Samsung might copy Google's trick: seven years of updates for the Galaxy S24.

Quoting the tl;dr in the linked article:

  • Samsung could be stepping up its game by offering seven years of major Android updates for the Galaxy S24 series, and the generous update policy might extend to other Galaxy flagships.

  • The Galaxy S24 series might also introduce charges for AI features like Live Translate and Pixel-like photo editing tools after 2025.

  • There’s speculation that users may need to sign in to their Samsung accounts for certain AI functionalities.

  • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.worldEnglish
    12·
    6 months ago

    Valid. But there are products out there.

    People like me believe. Ho there. Back your arse right up.

    I follow along with what I am told. If someone says they can do it. Show that it can be accomplished. You pop up and say actually it can’t and here’s why.

    Believing either of you is a toss up. Both come to the table with evidence.

    At the end of the day the product will either work or it won’t. Man went to the moon. 100 years ago they’d say can’t be done. 200 before that and the ability to stream video over the internet would get you burnt for being a witch.

    I’m sure science had fundamental laws but things change. Those laws aren’t concrete. They are shown to exist but that doesn’t mean things can’t alter or impact those.

    I can choose to believe.

    I have invested in wattup. I think it’s possible. Disney showed that it was possible. Just that an entire room was electrified and that you’d die of you went inside. We can mess with it.

    • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.comEnglish
      2·
      6 months ago

      I follow along with what I am told. If someone says they can do it. Show that it can be accomplished.

      Except they haven’t shown anything. There’s literally nothing on the market that works. Literally nothing. Over a decade of this “Technology” being developed and there’s nothing to show for it.

      Believing either of you is a toss up. Both come to the table with evidence.

      What? What evidence have they shown? The only video that I can find from any of these companies “working” is them lying to you and using like 20 modules to come up with the 5v of power then need to trick a phone into thinking it’s charging by pulsing a capacitor.

      At the end of the day the product will either work or it won’t. Man went to the moon. 100 years ago they’d say can’t be done. 200 before that and the ability to stream video over the internet would get you burnt for being a witch.

      The difference is that nobody said that rules of physics and science outright disagrees. You cannot beat the inverse square law. This is much like the laws of thermodynamics. You don’t just “change” them. The fact that people like you seem to thinks that laws of physics change is actually disturbing.

      I’m sure science had fundamental laws but things change. Those laws aren’t concrete.

      Uh what? Yes they are. You think that gravity just changes on a whim? That we discover some stuff and magically gravity will turn left? This is absurd.

      I can choose to believe.

      That’s true. But that doesn’t make it any more possible to actually do.

      I have invested in wattup. I think it’s possible. Disney showed that it was possible. Just that an entire room was electrified and that you’d die of you went inside. We can mess with it.

      https://seekingalpha.com/article/4031486-energous-admits-wattup-unsafe-for-humans-and-cannot-get-fcc-approval This was published 7 years ago… They admitted it themselves… but you still “believe”. Right? I hope you didn’t invest much. That money has basically been lit on fire.

      • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.worldEnglish
        12·
        6 months ago

        Well it means I put money down on an investment.

        I’m sure you told the same thing to Tesla investors.

        Can’t be accomplished.

        Time will tell

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          6 months ago

          Tesla, the famed genius who 100 years ago was scamming rubes with the same impossble promises wattup is peddling? Kinda seems like time has told on that one.

          Listen, Wattup isn’t doing anything new. RF to DC has been around since… well, Tesla. We already use it in the insanely few applications where it’s viable tech. You might even have a few RF to DC devices bolted to your house, solar panels. The problem is that Wattup doesnt have a literal star powering their chips. What was the last device you saw that was fully solar powered (calculator) - how much of the surface area was given over to that component? And how big are wattup’s chips? yeah.

          The power transfer Wattup promises is admittedly an impressive improvement in power while still staying within FCC guidelines, but go up one class of transmitter and you’re back to playing with tech thats been around for a hundred years. We already use COTS parts for this for indoor mapping, thats what RFID inventory tags are. Or power over NFC devices. It’s useful tech, but wattup hasn’t shown ANY devices that actually hit their pie-in-the-sky performance goals (“recon drones”). One hour with a radio physics textbook and you too can do the math to understand why its never, ever going to happen. it’s not a problem that can be innovated around, it’s fundemental universal laws here.

          • darganon@lemmy.worldEnglish
            11·
            6 months ago

            You come across as condescending and rude, and I hope you reflect onto he way you interact with people.

            • Warl0k3@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              6 months ago

              Huh, neat. Sincerely, what part of that seems undeserved? Here, I’ll explain my perspective:

              The parent comment that really caught my attention includes such wisdom as:

              I follow along with what I am told. If someone says they can do it. Show that it can be accomplished. You pop up and say actually it can’t and here’s why. Believing either of you is a toss up. Both come to the table with evidence.

              Which really just speaks for itself there. It’s “both sides” but with easily disproved corporate claims, being advocated for as totally reasonable and “I choose to believe”. It’s like tech bro fundamentalism, but… lame (edit: lamer). Also, while calling me “not a tesla investor advocate” barely warrants being called an ad hominem attack, like… come on. I’m not above rising to personal attacks, especially when I can quite clearly lay out why they’re an ignorant schlub. (also also, it’s hilariously wrong. Tesla was a very good investment and anyone could see that, including me, who owned Tesla stock. It’s er… slightly less so as time has progressed, but tenish years ago? yeah, jumped on that band wagon, worked out for me… Also, that’s just… the dumbest insult. Like come on.)

              I think you’re so caught up in your own self-righteous drive for civil internet discourse you’ve forgotten that

              1: Other people online are perfectly aware of the tone they communicate through their comments, and chose that tone deliberately.

              2: Sometimes, being rude and/or condescending is totally reasonable.

              Like for example here, where someone is seemingly advocating for people to invest in a company (or justifying their own stupid, stupid choice) that is at very best grossly misrepresenting the product, and at worst just doing straight up investor fraud. Also, a company where their product claims are fundamentally impossible, and I can back that up with math. I might have been raised in some wildly different culture than you, with wildly different values, but I will say that I suspect your culture and mine both put a high social value on calling out rampant BS when it runs the risk of affecting other people in your community. This? This worthy of being scorned.

              Seriously, maybe consider getting a better grip on that high horse before it runs off and does something interesting with it’s life.