be used to mean literally.

  • ForthEorlingas@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s “I could not care less” not “I could care less”. If you could care less, then that means you care. If you can’t care less, then that means you are all out of fucks to give.

    • sophs [she/her]@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve read somewhere that English teachers and grammarians agree that “I couldn’t care less” is the correct one, and it makes more sense to me too.

      Although, I can see how “I could care less” could mean that: you care so little that if you wanted you could care even less, but you don’t care enough to do that.

      • dxcz@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I’ve always thought it could be a good retort when someone is dissatisfied with the amount of resources you’ve already put towards some thing.

        “Wow, thanks for getting me only 20 bucks in my birthday card”

        “you’re only volunteering for a day? They are volunteering for at least three”

        “Gross, you’re got me a used laptop?”

  • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you throw cigarette butts on the ground you’re probably shittier than average person in many other ways too

  • mtizim@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Cats are an environmental disaster and if you let your cat roam outside or feed wild cats, you’re just a bad person and directly responsible for hundreds of bird deaths.

  • meyotch@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    If someone uses the phrase “assless chaps” I will not rest until they admit that if chaps had an ass, they would be pants.

    Fight me.

    • GiantBasil@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ok, but, what if the chaps had an ass but still had the front open? Would those still be pants?

        • GiantBasil@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I… guess? The point of chaps is extra leg protection right? (And some pizazz) And there’s one type with all front and no back called Armita. So it probably would be chaps, albeit a poorly designed one.

    • madkarlsson@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Never in my life I thought I would spend time thinking about assless chaps. But I will die on this hill with you

  • Nanokindled@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Microsoft Word is a bad piece of software that is poorly designed, laughably unoptimized, and mostly dysfunctional. It’s like a passenger car with seven wheels arranged in an irregular septagon, a 1 gallon gas tank, and a kitchen stool for a seat.

    Also hype clothes are a tremendous waste and reveal the hollowness and meaninglessness that underlies most fashion

  • TheBaldness@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Unless it’s boiled before they bake it, it’s not a fucking bagel, it’s doughnut-shaped bread. Bagels also do not contain blueberries, and any suggestion to the contrary should be met with a swift ass whooping.

    • ledtasso@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bagels also do not contain blueberries

      This made me think, “Everything” bagels don’t actually include blueberries, but it’s literally supposed to contain everything! Irrefutable proof that blueberries can’t be in bagels

  • bbtai@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Artificial sweeteners is one of the reasons I’m not obese. You can quote me all the studies you want, diet coke is not a gateway drink to regular coke, and splenda on my black coffee doesn’t make me crave a caramel macchiato.

      • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m kind on the same hill. I find that artificial sweetener leave a terrible taste in the mouth.

        The worst is that some regular drinks are using sugar plus sweetener. I got this bad surprise now than once after taking the first sip.

        • UnhealthyPersona@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I completely agree and don’t know how other people don’t notice the awful taste? Like the aftertaste is sooo gross and sticks around for awhile. Maybe it’s genetics and taste buds related. I also get bloated and headaches from things like sucralose.

          On another note though I have actually found an artificial sweetener that doesn’t taste like ass and doesn’t have negative side effects like sucralose for me. Xylitol has been great and I can finally chew gum again that’s good for my teeth too.

      • orphiebaby@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Aspartame gave me terrible headaches. Then I became diabetic. Turns out by that time sucralose was more popular. It doesn’t give me headaches and it tastes fine. After so long of having sucralose, I can now tolerate aspartame. Still gross though.

    • eightys3v3n@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      WHO says sugar alternatives not effective for weight loss. I think this would also generally imply that they do not prevent weight gain. I think you likely just don’t gain weight regardless of sweetener; like how I and most of my family don’t gain weight regardless of what we eat. That is to say our habits and decisions don’t allow for weight gain regardless of sweetener, not that we have some genetic thing processes sugar differently or anything so unlikely.
      Though yes, I also disagree with that strawman argument, diet coke being a gateway pop or artificial sweeteners being gateway sugar seems a bit rediculous.
      https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/15/health/who-sweeteners-weigh-loss-guideline-wellness/index.html

      • Omegamanthethird@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think it’s important to note that this was strictly an observational study that they explicitly describe as “conditional”. They don’t go into the how or why of it. It could be that it’s a negligible change or that participants overindulge elsewhere because they cut it out of sweeteners or that the most at-risk use sugar alternatives or that they lose weight in the short term (mentioned in the article) before reaching their new maintained weight.

        Honestly, I think the last part is very likely, or a mix of many of those. They say it doesn’t have a long-term effect, although it can have a short-term effect. So if you decrease your calorie intake a little, you’ll lose weight until your calorie output matches (less weight mean less effort to move).

        So, it’s not an end-all solution.

    • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah. I don’t get it either. Artificial sweetners are way more effective at stimulating your tastebuds than sugar for the calories.

      Why would anyone switch to an inferior product which ruins your health if they have the option not to??

