But that only works for watching things alone.

People have been secretly automating boring or difficult work for decades.

In this day and age pretty much the only thing I find need to print is patterns for sewing, knitting, and crochet. Sometimes different sizes or different instructions (like, blue means do this, while yellow means do that) is only differentiated by different colors. Often colorwork charts with more than two colors indicate where the colors go using only different colors (up until maybe the 90s it was common to use symbols instead, and some designers still do, but it's pretty common for modern charts to just use color). Sometimes even with only two colors, the designer uses colors that are close enough together that printing it in black and white doesn't work.

Knitting and crochet patterns can be used digitally, and that's what I do most of the time, but that's not feasible with sewing patterns (well, some people can use a projector, but that doesn't really work for me) and even with knitting and crochet patterns it's sometimes easier or necessary to print them out. Like if I'm going to work on something while away from any desks - I'm trying to get out of the habit of balancing a phone or tablet on my leg, since I broke a phone screen (although it didn't happen while balancing it on my leg, I know that's a risk). Or if I'm working on a complicated chart, it's easier to visually isolate the row I'm working on - I sometimes do this using photoshop if I'm at my computer, but it's a pain to do it digitally anywhere else.

I imagine many other people lead lives where color printing is necessary...

You must be young. "Super ancient" when it's not even old enough to not have wifi. I have a Kindle 2; there's no way to download wirelessly anymore on those. Once "download and transfer" goes away the only option to put books purchased from Amazon or borrowed from the library on there will be stripping the DRM.

Discouraging hacking isn't the point. If it was they would have done something 10+ years ago.

The point is getting average people to buy new Kindles even though the old ones work just fine.

I don't understand why everyone is focused on how this was used for removing DRM - and I say that as someone that removes DRM. There's already a way to remove DRM from the newer format. You can still get the files [to remove the DRM from] by using Kindle for PC, or (if you have a Kindle that can connect to wifi) download books using the Kindle, and then upload the books to Calibre from the Kindle. It's an extra step if you've been using "download and transfer", but it's not a big deal.

The thing that is a big deal is that (aside from removing the DRM and converting into a compatible format, or finding books where this has already been done), this is the only way to get books onto the older Kindles that can't connect to the internet anymore. So, anyone that has one of these older Kindles and doesn't know how to remove DRM (or doesn't want to) can basically put no new books on their Kindle. And by "new" I mean, anything that they haven't downloaded by February 26th.

Everyone that removes DRM will either do the extra step, or just not bother buying books from Amazon anymore since piracy can be done without the extra step. But this harms people that have been doing what Amazon wants - buying ebooks from Amazon (and these old Kindles usually mean someone's been buying ebooks from Amazon for 15 - 18 years) and not removing the DRM.

Amazon took away the only way for the average person to put books on old Kindles because they want people to buy a new Kindle when the old ones work just fine. These old Kindles already resell for just $20 - $30; this will probably make them not even worth reselling, and they're not worth donating as the complexity of getting books on them isn't feasible in like a school situation or etc. So this renders the majority of them ewaste.

It's also a financial accessibility issue. "Download and transfer" is also the only way (again, aside from removing the DRM and converting into a compatible format) to get ebooks borrowed from the library onto older Kindles. People that can't afford a new Kindle and relied on the library are just screwed. (And yeah, I know, people can just go to the library and borrow physical books - but getting to the library often costs money too, either gas money or public transit fare, or time walking there a person might not have.)

And it's a physical accessibility issue, sine the modern screen reader is a poor replacement for the text-to-speech on the old Kindles (they nerfed it when they bought Audible).

Most people don't have the time to do what they enjoy because they have to dedicate so much time to their "real job". I don't wish that on anyone.

I totally get that and agree. But, many people/companies are doing that; so many that any one book is going to struggle even if they do everything right. And obviously, there's always going to be people /companies with a bigger budget.

From the customer side, I frequently find (sometimes because they are marketed/advertised to me) books that I'm the target audience for. But I know there's countless more I never see, and I couldn't read my entire "want to read" list in a lifetime.



As someone that makes a living doing things that were originally hobbies (and that many people would still consider hobbies, but the IRS says they are officially not; writing is not included in this though, I don't really care enough to invest a lot of effort into it, so I make a few cents a year off that) I can't really agree it's not reasonable to expect "everyone else" to support your "hobby". I don't have millions of dollars though, sorry.

You may notice sziring put quotation marks around "free". People pay for Kindle Unlimited, and the books included aren't (generally) priced at $0.00, people just get access to them without paying again.

By the logic of being worth the price tag making it more interesting, Kindle Unlimited makes books more interesting. It also encourages people to read multiple books so that they're getting a deal - it's $11.99 per month, so if you read two books that cost $6.99 in a month, you're saving.

The problem really is just that there's so many books available that any one book is going to struggle to be visible, and to get read (Kindle Unlimited pays royalties based on pages read) because everyone only has so much time in a day to read.


The books priced at $0.00 are a whole different thing, there's no royalties from those, but that's intended as a promotional thing - get some reviews, hook people into a series, etc.

As someone else with backyard chickens - no, that would be akin to eating my dog because she got old.

Oh also, Plex allows for easy device switching, just pause and then go to the other device, vs in VLC I have to look at the timestamp and then go to the file on the other device and remember the timestamp and skip to it. I sometimes watch something on a tablet while doing the dishes, or on the living room tv while folding laundry, and then when I'm done I'll go back to watching on my computer, or vice-versa. And often not immediately, so remembering a timestamp would be a lot harder.

Plex keeps track of what episode you're on, and provides an interface for family members that don't have the tech prowess to connect to another computer and navigate a file system.
When it was just me watching, I used VLC, but nowadays I have a whole family wanting to watch my media, and sometimes we rewatch something together that one of us has watched apart. While there are ways to do this with VLC, it's a lot more convoluted, and maybe impossible to learn for my disabled brother.

The algorithm is taking that to mean you enjoy engaging with that creator's content. That you engage negatively is irrelevant.

So unless you enjoy the downvoting, when you see the creator in your home feed, you're going to want to select the three dots, then select "Don't recommend channel".

Thank you, I guess. It's never happened yet (knock on wood) and I get a lot of deliveries. I have cameras that alert me whenever someone comes onto my property, and I never leave deliveries out there very long (if I'm not home or if I'm busy, I send one of my kids to get it). And when it's an expensive delivery, I do stay home ready to run to the door... but it's not worth it for the majority of deliveries.

In the US it's considered their job to get it to the point of delivery (door, mailbox, etc.). But we already have these as options in the USA. Many people don't want to use them. Most people in the US want parcels just dropped on their porches. Myself included. I don't want to have to be home and ready to rush to the door for every delivery, nor to have to stay home again on a different day if I happen to be taking a crap when the courier arrives. I don't want to have to go somewhere else to pick up a delivery - that would defeat the whole point of having something delivered.