• 0 Posts
  • 131 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 5th, 2023

help-circle






  • Having had every pixel except the 4, 6, and 9, I’m gonna tell you that I had overheating issues on the pixel 1 and 2, and that battery life has been decent for me (a moderate phone user) on all of these devices except the pixel 3 which towards the end had the memory leak problem and was using battery when it wasn’t supposed to be. Most of my overheating issues have happened when the phone is charging (mostly using wireless charging or charging in a place that’s already got a high temp like in a car).

    I’m not sure you’re going to get the battery life you’re looking for out of an older phone unless it’s brand new/never been used or you degoogle it with a ROM like Graphene OS.



  • atrielienz@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyz👣👣👣
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Having been on the other end of this where they picked an applicant from outside so they could pay them less, despite more than one person being more qualified and already working for the company, I’m not sure who’s side to be on here. On the one hand, if you’ve already got someone lined up for the job, this is disingenuous. On the other hand, if someone already working for you can do the job but you don’t want to pay them what they’re worth, that’s just messed up on several levels.




  • There is a bigger barrier to them being able to take it away from you. But they absolutely can. Broadcast content like a movie or TV show illegally, and see what happens.

    This is about the medium by which the license is provided, there is no doubt whatsoever that the license is the same. This has been proven repeatedly. The difference here is that the distributor can be legally forced to remove the content by the owner of the media. So, if for instance you order a physical disc and pay for it ahead of time and then the place you order from loses the right to distribute that disc, you absolutely won’t get it in the mail because they’re required to send it back to the owner.

    You’d likely get a refund in that case but that’s because you didn’t get to actually enjoy that media at all. But buying a license to a show on Amazon or something is different only because it’s likely that they have pull the show after you paid for it and outside the return window. Meaning in theory you have enjoyed or consumed the media you paid for. So the license is legal.

    What really needs to change imo isn’t the transparency. This discussion keeps being had repeatedly and people keep being outraged by it as if they have never heard that this can happen. Its been 20 some odd years of this and I would think it would be common knowledge by now.

    What really needs to change is the terms by which the owner who licenses the content in the first place should either be required to provide a refund or equivalent on a different platform, or they should be the ones held liable for their terminology in the licensing agreement that would require that license to be null and void for people who have already purchased it.

    But literally every single time I say this people get upset about it and nobody can explain why.