apparent

Yes, I definitely remember noticing how much better TV was when we moved from 20" sets from last century to HD LCDs (and then much larger/higher-res LCDs) over the last 25 years.

And I would disagree that only the story matters. If that were the case, people wouldn't go to the theater (a trend that has started happening in the last 15 years as people have been able to rig their living rooms to give an experience that is nearly theater quality, especially when considering cost and convenience. When we had 20" TVs, they were no substitute for going to the movies.

That's not been my experience with the refresh rates, and it's not what GP and GGP said either. I have a 13 mini and have bought both 16 and Air. I kept them for 2 weeks and then returned.

When I got the phones, I did not notice any benefit related to screen refresh. I also did not notice any detriment when I went back to my 13 mini after two weeks on a 120 Hz screen.

But if it was as GP said, and it's only something you notice when you go back to a "lesser" screen, then that would not be a selling point in my book.

It's hard to even know what price to use to calculate the delta, since there are different processors with different memory capacities, different CPUs based on memory, and higher price for the nano-texture display.

But yeah, a top-of-the-line iPad mini costs well more than an MBA, which seems kind of nuts. Add on a keyboard case and Apple Pencil Pro and you're looking at $1,500.

If something is not noticeable when it gets "better", but it leads people to notice other stuff is "worse" over time, then I'd argue it's not actually a good thing to get.

Imagine if someone said "this food won't really taste better to you when you first eat it, but after 6 months you'll find other food tastes worse". To me, this would not be a selling point.

I think part of the issue was that it encourages media consumption, which can be bad for productivity.

I also think they were not comparing it to an iPhone SE.

> The larger screen is great for productivity.

Interesting, reviewers (Joanna Stern) said that it was not great for productivity, more for consumption. Perhaps it works for your kind of tasks, but not hers/others.

Why? Who gets the revenue? Local government or national? What are they supposed to spend it on?

> They now have 35%

Is this of new car sales? Surely they've not taken over a third of the entire fleet in a few years.

Wyze makes a decent one, and cheap. Probably has fewer bells and whistles, but it serves me just fine.

Kindle's color tablets look a bit better than Kobo's, by my estimation. But neither is anywhere near iPad-level color saturation or contrast.

I think Amazon does some special stuff with the backplane or something. Seems like it's not 100% marketing gimmicks if it actually looks better.

I'll let you continue being wrong in peace. Have a good day, and keep dreaming those sweet, sweet AAPL dreams!

I am aware that anecdotes are not as good as large-scale evidence. That does not defeat the point that you are confusing necessary and sufficient conditions, rendering your own anecdotes even more useless than mine and @layer8.

Really weird that you keep insisting that you're right here. Some guy on the internet made a conjecture, other people disagreed with him, and you feel the need to keep boosting his claim. Yet every argument you make equally damages your own side, rather than showing that your side is stronger. Really weird approach.

That's now how the logic works. If someone asserts "the market is XYZ" then they have to show that actually is the market. When people say "I'm in XYZ and I'm definitely not the market", that shows that the hypothesis is wrong. When someone else says "I'm XYZ and I'm in the market", that is a necessary but not sufficient condition.

OP said

> The market is: people with homes and an iPhones. That is to say, a fair number of people.

The point of comments like mine and @layer8's is that the market is actually much smaller than this. The fact that you are considering one does not mean the market is any category that includes you. It means that it is some category that includes you (and excludes me and @layer8). We don't know how big that market is, but if longtime Apple fans are not even considering the device, then probably it is not "all people with iPhones and homes". It could still be a big market, but it's glib to say that it's so large.

You can also use a HomePod/mini.

Well, I'm a big Apple fan and and also have an iPhone and a home (and various cameras in it) and I am not even considering getting this device. I am considering dropping 9x as much on a new iPhone, on the other hand...

If it auto-rotated to face the person speaking, that would make it much more useful. Having to manually move the thing around (especially in the kitchen, where your hands are likely to be dirty) doesn't seem great.

