MaXimus421

That is pretty cool man.

That lack of competing isn't because of price tho. The CCP has effectively convinced the population that Apple (US phones) are bad/untrustworthy, much like the US government has done regarding Huawei. There was a time when Apple had a decent (not great) marketshare in China.

Yeah, they're just slinging shit at the wall and seeing what sticks. There's no real thought put into anything these days. I'm very tired of the 'Form over Functionality' bs that's being hidden behind fancy marketing.

I'm not convinced. This company has purposely avoided OS updates because it's profitable to them. It causes people to buy their phones more frequently over a shorter period of time, thus offsetting the cheaper price they offer them at.

If this is true, I suspect we will see a noticeable increase of price on their phones and much less discounts.

Great discussion, BTW, man. I appreciate the back and forth. You were far more cival than me in this on a few things that is not lost on me.

Cheers.

Well there it is.

He's either blocking them in the name of "user privacy" fighting the "good fight" or he's refusing them because he'll very likely be implemented, lawfully on the charges they want access over.

My point is, Telegram is done. It's a rat trap at this point and anyone associated with it getting their info scraped - purposely.

That's a pretty heft user base, there. GL.

Telegram, it's "encryption" or lack thereof, whatever, is hiding behind it's owner. And he's got a what, $5 million dollar bond or something? The platform is being made an example of. And his kneck is on the chopping block.

If you think he won't fold, you're insane. The logs (yes, logs) will be handed over. Keys to encryption will be. Whatever it takes to gain 100% full access, will be given.

To think they won't is purposeful, blatent, fanboyism. And to turn the conversation into a Telegram and Signal comparison is just... ugh.

Signal ain't on trial here. Telegram isn't even in the same area code as Signal in terms of security. But you already know that. Telegram is not, was not and never will be a secure, privacy centered messaging program.

And because it allowed some of its users to treat it like it is one, with nefarious intent, is why it's going to burn in flames. And tbh, it should. People treated like it's secure. When it was anything but. Reap it.

It was a Lion King movie. Of course people paid to go see it. Box office profits (tickets sold) do not equate to an enjoyable film.

I've never heard of anyone IRL or online claim that film was worthy of their time.

We all got catfished on that one but I'm not surprised. You cannot remake a classic. It will work only 1 time out of 50. The odds are never good.

Jungle Book was an exception, imo.

I'm well aware of what you're getting at. I'm insulted you'd think I'm not. But at some point you have to look at the situation for what it is - in the moment.

Telegram has the very public, very purposeful eye of the government on it right now. That platform cannot hide behind it's owner taking the high road. It will bend the knee or it will close it's doors.

That's where it is right now. That's no choice at all for it's users, obviously.

No argument here. I agree completely on that. It is stupid. Complete waste of hardware.

Gez Z didn't grow up with watching movies. They grew up on social media. Cinematic story telling isn't something they're farmilur with as a form of daily entertainment.

I don't blame them for this. But it definitely shows in their work. Their own generation aren't interested in their stuff, by and large. Sure, there's some that watch and enjoy it but the audience they're putting this out to who are actually interested are older. And they see their work as it is - not as good as past efforts by generations before Gen Z.

It's why the film industry is drowning right now. There is an audience still there for film. But the majority of it isn't Gen Z. And that's the problem. There lies the disconnect.

If you want Gen Z attention and dollars, the film industry isn't where you should be aiming your sights at. Because they aren't the audience for film. Which obviously means, you should cater the film industry to the audience THAT IS ALREADY THERE.

And that ain't Gen Z...

Sounds on brand for Ron, tbh. I wouldn't look at him poorly over that, personally.