this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
1641 points (95.3% liked)

Microblog Memes

5878 readers
3364 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

We used to have earbuds that don't need to be charged because they had a headphone jack, didn't get lost so easily because they had a cord attached to a headphone jack, never lost the bluetooth connection because they had a headphone jack, and they cost less because they had a headphone jack. https://bsky.app/profile/daisyfm.bsky.social/post/3l3mfjc6sn62k

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 148 points 2 months ago (3 children)

And the cord would sometimes break inside/connector went bad.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 88 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, you'd snag the wire or slightly bend the connector and then you were just playing a game of making sure it stayed plugged into the exact right angle.

[–] silasmariner@programming.dev 24 points 2 months ago

Had to make sure there has just the right tension on the left wire or you'd only get half the track. Bonus points for weirdly mixed stereo where that just sounded shit

[–] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 1 points 1 month ago

Or replace it, those things were like 50 cents and all sorts of devices had earbuds delivered with them, included in the price.

[–] goldteeth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 2 months ago (2 children)

and then you'd just replace them with one of the other three dozen you bought from Wal-Mart for five bucks back in 2016

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 42 points 2 months ago (5 children)

And people wonder how the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and others like it came to be 🤦

[–] goldteeth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 2 months ago

hey I'll have you know I keep all my broken earbuds in the same box in the garage with all the other cables and assorted dongles I can no longer identify and will likely never use, like any responsible citizen should

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 19 points 2 months ago (2 children)

If you think Bluetooth earphones won't also be in that pile once the batteries stop holding charge after 2 years, you're in for a world of dissapointing sex

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

My AirBudz are over five years old and still play for like five hours before I need to charge them… and I used them 40+ hours daily for all of those years.

[–] guiguinofake@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 months ago

How are your days 40+ hours long

[–] confusedbytheBasics@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

We must know the secret of your 40+ hour days. Are you on Earth? What's the battery tech like on your planet? We could use some help.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world -4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

My point wasn't wired vs wireless. It was disposable crap that breaks vs corporations not deliberately making crap the only thing most people can comfortably afford.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

But they need to skimp on those few milligram ounces of solder per bud, so that they can make one extra low quality bud!

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Or rather so they can make the same number of buds and double or more the profits for the amoral shareholder dividends.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Hah! *affably slaps shoulder* Yeah!

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don't think earbuds make up a significant percentage of the patch to be here virtue signaling and shaming people for what they were encouraged to do by corporate greed. Your source says the great majority of the patch comes from agriculture and fishing.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I don't think earbuds make up a significant percentage of the patch

Cheap and disposable plastics and electronics IS a significant part of the world garbage problem and yes, plastic particles is MOST of the garbage patch specifically.

be here virtue signaling and shaming people for what they were encouraged to do by corporate greed

Whoa, dude, hold your horses! I'm in no way blaming consumers. Making consumer electronics cheap crap that breaks easily and everything of decent quality prohibitively expensive is 100% on the greedy corporations, not their victims the consumers.

Your source says the great majority of the patch comes from agriculture and fishing.

Ok, admittedly a poor choice of example. Doesn't invalidate my intended point though, however ill-stated heh

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is tough -

Making consumer electronics cheap crap that breaks easily and everything of decent quality prohibitively expensive is 100% on the greedy corporations, not their victims the consumers.

(US here) Gets me thinking about dollar store headphones. Consumers could buy decent headphones for about $10 direct from overseas. When that’s equivalent to more than an hour of wages, there’s still demand for the $1 version. Should this need not be met out of a sense of social responsibility?

(I don’t have a perfect answer myself)

Econ 101 on my mind here btw:

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The problem is that our economic system has encouraged an environment where reputation is a thing to be immediately cashed out. You can't even know if those $10 earbuds are any better than the $1 version.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

You can make some reasonable assumptions although they will be imperfect:

Wouldn’t be as frequently imperfect if freaking review fraud weren’t entirely ubiquitous (grrrr)

[–] Tankton@lemm.ee -1 points 2 months ago

When people talk about disposable plastic they don't mean electronics like earbuds. They mean packaging, plastic bottles, plastic bags etc.

[–] marduk@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

I'm here for the wired headphone -> pacific garbage patch vs lithium battery child labor -> wireless headphone fight 🍿

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Or we could just have quality standards and price controls so that regular people can afford decent headphones that don't break all the time whether they prefer wired or wireless 🤷

And a worldwide ban on child labor, of course.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Don’t fool yourself. Slave labor of children is not exclusive to batteries. They make most of the world’s textiles, for example.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-of-goods-print

[–] marduk@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Did I give you the impression I was fooling myself, or were you just speaking to the wider audience?

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The wording implies that the wired headphones weren’t manufactured using child slave labor.

[–] marduk@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 months ago

I disagree, but I also failed English 101 so 🤷🏻‍♂️

[–] MadhuGururajan@programming.dev 2 points 2 months ago

Somewhere the discussion chain has the following transition:

-> Hitler

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

You think wireless earbuds are better?? lol

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Earbuds? Yes.

