Well... the Bluetooth earbuds I got from China for 10 cents (I think actually 11 cents because of tax; I am being completely serious) have sound which is better than the Apple Airpods I got for free, which would make sense since the Chinese earbuds (I imagine the Airpods are also Chinese but they've got a brand attached to them) cost literally an infinite percentage more than the Airpods did. That's how percentages work when you divide by zero or whatever. But given that the MSRP of the Chinese earbuds was in the region of $5 if I recall correctly, whereas the MSRP of the Airpods, irrespective of how much they cost me, currently stands at $80, the Airpods should provide service which is 16 times better than the Chinese earbuds.

Apple is a scam.

Now, sound-wise, part of the reason why the earbuds are better is that they're in-ear earbuds, whereas the Airpods are those stupid earbuds which sit in the crease of your ear if you're lucky enough to have ears exactly the right shape, otherwise they fall out, and God forbid you get sweaty at all. So you have to buy pieces of plastic which keep the Airpods in your ears. And since they're farther away from your eardrums, plus they're not as directional, they suffer. I have no doubt that if Apple had been able to figure out how to create in-ear Airpods, they...

Hang on, I'm being told that they actually make them, but they cost substantially more. But surely the cost of two tiny pieces of silicone couldn't raise the price that much, right? RIGHT?!

Apple is a scam.

So these Chinese earbuds are louder, which is nice if one is trying to drown out the screaming, and they stay in my ears better for free rather than requiring the purchase of additional pieces of plastic to make this possible. Also, they actually talk to devices other than Apple products, so I can see information about them and use their touch features, as opposed to the Airpods which, I'm told, "just work" when paired with an iPhone but which "just barely work" in any other situation. I have yet to test the Chinese earbuds' battery life, which I suspect is where the Apple product may shine, but I very much doubt that the Airpods will shine 16 times brighter.

Apple is a scam.

Now, I should say that the bass of the Airpods may be slightly better. May. It's hard to tell. It's certainly not 16 times better. They also seem slightly more robust in design (if you don't take into account the glaring dipshittery of not making them in-ear earbuds) and will likely last some amount of time less than 1600% longer.

Also, Apple ain't the only scam. Samsung manufactures their own brand of scam, as do so many other companies, all of which, it must be said, probably get their audio drivers from the same factory in China but their quality control department probably calls that factory up and gives them a stern talking-to about testing or something.

I kid. A little.

I only bought these earbuds for 11 cents (again, I am in no way joking) because they were a prize for spending far too much time looking at AliExpress. I don't like wireless earbuds, but they are occasionally useful, and there weren't any other prizes which were worth bothering with. I would cheerfully trade the Airpods in, but as I didn't pay for them at all (they were a gift from an anonymous person who decided to leave them in the Lost and Found at work and never return for them) I'm kind of stuck with them.

This, more than anything, led to the rise of mercantilism in 14th-Century Prague.

Here's something easy to do, and comments have had an impact in the past. The Musk/Trump administration wants to strip gender-affirming care out of Affordable Care Act (ACA) plans.

To skip down to read the section about this, search the page for "sex-trait".

This proposal also is about denying the care to DACA folks. I recommend submitting two separate comments, one about each of these cruel proposals.

1) Click "Submit a Public Comment" at the top of the page.

2) Type in your comment.

3) There's a question "What is your comment about?" with a long drop-down list to select from. That seems to be a way to narrow down what your comment is about, which isn't appropriate for this kind of treatment. That question doesn't require an answer, so I skipped it.

4) Check Individual. You can make your comment anonymous or provide more info.

You can upload files with supporting information, too, if you'd like.

In my comment, I touched on:
- gender affirming care is required for a lot of people. For example, I’m on HRT after menopause. Many men with gynecomastia have breast-reduction surgery.

- gender affirming care for people who are transitioning is important healthcare, critical to their wellbeing. I talked about rates of suicide in people who cannot transition.

- The Executive Order that is the basis for this claims to be about protecting women. The EO is biological nonsense, legally incoherent, and as I woman I have absolutely no need to be “protected” from women who are trans.

federalregister.gov/documents/…

#uspol #TransRightsAreHumanRights #trans #access2heathcare