>"Because you "bought the device on credit" rather than "renting the device", so the device is still yours to do with as you please."

Yes and no. Depends on the contract and the way it is worded.

>"The device being locked doesn't take the place of the contract, it's just an extra totally pointless burden on the customer."

The phone company is using the locking as a type of collateral to help assure the customer doesn't just stop paying on their obligation and move that phone, which is not "fully" theirs, to another service or sell it. Apparently that was/is a major problem. Probably because consumers were not smart enough to realize the actual cost of the phone is double or triple what they put as, essentially, a down-payment. Many car sellers do something similar as well, for those with high credit risk- they put a GPS tracker/locker on the vehicle.

For 99+% of people, there is/should be no issue with a phone being locked, unless their intent was, in fact, to try and break their contracts without paying.

I can see both sides of the issue. I do think it is intolerable you should have to ASK to have it unlocked OR wait, once your obligation is complete. That should be automatic.

>"if you purchased a device from Verizon's value brands previously, they would automatically unlock them after 60 days. Now, you have to wait 365 days, request the unlock because it doesn't happen automatically, and also have active service. "

I must be missing something... If you choose to not outright fully buy a phone, but sign an agreement for a heavily discounted/subsidized phone, contingent on having service for X months or whatever, why should Verizon unlock it if the terms are not met? If you want the freedom to do what you want, then fully buy your own unlocked phone, right?

I do agree it should be automatic once the agreement is met, however.

1) There are a million times more things than just notifications for which a smart phone is useful. Games, maps, translators, reading books/articles, network utilities, calculators, etc, etc, etc.

2) Why would you buy a new one every "one to three" years? I always keep mine for 4 to 6.

3) Would would it need to be a "lot" of money? I always buy a midrange. My last one cost $400 and is fantastic (Samsung A52 5G). Or you can get a lowrange for $150 to $200. People spending $800 to $1200 on a phone is usually completely unnecessary.

4) Having control over notifications and which apps are installed or used isn't "using it as a dumb phone".

>"Imagine you're Netflix, and a paying customer says "I am paying you to show me this stuff I'm not watching, and I am becoming somewhat disappointed. What are you going to do about this?What would you say to this paying customer, who is representative of millions of paying customers?"

I don't know. I guess make an alternate version available for them? Or add some plot summary available on hotkeys or menus in the app?

What would I say to the even more millions of customers asking why the movies have become incredibly stupid and redundant and start dropping service?

>"To insist that people who want to get off the smartphone ecosystem are somehow impaired or dysfunctional itself flies in the face of a growing body of research the other way 'round."

Yeah, totally crazy.

The major problem is that most people apparently have no self control, at all. You don't have to switch to a "dumb" phone to purge yourself of constant irritation and distraction...

1) Change your app notifications. Turn them OFF or make them totally silent (no audio/no vibe) based on which app. And/or set a schedule.
2) Turn off SMS notifications for unknown contacts. And stop handing out your phone number to companies. Give them an Email address. Encourage friends and family to send you Email, not SMS, if it is not urgent/important. Turn off Email notifications, check it manually a few times a day.
3) Remove apps that are distracting or those for which you have no self-control. Connect to those systems at home, on your desktop/laptop/tablet when you have time to dedicate to them. Plus you will have a real screen, keyboard, mouse, so it will be a better and faster experience, and you will time to actually think about what you are reading and posting.

>"However, IMO movie-makers should shorten their damn films and cut out so much fluff. I maintain that if you can't tell your story in 100-110 minutes, you don't know how to tell a story."

That depends. Not all GOOD stories can be told in that short of a time. I would rather have it longer than split into a SECOND PART movie that is released a year or something later. Even worse when they fill it with fluff AND split it up into multiple movies. Ug.

In any case, no way should movies be altered to deal with idiots who can't bother to watch what they are watching.

>"Could We Provide Better Cellphone Service With Fewer, Bigger Satellites?"

Define "better". Better than more smaller satellites? Better than land-based systems?

As an augmentation to land-based systems, satellite service can be a great boon. But it is also a scary "single point of failure" issue. Satellite service is easier to jam/block, will suffer from space-based radiation, requires more device power, has sky-visibility issues, and considering the apparent space hostility, easy to knock out a few targets and leave absolutely huge swaths of non-coverage. And replacing such a mega satellite will be very expensive and time-consuming.

Probably. But if they don't satisfy enough demand and prices go sky high for non-AI compute, it will spur intense pressure for others to compete. I do wish there were some competition to TSMC. Especially if there could be a few significant fabs in the USA.

Now you have to wait for a credit for your credit not working. But you have to ask for the second credit first, then complete that and then maybe the first credit will work by then.

You could accomplish the same thing by just requiring a reply to the text message (that can have terms or a link to terms) saying "yes."

>"The bubble bursts and all that memory comes on the market Surplus. TSMC will be using a piece of rope to hold up their pants."

This is why TSMC, and DRAM makers, too, should not shun too much of their "bread and butter" regular CPUs/GPU's and consumer memory production. That way they have something to fall back on. Unless they can switch production really fast.

Basic diversification- it is very important in volatile markets (even in non-so volatile markets).

>"If people have a right to their own image, the US should consider making nonconsensual photography illegal, even in public."

There is a huge difference between being casually photographed or videoed in public and kept original, and taking those and modifying them with AI (or other) tools to change what was seen/heard.

>"Here's a thought: Mandate that all AI tools include watermarks in their output."

Seems distasteful, but I am in full agreement at this point. Even if they can be removed, it will help and evidence of removal might be detectable as well.

>"First google's AI is down, then microsoft's, then openAI or whatever they are called. Then repeat. Why should even one residential customer in the country ever be inconvenienced for this monumental waste of public resources?"

I was thinking the same thing. They mention the risk of blackouts. Well, fine. But the priority for power should go to medical and emergency sites, then schools and such, regular business/homes, and way down the line, data centers. If they are the cause of grids being overloaded, they should carry most of the pain. Right? Isolate them on their own part of the grid and drop them FIRST. Let them test their expensive backups and fail-over procedures to some other grid less affected at the time.

>"Can you explain maybe the mindset of people who support the platform of a guy"

Has it occurred to you that most people don't care about who owns it? They just use X as a communication tool and don't follow him or his posts? (And no, I don't use any social networks).

>"who publicly sieg heils"

That was/is a bunch of nonsense.

>"and also very publicly, blatantly and unashamedly tries to sow political discord?"

I think he is on at least one "spectrum" :)