I think you accidentally a word there.

Even not replacing your phone will not help if the AI is a cloud service. Google Assistant was replaced with Gemini just recently, so people with phones 4, 6, maybe even 8 years old have AI services on them as well. You can avoid having the AI baked into the OS if your phone does not get further OS updates, but apps and services can be updated by the vendor to add AI features. Having the AI running locally is preferable, as then the service can work without sharing all your personal data with the master company.

WankerWeasel's complaint is about having to change setups to a new server. People who were using Emby when the source was closed still had to transition their stuff to a new product (Jellyfin) even though it was a fork. Being open source and based on the previous product didn't matter.

I have never used Emby and I didn't use the early versions of Jellyfin, so I can't say how much was needed to transition. But if you have to get new playback apps and remake authentication, fix relatives' setups, you're essentially doing the same job you would moving from one proprietary solution to another.

Possibly the PR dept is just an AI. That would be totally on brand to think a human is unnecessary when you can just plug a LLM into some social networking services to learn the "current of public opinion".

Why do you think Jellyfin doesn't have these things? There's even third-party projects on Github that you can run that will sync the watch status between Plex, Emby, and Jellyfin so you can watch on whichever platform is more convenient at the time.

So was Emby.

I hear a lot of iPhone users online who want a small window in the back of their case (so the Apple logo is visible to others when they are using it). If that's not being image conscious, I don't know what is.

That's still buying them. They just are on a "payment plan". Some of those plans are really "We add the balance of the phone to your account (so you just bought it on credit), and we credit your bill for it split up into 24 monthly installments".

Yeah... I'm synchronizing my off-site backup disks as I type this, and the file copies have been over a terabyte more than once now. Looks like the PC will be running still when I go to bed tonight.

For a mobile device, I'm not sure I would let that much data stack up unique to the device. Pictures/video I would try to do backups on a PC before it got to that. Never know when a phone might get lost/damaged after all. Contacts are already synced to remote service. Call logs/text messages are archived and sent away once a week, too.

I was going to mention that I have an SD card slot so I would just store that data on a removable card, but it's standard practice to have all storage encrypted on device nowadays so I can't just move it over.

This from the administration that fires competent scientists and other government employees despite their importance to functioning government departments, and lets rando journalists into secret online meetings.

My money's on this one. Whatever it is, it will be something that has to be paired to an internet-connected mobile device to work, making it nothing more than a wireless camera and microphone module for a smartphone. But they will charge as much as an entire cheap Android handset for the hardware and it will need a monthly subscription fee, too. People will feel too self-conscious using it in front of others (unless they are people whose jobs you control, because you know they wont dare laugh at you then). Tech bloggers will love it for however long they can make content with it. It will be written off as stupid by most people.

Thank you for your reply. I can agree not all premium phone users are on the upgrade treadmill. I also bought what was billed as a flagship for its time, but it's 4 years old now and I'm not really feeling the need to upgrade to something newer. My impression was upgrading wasn't such a pain if you had a device that was recent and in high demand still as carriers seem to love running promos with trade-ins, and only mainstream makes/models tend to be eligible.

I think the danger of using a phone on an older patch level are being somewhat overblown. The biggest risk in mobile usage remains the user and their own vigilance with apps and attachments, which can impact even new devices.

Careful. That cuts both ways, sir.

Really? I would expect the opposite.

  - Owners of flagship devices concerned with their image and having the latest tech would be more likely to replace devices more often to get access to the latest gear, perhaps handing the old device down to a spouse or child if they aren't getting a trade-in credit for it.

  - Owners of cheap phones more focused on value. Top end features are nice but a luxury for something that has core essential functions for them (acting as a communication device). They lack the disposable income to replace devices as quickly, and wish to get the most return (usable life) for their purchase. They are more likely to keep a device until it becomes unusable (damaged, obsolete on mobile network, etc).

The Android vs. iPhone angle can be more of a toss-up. I would expect the iPhone group to be more on the image/latest-tech group, but iOS devices are generally longer-supported at the OS level, so there is less need to update to stay on a device getting patches. But the Android group might care less about being on a device still getting patches.

Google Search has been declining for a very long time. It's not LLM's driving people away from Google Search, it's the experience itself. People have been lamenting long before AI about how much less useful Google Search has become over the years. First it was because of companies using SEO to gamify the whole thing and get their commercial interests listed over actual helpful info. Then it was Google pushing more into advertising so you had to search inside the search to find the relevant results that were not being promoted. Then add to this the (relatively) recent privacy concerns about data-mining, tracking, and general creepiness from large technology companies like Google, Facebook, and Amazon that is turning people off from using their products because of how the information is sold and used to stalk them other places.

I do agree with this point. Stopping API or screen-scraping shenanigans that are resulting in LLMs using Google's services while stopping revenue is a concern they should address... much like Google abusing access to news outlets and presenting information in a way that prevents the actual authors from gaining compensation for their content.

That "future revenue" is a pretty big "if". Meanwhile the resources for this are not really practical from an environmental standpoint, at least as long as the AI makers keep thinking making deals with existing fossil-fuel utilities are the solution and not building their own solar/wind plants to power their datacenters. But their C-suites aren't concerned with that.