Real headphones? Nah

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'd imagine the limited lifespan of their batteries and the fact that they have ones to begin with would be of bigger concern

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That’s fair. My first pair still works awesome after five years, and I’ve used them for 40+ hours a week for that whole time. I only have a new pair because I needed ANC, but I still use my old pair to sleep.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

I think the headphones I'm using are 20 year old. But to be fair, a lot of them either don't last that long or are simply thrown away for some new thing.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Again, wasn't making a wired wireless argument. See my other reply itt for elaboration.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You might want to edit the comment since in the context it definitely sounds like saying wireless would be better

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Not really, no. I'm responding to a comment about cheap buds that break too easily, which isn't exclusive to wired ones.

There's literally no mention of the wired vs wireless aspect in my comment or the one I'm replying to.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

My friend, the whole thread is about wireless vs. wired. That's the context your post is in. And you've already had several people misunderstanding your intention because it is written in that context without clarification that it's not supposed to be the same as other comments here.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world -3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

My friend, the whole thread is about wireless vs. wired

Not my comment. I'm clearly commenting on a separate aspect. That others try to ascribe a nonexistent secondary meaning that I haven't so much as hinted at isn't my fault.

without clarification that it's not supposed to be the same as other comments here.

I'm personally not a big fan of spelling out the obvious, but ok:

You're wrong to assume that my comment follows the previous theme from pure proximity and it's annoying to have to bend over backwards to facilitate the poor reading comprehension (if not bad faith) of people making up their minds about what I'm saying before reading it.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I’m clearly commenting on a separate aspect

You seem to have been overestimated how clear that was.

That others try to ascribe a nonexistent secondary meaning that I haven’t so much as hinted at isn’t my fault

That's just how context works.

You’re wrong to assume that my comment follows the previous theme from pure proximity and it’s annoying to have to bend over backwards to facilitate the poor reading comprehension (if not bad faith) of people making up their minds about what I’m saying before reading it.

Idk if you know how conversation work but people typically use and understand context. If you don't mind people misunderstanding you, then no need to do anything. If you do mind it, it might be helpful to spell things out. But it's up to you really, I don't mind either way.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You know, a better way to stop the discussion would be to just stop replying and walk away from it. Some might think it a bit rude if you try to order them to stop lol.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Others might think it's rude to keep going on and on and on about me having the responsibility for your misunderstanding of my completely clear and concise commented and how clearly ANYTHING said within a comment thread is about the same thing, regardless of the words and immediately preceding context.

I keep answering because part of my mental handicap is impulse control problems. I'm not good at letting it go when people are being wrong and/or obnoxious and refuses to listen to reason.

What's YOUR excuse? Why is it so important to you that your misunderstanding be declared the only logical reaction to my comment?

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm just saying that it clearly (heh) wasn't that clear since so many misunderstood it. The context threw people off. So I just suggested how it could be avoided and explained why it happened. But it's your comment, entirely up to you to do with it as you'd like.

I think you're taking this a bit too seriously and a lot more personally than it was intended tbh.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm just saying that it clearly (heh) wasn't that clear since so many misunderstood it.

Literally you and one other person. That's not "many" by any definition of the word.

The context threw people off

Again, you and one other person isn't "people"

So I just ~~suggested how it could be avoided ~~ made shit up and explained ~~why it happened.~~ made some more shit up.

There. Now everyone understands.

But it's your comment, entirely up to you to do with it as you'd like.

Could have fooled me with gestures towards this entire conversation

I think you're taking this a bit too seriously and a lot more personally than it was intended tbh.

Yeah sure, use the "just kidding!" tactic of the stubbornly wrong. My younger brother does that too when he finally realizes that he's been confidently wrong for half an hour and doesn't want to admit it.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I counted three the first time we started talking (out of maybe five) but I might've read something twice. Not counted are of course the people who agreed with those sentiments but didn't make their own comments. Not that it is very important. It certainly confused some people (because of the context).

Yeah sure, use the “just kidding!” tactic of the stubbornly wrong

I wasn't kidding, I just think there's need to take it this seriously and especially personally. It was understood wrong because of the context, it could be clarified, only benefit from that would be that it could possibly prevent others from commenting about the wireless vs wireless thing. So no difference to me really.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I counted three the first time we started talking (out of maybe five)

There's literally two, including you. There was never a mass misunderstanding and the only other one confused enough to assume reacted MUCH better than you when I clarified. This is a YOU problem.

I just [don't] think there's need to take it this seriously and especially personally

The only thing I'm taking personally is your insistence on disregarding everything I say in favor of your own obviously incorrect assumption. That's extremely disrespectful and thus personal.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago

This is a YOU problem.

I don't think this is a much of a problem at all tbh. It's just a comment and a misunderstanding.

The only thing I'm taking personally is your insistence on disregarding everything I say in favor of your own obviously incorrect assumption. That's extremely disrespectful and thus personal.

I don't think there's need to take it so personally though. Nothing about this is big enough deal imo to be upset over.

[–] Lileath@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 months ago

Or if you buy the better ones you can usually replace the cord with a new one, making it work again.

[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

The TWS equivalent to that is one of the buds no longer turning on. I just had to RMA a pair because of that.