Understanding Others, Or a Lack There Of

It’s not something new and as a niche community we’re often the ‘victim’ of it, but it seems to me to have become a lot worse recently.

I was just watching the ShortCircuit (Linus Tech Tips side channel) video on the Boox Tab Ultra and skimming through the comments. The number of comments that are ‘I don’t get this eInk stuff’ or even ‘there’s not reason for this to exist’ are astounding.

Yes, said video is not the best for pointing out the differences, but I doubt many people even paid proper attention/watched the whole thing. It’s just that a couple of quick searches and some minimal critical thinking would reveal why it may be appealing.

I’ve seen it elsewhere recently to. How are dare Sony release a controller with extra features. How utterly pointless. It’s not what I want.

It also brings back a memory of an argument I had over at DPReview years ago now. Someone just couldn’t understand why someone might want a camera that runs off AA batteries.


“The advancement of the arts, from year to year, taxes our credulity and seems to presage the arrival of that period when human improvement must end.”

– Henry Ellsworth, US Patent Office Commissioner, 1848 report to Congress.

Seems there have always been people who are just wired up that way.


This is the root of all evil - just because someone doesn’t want something, NO ONE should have that as an option, ESPECIALLY in tech. Thurrott with his total aversion to ink; Apple with “gorilla arms” if you have a touch screen; Gates early disdain for the internet - it’ all the same - if I don’t want it you can’t have it…

There is no respect (just scorn) for the ideas of others…


I’ve spent my time traveling between East and West, and I’ve noticed one of the biggest cultural differences is the concept of individual expression.

Generally in the East, there is a tacit understanding that your opinion should be expressed in a way that respect the plurality of the ‘group’, be it family, organization, or nation.

Whereas in the West, there seems to be a tacit understanding that individual expression need not be burdened by consideration of the group. Thus comments phrased in the singular “I”, are given the allowance of an implicit “but you may differ”.

This is slightly changing on both sides of the world, but generally I think the English-speaking internet comes from the latter tradition.


No, that’s not what I’m getting at.

The types of comments I feel like I’ve seen ever more of are the type that are vehement in their tone or even words that the author thinks they are right and that anyone wanting something different from that is wrong.

It’s not just a preference, but a condition of not wanting others to fulfil their own preferences/have their own preferences fulfilled. That what they would like shouldn’t exist. And I really can’t get my head around why these people act like that, as it hardly impedes their own wants.


That’s why I focused on tacit understanding. It’s based on the audience’s allowance of an unspoken ‘only on his own behalf’, regardless of how exclusionary the viewpoint.

Think about it in terms of language tradition, instead of language. British parliamentary-style debate often involves the direct confrontation of one-sided views. At face-value, it’s shockingly unconstructive. But the ‘clash of individuals’ is the hallmark of much of the English-speaking thought and discourse, which has yielded some of the finest achievements of human intellect.

In a wry way, we pay for the timeless achievements of democracy, law, and philosophy, by the daily annoyance of people who think they are Socrates.

Perhaps there’s an underlying insecurity that the existence of other “valid” choices puts the validity of “my” choice at risk of being “less”.


That’s a very western tendency to view nearly everything in a zero sum outcome context. In other words if I claim my viewpoint or object to be “superior” then yours is "less than by definition.

And already this topic is showing evidence of that :frowning:


It’s clearly a consequence of zero sum gamesmanship - if I don’t destroy your option, it might get fulfilled in preference to my obviously superior choice, so I need to defend against me NOT getting what I know to be inherently superior.


Perhaps I’m just more aware of it these days, but I came across yet another today (and no, there have been many more that I’ve managed to put aside).

Can anyone really name a reason why you would need a standalone MP3 player in 2023? With services like Tidal or even just Spotify it seems like there are so many downsides, with little to no benefits. (Other than maybe owning your own physical music as opposed to relying on a streaming service?)

It’s comments like this that really get my goat.

1 Like

Especially since he named a major reason (owning media) right in the article.

Furthermore, given the constant demonstrations that California’s electric grid is so fragile, why would anyone assume ubiquitous and uninterrupted streaming?

“The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain.” - Cmdr M. Scott.

1 Like

Bravo @Bishop. Bravo. It’s not only the electric grid - ISP and carrier overload, location (here in the hinterlands even my Verizon friends complain of poor 4g adn 5g performance, much less my “I can’t get to 2 Mbps downloads” AT&T).