Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 276 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#71

Post by minikites »

Naga wrote: post #18
RicoElectrico wrote: post #3

The company holding patents for e-ink is literally retarded, as if they don't want it to succeed. I'm not making this up. [1] Sure e-ink has its flaws, but wouldn't it be better to have a smaller slice of a much larger cake? OLED is patent encumbered too, there's also a patent holding company, despite that you can buy smallest modules for less than $2 on AliExpress. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22829798

I agree completely with your points, and I'm sorry be that guy, but "literally retarded" is offensive language and is frankly below the level of discourse of HN. I'm not one to be the PC police but really, come on. You can make your argument without resulting to slurs like that. https://www.verywellfamily.com/what-is-the-r-word-3105651

I agree and the people who are tying themselves into knots to justify using the r-word reminds of people who pointedly use the word "niggardly" instead of any number of synonyms just to get a rise out of the audience.

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#72

Post by toyg »

Beyond patent issues, TBH I would not have a problem paying for a reMarkable this very day, if I could be 10000% sure that there wasn't some shitty SaaS service involved in using it at any stage.

These days, whenever a new gadget comes up, my first reaction has become "I wonder how they try to screw you into a SaaS later".

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#73

Post by 1shooner »

pid_0 wrote: post #50
Naga wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree completely with your points, and I'm sorry be that guy, but "literally retarded" is offensive language and is frankly below the level of discourse of HN. I'm not one to be the PC police but really, come on. You can make your argument without resulting to slurs like that. https://www.verywellfamily.com/what-is-the-r-word-3105651

Is this really necessary? Retard is not used to refer to people with mental disabilities. It is not a slur. Its a new social justice campaign to get mad about something when they ran out of things to complain about. Guess what, stupid, moron, idiot, etc used to refer to people with mental disabilities. Why aren't they campaigning to ban those words too?

It's called the euphemism treadmill[1]. It's nothing new, and it's a normal part of language. Attributing it to some sort of contemporary 'social justice campaign' seems very reactionary.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Euphemism_treadmill

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#74

Post by nate_meurer »

alisonkisk wrote: post #61
Ajedi32 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't necessarily disagree with you, but seeing as "the r word" is no longer used to refer to mentally disabled people it seems a little late to be campaigning to end its use as a pejorative _now_. If anything, these efforts should be directed towards ending the use of "autism" in a pejorative context, as if that trend isn't stopped then that term is up next on the euphemism treadmill. I also wonder if perhaps these…

We can attend to more than one abuse of language at once. "Idiot" and other discourse-terminaring slurs have no place on HN. It's not the word that's the problem, it's the intended meaning. The euphemism treadmill is when people keep changing words instead of communicating better.

Except GP didn't use the word "retard" to terminate discourse, or to shortcut debate or insult anyone in this thread. The word was purely descriptive, and this context, quite appropriate and illustrative. I can think of no other single word that better describes the behavior of the E-Ink patent holders.

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#75

Post by mumblemumble »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #48
Naga wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree completely with your points, and I'm sorry be that guy, but "literally retarded" is offensive language and is frankly below the level of discourse of HN. I'm not one to be the PC police but really, come on. You can make your argument without resulting to slurs like that. https://www.verywellfamily.com/what-is-the-r-word-3105651

Don't necessarily disagree with you, but seeing as "the r word" is no longer used to refer to mentally disabled people it seems a little late to be campaigning to end its use as a pejorative _now_. If anything, these efforts should be directed towards ending the use of "autism" in a pejorative context, as if that trend isn't stopped then that term is up next on the euphemism treadmill. I also wonder if perhaps these…

Except that it is still used to refer to people with developmental disabilities. Typically as a pejorative term.

Edit: Thinking on your 2nd point, I suspect that you've got your arrow of causality backwards.

