For the most part I think that they’re all entirely nonsense and based around people searching for something that simply isn’t there.

At the end of the video Lemmino spends some time talking about these, saying that they’re just not credible based on so many factors. And for that I entirely agree. However he doesn’t talk about the weird behaviour of the Secret Service following the event.

Now all of that could be down to Secret Service corruption, incompetence, secrecy etc etc, but it could also just as likely be on purpose.

I’m a big believer in Occam’s Razor, that the simplest thing is probably what happened. As we all know the events, I fully believe that Oswald did what he did entirely as described in the video, but there are is also interesting ‘evidence’ that suggests that maybe one of Kenney’s Secret Service detail may have unintentionally shot Kennedy in the back of the head in the chaos of everything and upon realising this, the Secret Service obviously decided to try and (successfully) cover it up.

Again, I fully recognise this theory as a conspiracy, but for me, based on what (admittedly small amount) I’ve seen on the matter this is the most credible. Because it’s the simplest answer. Only being trumped by the simpler answer that everything happened as described.

The amount of effort and research that Lemmino puts into his videos are epic.

I can honestly believe that the amount of time between videos is entirely the length of time it takes to create one of his videos.

For anyone who hasn’t heard of this youtuber I would strongly recommend his video on Jack the Ripper and the video on the origins of the ‘Superman S’. The latter of which I think is the genesis of his passion for these long form deeply researched videos.

He has come such a long way from his roots as a bit of generic ‘Top 10’ lists creator to where he has come. Phenomenal development of skills and style.

I think my criticisms on this video, if I was to be picky, would be that he perhaps could have touched on some of the more credible ‘conspiracies’ surrounding and following the event. But I appreciate the length of the video was already nearly 2hours just in the details surrounding Oswald at the time. Maybe he’s got another video planned regarding this, after all he has touched on speculation before on the Jack the Ripper video.

What is so different about my Pexel7a that’s any different to my 5?

Nothing that I even notice. Except for missing convenience such as the rear finger sensor.

And that’s the same for most models.

In fact in a desperate bid to make phones exciting again, manufacturers are trying to bring back the folding concept. And that’s just going to be a total fad since it doesn’t actually bring anything functional to the market.

Except that doesn’t happen, no matter how much you want it to.

I don’t see the strawman? And it’s more than just the ‘oh it’s only once every 3 years’. It’s the environment. Why are we making phones to be replaced needlessly every 2 or 3 years and all the waste that comes with it when you should just be able to replace the one common failure point?

You’ve got to be on a very old phone before you stop getting updates pushed through though? I know Apple are actually pretty good at legacy updates, but Android has got to be 5 or 6 years? Although the challenge is probably more to the variety of Anroid options out there in both the OS configurations and the hardware, where iOS is just iOS and the hardware is known.

I feel that when you get to that age then your battery is pretty much cooked anyway unless it’s had very light use or the owner has been absolutely meticulous in it’s care.

I think the biggest reaction will be that it will likely also impact the US and other markets. Just like with the previous EU regulation that mandated that everyone standardises on the same cables (USBC) it benifited the rest of the world as it was just cheaper to design and manufature one phone rather than multiple for the different markets. Probably the same here to.

I am curious to see how they will design around this requirement though. Curretly we’ve been ‘spoiled’ with some very sleek and clean designs, but if designers have to find a way for them to be easily openable either tooless or with non-propreietry tools and all the rest of it then it may change this.

Although, to be fair, I have noticed that phones have recently started getting bigger, heavier and clunkier. For example the difference between my recently retired Pixel 5 and new Pixel 7a is night and day. I actually regret upgrading - if it wasn’t for my son being ‘due’ for a new phone and being a little skint at the moment (easy ‘free’ birthday present), I wouldn’t have switched.

Maybe try and blag it on expenses 😉

The comment I replied to did being up the topic of colour though, just read the thread.

My response to that is that the average person doesn’t need colour printing, and honestly doesn’t even need to print at all with rare exception.

Based on your replies you are not the average person in terms of printer usage. So that’s why you had the responses that you’ve had. You’re just seeming to look for an excuse to argue?

You can literally buy an inkjet for £30, use it once with the dribble of ink that it comes with, never need to print anything again for 5 years and buy another £30 Inkjet to do it.

It’s cheaper and less bothersome than any other options for those that next to never need to print.

Epson are the name in the game for high quality sample printing. To the point where many people literally call printed samples ‘Epsons’.

A printed sample being a one off print of something that will be industrially printed at scale on a larger printing press. It is used to have a ‘colour master’ to check the print run to, so you can identify colour shifts that can happen over the course of thousands to hundreds of thousands to even millions of sheets.

How often does the average person really need that, though?

Theres always ‘but sometimes’ arguments to everything, but the advice was general.

Maybe not the correct ‘legal’ term. But it’s splitting hairs really.

He wants rid of his serious burden. And imagine he thinks that he can do that if he kills the platform. Instead of being on the hook for 44billion with the repayments and interest attributed to that every month, he can cut that down to a fraction.

I’m not saying I have any idea how it works, or even if it’s possible. Mainly that I wouldn’t be surprised if it was.

I don’t think he’s interested ingetting it back, just to no longer be on the hook for it. I’m sure there’s no doubt various loopholes that he can use to wiggle out of the full consequences of his stupidity and hubris.

Probably some sort of rich person scheme that he can do whereby if his multi-billion dollar mistake ends up being a failure he can write it off and no longer be on the hook for it or something.

Like bankruptcy, but only for twitter and not himself.