So due to recent developments, are we still allowed to post and discuss tech-related topics? Or is the goal of this community now one of shitposting on LMG, given the recent name and banner changes?
The recent post on stubby screwdrivers was locked before even giving other people the opportunity to share their own thoughts on alternative brands that are specific to their country. As much as Linus and LMG fucked up, really sad to see this community degrading down a path of hatred (even if justified, based on community name change , banner, etc), instead of chatting about what we all love: technology, independent of the situation at LMG.
Really hate seeing a community with so much promise (especially as a Reddit alternative) getting destroyed.
I find comparison discussions important to choosing a product as it allows us to assess and evaluate what makes a good product, and purchase the best available product for our own needs.
If we find that a product fits our needs, who cares what brand it is? I’m not a fan of Google, but the pixel series seems to be the best device available for me.
If an LTT bag suits someone’s needs for school, then get it.
this is a bad take. You should absolutely care what brand makes your products because some brands use slave labor or child labor, some brands use toxic chemicals, some brands destroy our environment, some brands steal from their employees etc.
If you want to shop on Amazon, and drink Nestle water, and wear Adidas that’s your choice, but don’t pretend like brands don’t matter. You say you don’t like google, but you send them your money and in doing so, send them your support in the only way that matters.
I commend you if you are able to pursue a 100% ethical approach, but it’s also a bad take to expect everyone to follow that approach.
The reality is that purchasing ethically is a luxury, and a first world problem. The power of brand choice is very much a luxury. You are assuming that everyone has the purchasing power of choosing ethical production. You can only do that if you have the means to choose and finances to pay. The majority of the world doesn’t have the fans financial means and have no choice but to purchase what they can afford, regardless of unethical production.
If we don’t realize this unfortunate reality of the world, it only exacerbates unethical production even further, making it much harder to find ethically produced goods, as ethical products get more and more expensive due to demand, making people flock to unethically produced goods due to financial means.
However, in this sepecific case, people who can afford a 250$ backpack, a 70$ screwdriver, and/or a 60$ fanny pack probably have the financial power to choose.
As much as I am also upset that LTT related post is dis allowed here, I don’t feel like “people cannot afford ethical consumption” is a good argument against it.
That’s a stance I can only admire, but you’re basically removing any decently priced piece of technology from your life, starting from the iPhone.
We can totally buy fair stuff made 100% in America which costs probably 5x the price of the same article built in China, but for a lot of people, the wallet is a higher priority if they have to choose between being ethic or buying food for their family.
It’s not always easy living a more ethical lifestyle, and of course there’s no truly ethical consumption under capitalism, but you can try.
Most people have too many things and in order to afford them all they need them to be cheaper. You need less than you think, you don’t need the new phone every other year, or a new laptop every update cycle, or iPods or an iPad. You don’t need a smart watch or wireless earphones or designer clothes or 5 pairs of shoes. You don’t need multiple TVs or multiple games consoles.
Less consumption means more money for the things you need, which means you can be more ethical with your choices.
Of course if you’re in a position of struggling to feed your kids, you gotta do what you gotta do. Too late to do anything about it at that point
If you think something being american made means it wasn’t built around worker and environmental exploitation then I got a bridge to sell you.
The reality is that nothing is 100% purely “ethical”. The key is to inform yourself and figure out what is and is not worth supporting some shittiness… and if you want to offset that.
Two examples:
First, I am connecting through DFW in a few days. I know from LOTS of experience that my only real food option is to grab chikfila while walking to the next gate. I have long come to accept that I will just make a donation to an LGBTQIA+ charity to account for my “homophobia offset credit” as it were. And I will savor those delicious waffle fries in the process.
Second, Donnie Yen is one of my favorite actors. He is also… REALLY up the CCP’s ass. Like, Jackie Chan levels of crazy. And there is a LOT of stuff in his films that make me think that if it weren’t the chinese media protecting him we would have heard some REALLY bad stuff. But… I try to ignore that while I watch a 60 year old man stare down some martial artists before running up a vertical wall to kick someone.
And same here. If there is an alternative, I’ll go for it. If there is not? I’ll feel awkward but probably still get it.
Eh, that’s sort of muddy water. There’s still value in supporting something that you believe in, and putting your money where your mouth is. It’s easy to argue that by buying a company’s product, you’re actively supporting their business practices, shitty or not. So it kind of depends on whether you care about their practices that much.
Normal statistical distribution will most likely point to varying degrees and levels of care for those practices, and regardless where anyone sits on that distribution graph, all those points of views are perfectly okay to have.
Edit: people really hate the reality of stats and math huh. So much for pushing science forward.
I don’t think anyone has a problem with the stats, wherever they came from. They have a problem with the last sentence you added, which is
That’s not science, that’s your opinion.
So that implies that the degrees of care a given person may have is purely binary then? Just yes or no?
What if a person cares about unethical business practices, but are swimming in debt, which forces them to put priorities elsewhere? The world is rarely black and white.
Well then you forgot that piece of context in your comment, didn’t you 😂
I already said it depends on whether you care about their practices that much, so no of course it’s not binary.
But no one here is talking about poverty, especially since the OP in question was about a $60 screwdriver then a $250 backpack, both of which are definitely not what people should buy if they’re swimming in debt.
I’m not sure why we need to be having such a hostile discussion? Discussions don’t typically involve putting together a full detailed case, at least in my experience…
I hear your point about a $250 backpack and $60 screwdriver, and agree that yes they would be categorized as luxury items
Oh no I’m not trying to be hostile at all. That definitely wasn’t my intention, sorry if it appears that way. I’m just coming from the angle of what went wrong in your original comment, that’s all. :)
I don’t disagree with your points at all, but context matters, and especially in internet discussions where comments are skimmed through quickly and people don’t fully get what you were trying to say if you leave out some things. Though I also think you don’t really need to be that salty and edit your comment when only 2 people downvoted you. Just elaborate and move on, that’s what I do at least.