      • ArumiOrnaught@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I can taste all of the artificial sweeteners. My spouse uses them constantly and they taste sideways to me. My partner doesn’t taste much of a difference so If we ever get drinks mixed up I’m the poison tester.

        The only way to get them to taste fine enough is by using a mixture of a few different ones. I’m sure my experience is similar to people who have the cilantro soap thing.

        • AttackBunny@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think high fructose corn syrup taste like literal poison. I can taste it in anything and everything it’s in. Funny thing though. Your tastebuds acclimate, and you get used to flavors (either HFCS or Aspartame). I still struggle with stevia, sometimes, but it’s far easier to look past than high fructose corn syrup.

          • keet@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Artificial sweetners do taste “off” to me, but tastebuds can acclimate to it. The rest of my digestive system? Not so much. Let’s just say there is a reason it is pronounced ASS-partame.

          • ArumiOrnaught@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            My partner has been doing low carb for around 5 years now. I’m assuming it takes longer? I usually try everything they make. From ice cream to syrups to cakes.

            Real talk though, I love xanthan gum. I know it’s garbage.

    • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’re also one of the most heavily studied food additives and if it was going to poison you big-sugar would let us know.

      • SenorBolsa@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Aspartame is the only artificial food additive I feel has been studied so much that’s it’s all but guaranteed to be safe for human consumption (unless you lack the ability to process certain proteins, but you know that if that’s you)

        Sucralose and other more novel alcohol sugars (ethyritol/monkfruit) are slightly more questionable to me, but should still be fine in moderation.

        • curiosityLynx@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Possibly also depends on your body in other ways. I have yet to find an artificial sweetener that doesn’t give me headaches. Multiple times I had a headache for seemingly no reason and found out something I consumed a few hours earlier had artificial sweeteners. Same goes for too much licorice or stevia.

          • SenorBolsa@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yeah some people are sensitive to Phenylalanine without having Phenylketonuria, relatively uncommon. As with all things natural or not you should listen to what your body tells you there is no one reaction to anything. Eggs and dairy can also be high in this amino acid.

            • curiosityLynx@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I have no problem at all with either eggs or dairy, so it must be something else. I suspect it’s my brain registering sweetness and telling the respective glands to prepare for an influx of sugars which then fail to appear, leading to those headaches.

  • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Phones are for talking, navigating, and casual content consumption. Desktops (and laptops) are for actually getting things done. Both are useful, but the former is not a substitute for the latter.

    Tablets are oversized phones that can’t even phone. I don’t see any use for them that isn’t better served by something else. They’d actually be useful if they ran a desktop operating system, and some early ones did, but modern ones don’t.

    • ShittyKopper [they/them]@lemmy.w.on-t.work
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Tablets do have a singular purpose, being drawing.

      Of course, most tablets that aren’t specially built for it (or are from Apple) are terrible at it, but I definitely wouldn’t want to draw on a phone or with a mouse.

      • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I seem to recall there being purpose-built drawing tablets that are only drawing tablets, and act as a peripheral to a computer rather than a computer unto themselves. That sounds good on paper, since then you can still use the keyboard and mouse for everything other than drawing, but I’ve never used one, so I wouldn’t know.

        Also, there are laptops with touchscreens and full-range hinges. With that, you could do your drawing on an actual, fully-functional laptop. I haven’t used one of those, either, though. I do have a laptop with a touchscreen, which could in theory be used for drawing, but it has a normal laptop hinge and can’t be held like a tablet or paper notebook, so actually drawing on it is cumbersome at best.

    • HalJor@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      My dermatologist uses a tablet. Seems way more useful than a phone (larger screen) or laptop (handheld, more portable). I use mine mainly for reading, mainly graphic novels, but also for Slack, Zoom calls, and general one-off productivity away from my office where my laptop lives.

    • Dash@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      What about when I want a larger screen than what my phone offers without the added bulk of a physical keyboard? What should I use then?

      • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Funny you should say that. I would very much like a phone that has a physical keyboard, like my old Droid 3 had.

  • Souvlaki@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Microtransactions are not acceptable in full retail single player games. I don’t care if it’s only cosmetics. If i pay 60 bucks for it, i better get the whole damn thing. Looking at you, Diablo 4.

    • suddenlythequietrose@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Further, I’m convinced the term “microtransaction” was introduced by corporations cynically and insidiously knowing full well they would ramp the price up over time deluding the meaning of the term.

    • HalJor@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Related: If it’s more than 99¢, it’s not a “microtransaction”. There’s nothing “micro” about $99.99. That’s an “in-app purchase”.

      • Souvlaki@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Absolutely. But you can see it the other way, the “micro” now refers to what you are getting and *not *what you are paying.

    • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agree 100%. I’d honestly argue there shouldn’t be microtransactions in any single-player game, unless it is free.

      I miss the days when you unlocked cosmetics, etc. by actually playing the game and doing achievements rather than needing to buy them through "micro"transactions.