nintendiator

Señor, esto es un hilo de general.

Entrando a leseo, o si le disgusta el bien común saliendo de leseo, tu postura parte desde la posición que una moral o ética sostenible requiere un "fin trascendente". Si tal fuese la realidad, las generaciones muy anteriores, de los tiempos donde el humano promedio vivía con cuea 40 años y donde la amenaza más patente aún era claramente visible y tenía garras y colmillos, nunca hubieran podido optar por un bien ulterior colectivo. No sin una presión externa o "divina" como la quiera llamar.

La verdad es que más que "trascendencia", para una moral o ética sostenible se requiere continuidad. Es eso, a fin de cuentas, lo que sirve de base a "la autoridad hace la ley". Pero hay que tener cuidado de los roles que se asigna a los agentes sociales: el rol de la autoridad es ejecutar las cosas que le permiten mandar (está en el verbo mismo): lo que es permitido y lo que no; no es su rol dictaminar lo que es bien y lo que no, sino consensuarlo en forma ejecutiva. Después de todo, como colectivo soportamos la autoridad para que por arrastre social haga lo que a nosotros, en invididual, nos da somera paja hacer; mientras que cosas como "el bien", está demostrado que llevan una sensación intrínseca de satisfacción que motiva a ejecutar. Hacer el bien se siente bien; no necesitas a un "dios" o a un "rey" que te ordene sentirte bien, nuestra naturaleza misma provee esa evidencia.

Demostración sencilla: adopta (o patrocina) un gato. Ve si tu "autoridad" sirve de algo versus simplemente jugar con él y entretenerlo porque es la bola de pelos más preciosa del mundo.

String a: new String()

That's the part we have to combat. The idea that being a fan of something means any contribution you do to the fandom has to be treated as essentially unpaid workforce for the franchise. In truth, it's nothing in the fact that you are a fan, but rather the fact that the thing you are a fan of is defended by some of the vilest scume of the earth (lawyers) that is a problem.

Down with copyright law!

In this year of 2025? No. But it still is basically setting oneself for failure from the perspective of Graphene, IMO. Like, the strongest protection in the world (assuming Graphene even is, which is quite a tall order statement) is useless if it only works on the mornings of a Tuesday that falls in a prime number day that has a blue moon and where there are no ATP tennis matches going on. Everyone else is, like, living in the real world, and the uniqueness of your scenario is going to go down the drain once your users get presented with a $5 wrench, or even cheaper: a waterboard. Because cops, let alone ICE, are not going to stop to ask you if they can make you more comfortable with your privacy being violated.

I was gonna make a pun, but I'm not in any hurry for it to come out.

That still sounds like choosing to me. Like, if your project requirements are so strict that it only works on the mornings of a Tuesday that falls in a prime number day that has a blue moon and where there are no ATP tennis matches going on (all pre-existing things you have no vote on), maybe you should re-evaluate if you actually want your proyect to have a viable audience.

We can only wait and see how other phone manufacturers react to this.

Honestly, it's obvious how they will react. After all, they'd have to pass a certification process if they want to be able to ship Google stuff.

Nothing in any of those three words precludes payment (it's work after all) but it's still notoriously scummy. A donation jar would make far more sense.

or a brand whose phones support their requirements other than google.

Wasn't Graphene's "selling point" for long being that nothing but Pixels can match their reqs? I don't see why any current band would want to make it easier for them, and I also don't see new brand significantly entering the market.

Graphene boiled themselves in their own frogpan.

To be fair, it’s entirely reasonable to be able to expect that paying money for something should get you the thing you paid for.

Fam, it's 2025, the last time what you say was entirely reasonable was, what, 1986?

GOS has lots of time to - even before their very own conception - to see the writing on the wall.

Sure, Karen.

I liked the (first four) movies. Honestly awesome if short Alan Rickman screentime. I pirated them. I watch hem whenever I want, not when you think I have to be a soldier for your cause, and that bitch still don't get a cent from me.

Like, sure, conveniently I won't have any spare time to rewatch them this month, but that's because life is busy not becuse you think you're right.

In English I guess it would be something like "mother-in-law".