Libb

J'imagine que ça dépend du produit mais l'Union est un gros marché, plein de clients qui ont les poches pleines. Même Apple a commencé à fabriquer des iPhone USB-c...

En plus, la plupart des gadgets USB-c sont justement ça: des gadgets, càd un gaspillage 100% inutile de resources naturelles et d'argent. Ce serait con de ne pas pouvoir les proposer sur ce marché 450 millions d'enthousiastes toujours heureux/ses à l'idée d'acheter la dernière stupiderie du moment qu'on lui assure que c'est écolo parce que USB-c.

And weirdly, my mind keeps drifting back to 2006. I don’t even know why exactly — maybe because it felt slower. Simpler. The internet was just fun and weird, not all-consuming.

It's up to us to make it like that again.

Anyone else feel like this? Have you figured out how to shake it — or at least live with it in a way that makes sense?

I stopped participating/consuming into anything that is algorithmically managed. It means that I cut back on everything online that is not... man-made. I don't do Twitter/X, Facebook, Reddit, and so on. I even almost completely quit using YT beside a couple channels. So, I use Lemmy, watch vids on non-YT platforms (peertube, for example) and I do read blogs and websites... all contents that are all created by actual persons (not some SEO-optimized or AI-crap), actual people that care about what it is they're talking about.

I feel… detached. Like I’m watching my life from the outside, waiting for it to feel like mine again.

The thing with those corporation-owned 'occupations' is that our live don't belong to us anymore. It's theirs. Our live is a product they are exploiting (mining) and at the same time it's... a service they're selling back directly to us, as well as to other people that the algorithm thinks will (dis)like us.

Realizing that, I decided I did not want to be the product anymore no matter how much I liked their 'services'.

And that was liberating. I would not want to go back to their precious little apps and algorithms. I spend a lot less time online, but I appreciate almost every second of it. Which to me at least seems like a good compromise ;)

edit: clarifications & typos.

I’ll admit I’m often verbose in my own chats about technical issues.

Don't. Time is too precious. Even more so when it's time spend working. if you feel thee need to be chatty, you may want to write a novel, or start a blog ;)

As others have mentioned, make sure there is no security issue with using AI. Seriously.

I think the internet has a lot of potential

I only mentioned social media apps, not the Internet which is much older (I started using BBS in the early 80s and my first web browser was Mosaic). So yeah, the Internet has the potential, and always had. Not sure it will have for much longer though but that's another question.

The issue is that for more and more people 'the Internet' is nothing but an empty space in which they can find their 'app of choice' or their service of choice. And they have no idea there is a thriving world that is well-alive outside of those walled gardens Including the many remaining blogs—like mine, which is tiny, and so many others. A lot of blogs are and non corporate owned websites also try to monetize their content, though, but many, like mine, do not.

Edit: clicked publish too quickly, added the rest of my reply.

How do we consume less content and be more social/productive in a way that isn’t concerned with profit?

I'm not sure to understand what you mean?

We consume less by doing more. Say, we watch less YouTube about what we want to do and start doing more of what it is we want to do.

And we're less concerned by profit the moment we start doing stuff or going more toward people (spending time with them) without expecting much if anything in return beside enjoying their company and/or enjoying doing that stuff we are doing. Without expecting to be paid anything in return.

As far as being more productive, I'm not sure to understand what you mean either but, here again, doing more is a fine starting point.

It's consumerism that wants us to believe we need to endlessly consume (aka spend more money and time) to do stuff. We don't.

Well, yes, we do need to consume a little resources and we also need to feed/teach our head (ideas as well as art don't come out of nowhere), but we certainly don't need to constantly be stuffing ourselves with new content or tools—think obesity, but for the mind.

So, if we want to be able to do interesting stuff on our own. We start by learning to do (interesting) stuff. Aka, by doing crappy stuff. And that's true for every single things we may wish to do.

Or, should we consume more content that is conducive to being social? What type of content would that be?

We don't need to consume any content to be social. But here again maybe I don't understand the question, what would be a type of 'content conducive to being social'?

BTW, our species have existed (aka being social) for million of years, meanwhile Twitter/X and the others have existed since around 2005. So, we clearly don't need them to be ourselves but they absolutely need and want us to think otherwise so they can sell us more ads and make more money.

Congrats :)

A few years ago, that was the first step that led me to stop using Apple computers and slowly switch to Linux and easy to fix PCs. Something that, back then, 50 years old me would never have imagined doing: I had been an Apple user since the early 80s and never imagined not being one.

As an Infomaniak user myself, I don't feel much need to complain or to ask for help but I would not mind a community where people can discuss ideas, tips & tricks and why not, ask for help. Maybe all what's needed for this to happen is someone to start doing it?

So, if you feel like it, don't be afraid to start such a community. Worse case, it won't get much traction and no harm will be done. Best case, you maybe surprised to realize a few people were looking for exactly that ;)

I'm not annoyed by them (I simply don't read them, why would I want to waste my time?), I'm saddened by them.

Edit: that's also the reason why I read so few newspapers/periodicals. And why I pay for them. I want to support quality work.

C'est là que tu lui réponds, 't'as tellement raison, fils' et, tout en lui tendant une paire de rames et, devant son air probablement un peu surpris tandis qu'il prend la paire de rames, tu lui racontes où poussent les bananes tout en précisant qu'il devrait se grouiller s'il veut avoir sa banane pour la cantine de ce midi et ne pas arriver en retard à l'école ;)

Le marketing est notre pire ennemi. Même quand il est colorié en vert et même quand il est souriant comme une banane.

any experience or advice on which is best

Depends a lot what you want to with it, aka where you will 'walk around' with your camera ;)

And also it depends a lot how you like to take pictures, and what is your level of expertise.

I've quit photography almost completely (I'm sketching now) but was mostly doing street and wildlife. The last camera I ever purchased was an used OM-d 5 MK II (I would have to get it out of the closet to be sure of the exact model, the one that's weather-sealed but not top of the line from 2015 or 2016) and I could not be happier. It was to the point that I stopped being interested in new gear.

(for context: I have been using almost anything you can think of since the late 70s, from your standard 35mm to large format chambers, from fully automatic cameras to full manual ones with nothing but the sunny 16 (not even a portable light-meter). And I started fiddling with digital starting in the late 90s)

Yeah:

• Lightweight and not bulky. Those two things alone make it a blessing if you carry the camera all day long on the streets, and even more so when hiking in the wilderness.
• Edit: It's also much less intrusive than a bulky DSLR for street. And a tad less of a thieve magnet than, say, a Leica.
• Image stabilization works great.
• Fully articulated screen is so useful in so many situations.
• Silent (if you want it to be).
• Excellent lenses. Even basic kit lenses are decent (unlike so many other brands kit lenses). I mean they're not amazing but anyone should be able to use the 14-42 from Olympus or from Panasonic and get decent shots. Which is great considering how cheap they can be found used. Much better lenses will be, well, much better but it's hard to beat the 14-42 price used (I paid something like 25€ for the first one I got, and got a second one new for free by someone that refused to use nothing but the most expensive lenses to take snapshots (which was more than by me). Not my favorite lens by any means but one I would never hesitate to pick in many common situations.
• Very niche, but this OM camera has a very usable focus stacking mode.
• Did I mention it was so fucking not bulky with great image quality (given enough light)?
• Edit: dirt cheap, used.

BTW, I also own a Lumix GH5 that I mostly use(d) for video. It's great for that but I prefer the OM for photography.

Meh:

• Poor low light perfs compared to larger sensors. I never cared that much about my images being noisier I cared a lot more about my gear being too bulky and too heavy to easily carry around ;)
• In-lens stabilization doesn't work between Lumix<>Olympus (depending the type of photos, it will work wonder within each specific brand) but the in camera does work cross-brands.
• Weak battery life. I carried 2 spares on a standard day, to be on the safe side. Still less than the 4 I used to carry with my Fuji X100 and the 6 or 8 I had to carry with the now long forgotten but still beloved Epson RD-1s.
• Menus are a mess. It's even worse with the Olympus than with the Pana but one gets used to them and since one seldom need to access more than handful of those menus. Plus, all buttons are configurable for quick access to whatever you often use.

"I don't know."

If we were honest, it's the thing we should all be saying and hearing all day long. But it's not. Quite the opposite, it's among the rarest. Instead, people are shooting their certainties at one another, relentlessly.

Not knowing something or not having an opinion on a question is not an issue. It's to be expected, even if we were all geniuses (I'm certainly not one). Not doing the work to inform oneself could potentially be an issue but should not be as long we don't pretend otherwise. It's when one pretends to know, based on what one has heard someone else say, or because one wants to push a specific narrative that suits them, that shit starts hitting the fan. That's when living together turn into the stinking shit hole it has turned into in which lies are fine (when they're not adored) and facts have become suspicious if not dangerous.

Obviously, I don't know what I'm talking about.

To be precise about France, only polygamous weddings are forbidden but being polygamous without being wedded is not illegal.

True that, but those persons still lack any legal status, unlike married or 'pacs'ed couples. I mean legally, in such a, err, cluster of person would be considered the head of the family and no one would be able to take medical decision for the others if they needed (they aren't considered 'family') and no could inherit from the other(s) I mean not tax-free like in a standard couple. And the moment they've kids... Things can become real hairy. Edit: well, exactly like you mentioned already (I should have read the entire comment :p) but the point is that they would lack any legal status (like up until recently homosexual couples up until recently would have lacked one as they could not get married or pacsed).

Would it be frowned upon?

At the very least, feminists (young as well as old ones) would frown upon that. And I think most people would look down on it, even if they may not be openly hostile.