One of the things I initially liked about Pixels was that I could uninstall/disable a lot of the proprietary garbage that would be mandatory on other phones. But now it looks like Google is abandoning that flexibility in favour of shoehorning Gemini into everything.
My only interaction with Gemini so far was telling it to kick rocks when it sent me an unsolicited text message. I also barely use Assistant to begin with. So once my current phone dies, I guess I'll have to find something new.
The Stone Angel.
It's a miserable story about a dying old woman regretting all her life choices. It's also required reading in Canadian high schools because the author is Canadian.
And then, on top of all that, my teacher absolutely insisted that its only major theme was "hope" and docked marks for having any other interpretation.
I've never experienced that, and I've definitely told Google Assistant to fornicate with itself on multiple occasions.
I had never heard of Humane until I read this article. After also reading Engadget's review of the thing, it sounds like an absolute nightmare to use.
Maybe I'm too old-school and impatient, but I've never been able to make voice assistants work for me. It's a feedback loop: the assistant fails to do a task, so I become resistant to using it in the future. Even the thing I've used an assistant for the most, playing music out of a Nest speaker, seems to still be hit-or-miss after years of trying, and in some ways seems to be getting worse.
The gestures also sound awful. As with voice assistants, I've never gotten comfortable with smartphone gestures beyond the most rudimentary. I strictly use 3-button navigation on my phone, and I use Connect as my Lemmy app of choice because it allows me to disable all the swipe commands for upvote/downvote.
I only ever got one ad in RIF, repeated in every spot. I think it was an app for organizing decks in TGCs, but as I don't play any TGCs, I never bothered to investigate. As with every other ad on the internet, I only interacted with it by accident.
Briefly: I didn't.
More substantively: I never owned a cell phone growing up, even though I was at the right age when they became a common thing for teenagers to have. It wasn't a money thing, nor household rule, as my sisters got phones when they were in high school. The biggest reason was probably just how I communicate. I wasn't big into IM services either, and I preferred email or face-to-face, or a (landline) phone call if it was an urgent matter.
Then there was also my adolescent brain thinking I was making a bold counter-culture statement by steadfastly resisting the march of technology. In reality, I was probably just being a pain in the neck for my friends and family, and I probably unnecessarily endangered myself at least once.
I did finally, begrudgingly, get an old hand-me-down flip-phone in my final year of university, but that was out of necessity, and I used it to make maybe only a dozen calls the 2.5 years I had it before getting a smart device.
To bring it full circle: I did try sending a text message with that flip-phone exactly once, at the insistence of my family. That message was predictably a garbled mess, and to this day my sisters still wonder how I managed to get a number to appear in the middle of the "word".
I have a number of other somewhat amusing stories about people's reactions to my lack of a cellphone, but this post is long enough already.
Am I the only person in my generation who never learned to type on a number pad? It wasn't the only thing I didn't recognize from the "test", but it stuck out to me.
At least last time I donated blood in my country (Canada), you could discretely indicate "do not use" by applying a different sticker to the bag. This was done in case someone got peer pressured into donating but didn't want to reveal something private that would have disqualified them otherwise.
You are welcome.
Pointers do make more sense to me now than two decades ago, mostly owing to me being married to a computer scientist. But I always go back the fact that for the purposes of my first year programming course, pointers were (probably) unnecessary and thus confusing. I have a hard time understanding things if not given an immediate and tangible use case, and pointers didn't really help me when most of my programs used a bare few functions and some globally defined variables to solve simple physics problems.
EDIT: I'll also say that pointers alone weren't what sunk my interested in programming, they're just an easily identifiable concept that sticks out as "not making sense." At around the same time we had the lesson on pointers, our programs were also starting to reach a critical mass of complexity, and the amount of mental work I had to do to follow along became more than I was willing to put into it - it wasn't "fun" anymore. I only did well on my final project because a friend patiently sat in my dorm room for a few hours and talked me through each step of the program, and then fed me enough vocabulary to convince the TA that I knew what I was doing.
I doubt that you're missing anything about pointers themselves. I may not have done a good job articulating why non-programmers have a hard time understanding them.
Nah, just the sad message of "Pretty please love me (because we sunk a bunch of money into this)."