A decentralized peer-to-peer messaging application that operates over Bluetooth

Post by nunobrito » Mon, Jan 19, 2026, 9:36 AM UTC

niemandhier wrote: post #51

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> wish I had fuck-you money and could spend my day engrossed in whatever I find interesting A good mental exercise is to calculate how much you'd need to survive indefinitely in a pocket of rural America or the third world. No international travel. No bells and whistles. Limited cuisine. But survival and leisure unlimited. When I've run the numbers for a comforable living, they've come to $300k (Vietnam, $12k/y) to $…

Coll idea. One thing: This numbers exclude healthcare costs as you get older this gets more expensive. For countries with free healthcare, it is usually limited to people working there or citizens and ( in the German case ) recognised refugees.

Post by szszrk » Mon, Jan 19, 2026, 9:40 AM UTC

canterburry wrote: post #53

Finally...a dedicated app to bitch at people.

Post by pipo234 » Mon, Jan 19, 2026, 9:47 AM UTC

yaris wrote: post #15

maqp wrote: post #9

Could someone please explain in what situation do you use a BlueTooth messaging app? Like, even BT5 range won't exceed 400 meters. What good is this? You're not going to send images to journalists from protests with it (you'd do wisely to keep it in airplane mode until you get home and then you'd upload them to their securedrop or whatever), and you don't need off-band security to let the kids know it's dinner time.

Any situation when mobile internet cannot be used. That is not only protests, but also legal gatherings, i.e. street concerts, or places where mobile coverage is poor in general.

Post by senchalover23 » Mon, Jan 19, 2026, 9:48 AM UTC

Post by threatofrain » Mon, Jan 19, 2026, 9:50 AM UTC

littlecranky67 wrote: post #34

bariswheel wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, it's immature to disclose an opinion without being forthcoming and add some objective rationale behind a bold conclusion as disliking an entire person. It may be something they said, or did, getting specific would help, ideally something that is relevant to the original thread. It's not entirely helpful and potentially a negative impact to just imply you don't like someone. Do what you want obviously, that's…

It is a disease of modern (social) media and personal branding. People also now broadly think that an ad-hominem (attacking the person behind an argument, not the argument) is good argumentative style. I don't know about Jack Dorsey other then he founded twitter, and I don't care much about him. If there is a product, I will evaluate that product by my catalogue, not whether I like or dislike a person.