[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

I appreciate the freedom feeling, bought a Pocophone F1 a couple years ago just to flash it with custom roms.

Have you tried Lineage? How would you compare the experience of using them if so? Some of the custom roms I've tried had some things I missed UX/functionality wise but as people seem quite happy with Graphene I assume it is nice to use.

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

Was looking at the pixel 7 as well, but it is technically a hardware downgrade from my current zenfone 8. Very happy with the zenfone performance so a bit worried the 7 would feel sluggish, or at least slower..

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

AnySoftKeyboard is a great FOSS one!

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago

Okay, cool! Several people here seem to recommend it so I will add it to the "scale"

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

Okay, good to know! Do you know whether banking etc is a problem on graphene or not? Last time I used custom roms I got it working with microg but I heard there might have been some regressions?

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 8 points 9 months ago

Is it still that bad huh? I had an A50 before and the bloat was one of the reasons I disliked that phone.

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

Yeah, that is one of the reasons I'm intrigued. Havent looked at it since the Rossman/Daniel Micay thing though, is it still good?

45
submitted 9 months ago by tuxed@lemmy.ml to c/android@lemmy.world

Hi everyone,

Currently looking at either a Pixel 8 or a S23 as a replacement for my Zenfone 8 that is slowly becoming a hindrence due to (primarily) the battery. I would replace it, but as it costs a lot to do that here and I have needs for a non-compromised water protection DIY feels like a dangerous option.

So S23 vs Pixel 8, what would you guys recommend assuming I can get either for the same price?

I like the S23 hardware a bit better on paper, but as Pixel phones generally are very flashable my anti-Google sentiments might (ironically) push me there.

I would get a fairphone 5 for the hot-swappable battery etc if they weren't so expensive for what you get, and as Im buying second hand reuse is better for the environment anyways.

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago
  • Nobara for my gaming rig, same as OP + lots of out of the box gaming fixes.

  • Tumbleweed for the laptop, rolling release while (in my experience) being a bit less likely to break than arch.

  • Ubuntu/Debian/MicroOS/Alma for servers depending on whether I want stability + some fresher software, mountain-like stability, automatically updating container hosts or if I need redhat compatibility.

  • Mint if its someone elses old computer they want to "just work", since I dislike being tech support more than necessary.

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
  1. That happens whether you're subscribed or not.
  2. Sort of agreed, not really relevant to the parent comment though. 3+4. You can't have both "no ads allowed in-video" and "creators are paid a majority share of the money we make serving the video". YouTube was (and still is if I understand it correctly) barely profitable, and if it is profitable right now I'm sure it is because of the worst kind of data-mining.

It is way harder to provide an effective platform for content than it is to deliver actual content, especially as effort/content has close to zero effect on vitality/attention/profitability, while the aspects we want in a platform (especially in regards to privacy) are entirely unprofitable. As someone who uses adblock and generally dislikes the corporate aspect of YouTube I at least has to acknowledge that YouTube has to make money somehow, and that in-video sponsors seems like a win-win for everyone involved, especially when you can skip them pretty much effortlessly.

Normally I wouldn't even comment this shit, but as we are (hopefully) part of a shift to actual community driven platforms (fediverse in general), I think we have to aggressively discuss how to monetize these platforms enough so that they don't actively drain the wallets of the people maintaining them, and this is a very relevant aspect of that discussion.

Hopefully not too ranty, extremely inebriated.

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago
  1. That happens whether you're subscribed or not.
  2. Sort of agreed, not really relevant to the parent comment though. 3+4. You can't have both "no ads allowed in-video" and "creators are paid a majority share of the money we make serving the video". YouTube was (and still is if I understand it correctly) barely profitable, and if it is profitable right now I'm sure it is because of the worst kind of data-mining.

It is way harder to provide an effective platform for content than it is to deliver actual content, especially as effort/content has close to zero effect on vitality/attention/profitability, while the aspects we want in a platform (especially in regards to privacy) are entirely unprofitable. As someone who uses adblock and generally dislikes the corporate aspect of YouTube I at least has to acknowledge that YouTube has to make money somehow, and that in-video sponsors seems like a win-win for everyone involved, especially when you can skip them pretty much effortlessly.

Normally I wouldn't even comment this shit, but as we are (hopefully) part of a shift to actual community driven platforms (fediverse in general), I think we have to aggressively discuss how to monetize these platforms enough that they don't actively drain the wallets of the people maintaining them, and this is a very relevant aspect of that discussion.

Hopefully not too ranty, extremely inebriated.

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago
  1. That happens whether you're subscribed or not.
  2. Sort of agreed, not really relevant to the parent comment though. 3+4. You can't have both "no ads allowed in-video" and "creators are paid a majority share of the money we make serving the video". YouTube was (and still is if I understand it correctly) barely profitable, and if it is profitable right now I'm sure it is because of the worst kind of data-mining.

It is way harder to provide an effective platform for content than it is to deliver actual content, especially as effort/content has close to zero effect on vitality/attention/profitability, while the aspects we want in a platform (especially in regards to privacy) are entirely unprofitable. As someone who uses adblock and generally dislikes the corporate aspect of YouTube I at least has to acknowledge that YouTube has to make money somehow, and that in-video sponsors seems like a win-win for everyone involved, especially when you can skip them pretty much effortlessly.

Normally I wouldn't even comment this shit, but as we are (hopefully) part of a shift to actual community driven platforms (fediverse in general), I think we have to aggressively discuss how to monetize these platforms enough that they don't actively drain the wallets of the people maintaining them, and this is a very relevant aspect of that discussion.

Hopefully not too ranty, extremely inebriated.

[-] tuxed@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago
  1. That happens whether you're subscribed or not.
  2. Sort of agreed, not really relevant to the parent comment though. 3+4. You can't have both "no ads allowed in-video" and "creators are paid a majority share of the money we make serving the video". YouTube was (and still is if I understand it correctly) barely profitable, and if it is profitable right now I'm sure it is because of the worst kind of data-mining.

It is way harder to provide an effective platform for content than it is to deliver actual content, especially as effort/content has close to zero effect on vitality/attention/profitability, while the aspects we want in a platform (especially in regards to privacy) are entirely unprofitable. As someone who uses adblock and generally dislikes the corporate aspect of YouTube I at least has to acknowledge that YouTube has to make money somehow, and that in-video sponsors seems like a win-win for everyone involved, especially when you can skip them pretty much effortlessly.

Normally I wouldn't even comment this shit, but as we are (hopefully) part of a shift to actual community driven platforms (fediverse in general), I think we have to aggressively discuss how to monetize these platforms enough that they don't actively drain the wallets of the people maintaining them, and this is a very relevant aspect of that discussion.

Hopefully not too ranty, extremely inebriated.

view more: next ›

tuxed

joined 1 year ago