here's hoping that someday headphones without pressure (e.g. active/passive noise cancelling) will make a comeback, too. But then again I think there still exist cheap wired ones without such "advanced" technology. As one woman in the article said best: "'I don't like how this feels' and we're all kind of returning to the last place we were comfortable."
For wireless headphones I've gone to bone conduction and open-ear. Started with some cheap models from Ali-Express to see how I liked it. I did.
Shokz had a black friday deal on Open-Run Pros and those are my goto. Admittedly, they are not as convenient as my Airpods were, but my ears appreciate not being bombarded with noise canceling.
Bose QuietComfort Ultra 2 at least just allows varying levels of passthrough. You can have noise cancelling or noise cancelling + sound from the outside mike. You cannot have noise-cancelling off for better battery life or to cope with windy conditions
They're awful in several other ways too, which is sad for what should be their flagship model
I avoid noise cancelling as well; I find that it very rapidly gives me a headache. I prefer a nice set of headphones that physically block outside sound.
I have an anecdata where it was true: Angela Merkel. She studied physics not because it was her favorite but because in the system that she lived (GDR) it made more sense than social studies or politics.
But she wasn’t oppressed. She made a choice freely and was able to decide what would allow her to pursue a career and get ahead and actually end up becoming the de facto leader of the EU.
The OP is suggesting women are becoming highly educated in technically difficult fields due to oppression. It makes literally no sense. Either they are oppressed and cannot get ahead, or maybe they are able to freely pursue education contradicting the original assertion.
I got the same or similar but let's not kid ourselves that this is in any way small. It would have been giant by 2015 standards. That's how much the overton window has shifted.
1) 2015 saw the iPhone 6s, which was only 15 mm shorter than the Xperia 5 or 10 V, while being about the same width and thickness. It had a tiny screen in comparison. The 6s Plus was larger, and heavier, than the Xperia 10 V, in all dimensions (OK, not thickness, this was the time of "paperthin" phones) while still having a smaller screen.
2) I don't want a tiny 2008 smartphone, I want a phone I can use with one hand. A width of 70 mm or less lets me do that. Today, that is small, in 2015 it was about normal.
3) My perfect phone was the Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge from 2015, which has about the same dimensions like the Xperia 10 V but the rounded screen edges made it easier to use with one hand.
I once read a study during the height of covid about this[1], which is why I loaded up on Metform. Was lucky enough not to get covid in the meanwhile (or didn't notice), but better safe than sorry.[2]
I've been thinking: Trump won't settle for less than Greenland unless it's the Nobel Peace Price. So... why not give it to him but with caveats? E.g. It will be presented to him in an extraordinary pompous celebration (to tickle his ego) but will remain in Norway until the day of the end of Trump's presidency. He will receive it again on that day, and can keep it!, in another majestic ceremony.
It'd be interesting to see what trump would do if the Nobel committee promised to give him a peace prize if he stopped all tariffs and gave up on greenland (or better yet, if he resigned).
Because every other agreement we have made with him on tariffs or Ukraine, every other appeasement, has done nothing to sway him from his actual course.
Contrary to popular thinking (and it is a nicer fantasy), he is not an inconsistent, emotionally manipulated short-termist with no attention-span.
He is actually smarter than we thought (or wanted to think) OR someone actually is a bona-fide Trump whisperer.
His main foreign policy aims and beliefs seem remarkably fixed.
All of this to say, no further appeasement. No need to completely undermine the Nobel peace price also for 5 minutes of respite, he will literally be back to this within a fortnight.
Humans are not rational. Even if you are 99% of the time, with a smartphone in your pocket there's a good chance you will use it for your emotional 1% within 2hours (and unravel). Read Rutger Bregman's goal for 2026: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2026/jan/04/lifes-t...
Yes. It's propaganda, not speech. Also the algorithms favor this sh*t. Also this massive generation of content floods the zone[1]. There is nothing "freedom of choice" about it if it resurfaces all the time. Upvotes/Views count disproportionally in most social media against downvotes/"not interested" (tiktok is better but even there you can't downvote enough AI-videos for them to not resurface. Probably because the algorithm isn't good enough to understand what is AI and what not, so these downvotes often don't count against AI).
D’oh that’s what I get for squeezing my reading and commenting between compiles. But this is worse. Americans have little reason to go to Antigua; they have no reason whatsoever to immigrate to Niger. So what was achieved here? How is US policy affected in any way? It’s a theatrical empty gesture.
No. No, you don't understand. This is actually pro-consumer because if the patent is enforced, other car-manufacturers cannot pull this stunt. So, thanks BMW, good job for keeping anti-competetive practices at bay by patenting them.
reply