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#76

Post by g63wchueuo »

craftinator wrote: post #46
g63wchueuo wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thats just it tho. no retards were harmed in writing that sentence. any retards here disagree? instead what we have is a group of people offended on behalf of retards, which is itself retarded

Dead.

i stand corrected

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#77

Post by m-p-3 »

throwaway4485we wrote: post #14

Throaway to not get sued. E-ink, the company, holds the patents of the pigment core tech that makes "paper-like" displays possible and strongarms the display manufacturers and the users of their displays to absolute silence. Any research project or startup that comes up with a better alternative technology gets bought out or buried by their lawyers ASAP. E-ink don't make the display themselves, they make the e-ink fi…

Seriously, I hope their patents expire ASAP. They're hampering the technological progress of e-paper devices with their iron grip on the technology.

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#78

Post by TulliusCicero »

darkwater wrote: post #66
pid_0 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really necessary? Retard is not used to refer to people with mental disabilities. It is not a slur. Its a new social justice campaign to get mad about something when they ran out of things to complain about. Guess what, stupid, moron, idiot, etc used to refer to people with mental disabilities. Why aren't they campaigning to ban those words too?

> Guess what, stupid, moron, idiot, etc used to refer to people with mental disabilities. No, they were not. And despite what the "you get offended so quickly" mob says, "retarded" main meaning when used in a negative fashion against someone always, always appeals to the "that person/entity has the mental abilities of someone with Down syndrome or any other similar intellectual disability". And you, me and everybody…

> No, they were not.

Yes, they were: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot

> An idiot, in modern use, is a stupid or foolish person.

> It was formerly a technical term in legal and psychiatric contexts for some kinds of profound intellectual disability where the mental age is two years or less, and the person cannot guard themself against common physical dangers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moron_(psychology)

> Moron is a term once used in psychology and psychiatry to denote mild intellectual disability.[1] The term was closely tied with the American eugenics movement.[2] Once the term became popularized, it fell out of use by the psychological community, as it was used more commonly as an insult than as a psychological term. It is similar to imbecile and idiot.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imbecile

> The term imbecile was once used by psychiatrists to denote a category of people with moderate to severe intellectual disability, as well as a type of criminal.[1][2] The word arises from the Latin word imbecillus, meaning weak, or weak-minded.[3] It included people with an IQ of 26–50, between "idiot" (IQ of 0–25) and "moron" (IQ of 51–70).[4] In the obsolete medical classification (ICD-9, 1977), these people were said to have "moderate mental retardation" or "moderate mental subnormality" with IQ of 35–49.[5]

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#79

Post by nate_meurer »

darkwater wrote: post #66
pid_0 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really necessary? Retard is not used to refer to people with mental disabilities. It is not a slur. Its a new social justice campaign to get mad about something when they ran out of things to complain about. Guess what, stupid, moron, idiot, etc used to refer to people with mental disabilities. Why aren't they campaigning to ban those words too?

> Guess what, stupid, moron, idiot, etc used to refer to people with mental disabilities. No, they were not. And despite what the "you get offended so quickly" mob says, "retarded" main meaning when used in a negative fashion against someone always, always appeals to the "that person/entity has the mental abilities of someone with Down syndrome or any other similar intellectual disability". And you, me and everybody…

> And you, me and everybody else KNOW this.

No, you may know this about yourself, and I don't doubt that you feel strongly about it, but you're projecting your feelings onto everyone else here.

To me, words like retard, imbecile, idiot, etc. don't immediately invoke thoughts of mentally disabled people. Rather, I take them as descriptions of fools. GP's post is a good example of this, and was an effective use of the word to describe extremely foolish behavior.

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#80

Post by [deleted] »

darkwater wrote: post #66
pid_0 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really necessary? Retard is not used to refer to people with mental disabilities. It is not a slur. Its a new social justice campaign to get mad about something when they ran out of things to complain about. Guess what, stupid, moron, idiot, etc used to refer to people with mental disabilities. Why aren't they campaigning to ban those words too?

> Guess what, stupid, moron, idiot, etc used to refer to people with mental disabilities. No, they were not. And despite what the "you get offended so quickly" mob says, "retarded" main meaning when used in a negative fashion against someone always, always appeals to the "that person/entity has the mental abilities of someone with Down syndrome or any other similar intellectual disability". And you, me and everybody…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN