So OP edited his post to be about being ‘user-centric’ and not ‘user friendly.’ There’s a huge difference between being easy to use, even for the technologically illiterate, and being good for users so I wouldn’t disagree with a lot of what’s been said in this thread
As someone else pointed out, the premise of this question is extremely faulty. Being user-friendly is one of the main advantages of proprietary software because they have teams of researchers and designers making sure that things are as frictionless as possible for the user. This isn’t to say they don’t use dark-patterns or engage in anti-consumer practices, but I’m certain that if you did a random sampling of F-Droid and the Play Store, you would find a lot more polished and user-friendly software on the Play Store than the FOSS apps on F-Droid
The difficulty is asking people to get started with this. People want to get to work/navigate as quickly as possible to where they need to be, they don’t want to be figuring it out. Social media can be janky and you’ll be patient, but if you’re late for something because you’re struggling to adjust to an app you’re more likely to go back to Google/Apple Maps
But does that auto accept cookies like many of these other anti cookie banner extensions?
I don’t know you but my advice is that you talk to a therapist before you condemn yourself to a life of unhappiness. What you’re thinking about yourself is not always objective, even if you think it is. Being self-critical is not the same as being realistic
Thing is, sex is not a privilege. If you - as someone in such a situation as OP - can’t accept that, you are in danger of growing… hateful views.
No one is entitled to sex, I agree. But in a relationship, you are allowed to make clear what your needs are and move on if those needs aren’t being met. It’s not entitlement to know what you want. Having a ‘dead bedroom’ is why a lot of relationships end.
I don’t want to become such a person, and it’s clear that it’s not their fault that they are not attracted to me. Realizing this helped me accept it.
If I may ask, was there any physical attraction between you two when you met?
I’m not denying that ace spectrum people have relationships and settle down as well. But OP is asking about the normative (read allosexual) experience and explicitly mentions physical attraction.
The vast majority of relationships will involve physical attraction and sex. It’s highly unusual for that to not be the case for allosexual people. That’s not a value judgement—if a minority of allo people find something else works for them, then that’s great. But if OP is asking if this is normal, then no it’s not. Even ‘less attractive’ people, as OP put it, find people they’re attracted to enough to enjoy a lifetime of intimacy and sex with.
Overcoming a lack of physical attraction is a pretty big barrier and I can’t see most people overcoming that barrier just to ‘settle down.’ Not being your physical ideal is one thing, most of us settle down with people who don’t look like models or actors, but finding someone physically unattractive is a tough sell in most cases.
If you don’t find someone physically attractive, how do you settle down with them? Do you just accept getting into bed with someone you’re physically repulsed by every night?
Amazing tagline. You should pitch this to their marketing team
The point is not that we can’t imagine speculative technologies. The point is that this is a grift which distracts from the real and present threat of AI like the threats to privacy, artists’ livelihoods and the internet itself which is being poisoned by LLM generated content
I don’t think he plans on delivering much product at all
Well good news. If the product you’re imagining is ‘Skynet’ or a ‘god-mommy’ both of those are science fiction and we don’t need whatever this bullshit is to save us
Possibly the most obtuse person I’ve encountered on Lemmy
I think we need regulation, that doesn’t make me a person who irrationally hates children skateboarding.
Also skateboarding hasn’t led to and been complicit in genocide on two continents, but social media has in Asia and Africa. If it had, maybe you’d see people writing op-eds about that instead of social media companies that value profits more than human life
Again… banning the worst practices of social media is to help people. I think this is a comprehension issue at this point.
We need to break them up, and legislate against their practices for the future but this is something that can happen right away and hit them in their pockets
That was in my original comment. I was clearly making the point that the aim is to legislate against harmful practices. I don’t think most people need it spelled out for them why that is, or why we can’t do it right away but I’ve done my best to be patient in explaining it to you.
If you want to take a weird stance that I’m being mean to corporations that’s up to you, but I didn’t say anything vengeful let alone posted a ‘screed’
It’s really not about revenge. It’s about taking back power from corporations and giving it to the people. Right now, political power is with the highest bidder and these companies know it.
They are using the money from advertising to lobby and buy politicians, which is what stops us from having sensible regulations for social media. Taking away that revenue stream inhibits their ability to do this, so it’s a win for the people
The relatively low level of plastic in our testicles
The rest of these comments are surprising because I don’t remember anyone past an interaction we had. Now I’m wondering whose shit list I’m on
Read it so you don’t have to: It’s a troll.
Block and move on.