> To a lawyer, there's no such thing as the Spirit of the Law

This is untrue. And when I ask questions like the above, I am wondering what the spirit was they were going for. It's too vague to know.

> Ya'll know what a law is supposed to say, but weaponize language in order to invent ambiguity that any sane person would say isn't there, and as a result, a law that should only be 4 sentences ends up being 4 pages full of synonyms in order to make sure there's no loopholes.

This resonates for people who have never needed lawyers and think that lawyers just make things worse. They certainly can, but they can also make things better by pointing out when things are ambiguous and need to be clarified. Or helping parties realize where their interests align and how they can work together.

You think there aren't sign up buttons on the front page of websites?

Sure, plenty of startups are small businesses and have customers all over.

Interested to give this a try. I've tried Wispr Flow and found it to be quite good, but a bit pricey for my taste. I guess I assumed there were equally good models that were cheaper, and I suppose this is one of them.

I'll be curious to see how the existence / popularity of tools like this end up affecting the pricing of paid tools like Wispr Flow.

You skipped over the part where the cancel button isn't on the front page of literally any website. It's somewhere in account/settings/subscription/edit. No word if this is allowed under NYC's desired regime. I don't have a lot of faith in their reasonableness, considering the politicians that are getting elected there these days.

I think the most helpful thing is not to add language to the regulation, but to add 4-6 examples that illustrate what is considered to be ok or not ok.

The lack of examples/specificity makes it easier for the government to capriciously enforce this law against companies they disfavor. I'm surprised that on a startup-friendly forum, most of the comments are from folks who are worried about malicious companies, not malicious enforcement.

I totally hear you on Comcast. I've filed FCC complaints against them several times. But these rules apply equally to very small companies, who may not have the resources to make sure that they're in compliance with the spirit and letter of every rule in 50 states and 100 countries.

This is actually a hilarious point. Some companies might end up making the sign up process more complicated in order to make clear that their cancellation process is equally "simple"/"easy". I guess godaddy is ahead of the curve on this one.

This is exactly my point. It's never going to be as easy to cancel as to sign up because signing up just requires entering cc details. Canceling requires authentication to an account to ensure that the one being canceled belongs to you, and of course finding the settings and the place where the subscription is modified. That's always going to be more clicks than landing on startup.com's website, clicking sign up now, and entering your cc details.

What does malicious compliance mean to you? I've heard it used, but never in a way that makes sense in this context. If they had examples, it would be clearer what the intent was, and businesses would be able to be held the appropriate standard. As it stands, I can't figure out if many of the businesses I deal with are in compliance, and anyone who claims to know is naive, or simply hasn't read the rule closely.

The last thing I'd want is to have to end up in court in NY to figure out what is or is not in compliance with this law. They should include examples, like many regulations do. We don't need more lawsuits for laws that could have been clarified in the first place.

Where does it say they have to send even 1 email prior to renewal, let alone 2-3? That would be spam in my book. I'm pretty sure companies like Netflix don't do that, and I'm sure Cursor doesn't. That doesn't mean the requirement doesn't exist or isn't added by this law...but it would fundamentally change things.

I wish it were that simple. The language I quoted gives two additional requirements, however, and no examples for what does/doesn't meet them.

The HN guidelines ask us to "assume good faith", and I try to do so here. Comments like yours take a good faith question like mine and treat it as if it's being asked by someone who is "intentionally misunderstand[ing]" it.

You say:

> I honestly don't think this is one is hard to understand at all. If you can sign up through the web you should be able to cancel through the web.

If that's all they were trying to do, they would just say that it has to be the same medium. But they don't stop there. They say you have to have a "simple cancellation mechanism" and it has to be "as easy to use as the mechanism that the consumer used to provide consent". Then they layer on the same-medium requirement that you think is the only actual requirement.

I've read a lot of rules, laws and regulations in my day (lawyer), so I know that when there are 3 distinct requirements, then you can't just meet one of them and think you're in compliance.