HonkyTonkWoman

I have no idea if it would work, but I do have a spare CRT monitor if you blow yours up.

Maybe look into a direct box? I had to use one when recording to change the ohms between the instrument & the usb interface in the tower.

I was hoping I could plug it into my guitar & watch the sounds on an old computer monitor…

You haven’t been paying much attention to the current state of journalism, have you?

Twitter is a decent portion of their revenue stream, and given that none of us want to pay them for their efforts, what do you suggest they do?

Those clicks are their livelihood & we’re all sitting here reading the article pasted directly to this thread.

WE, INCLUDING YOU, ARE COMPLICIT IN THIS TOO.

E: “I don’t wanna pay for the news, I want journalists to forgo their living & only post their work on sites I’m actually willing to steal their content from”

Keep on downvoting children. Y’all suck as humans.

Wait… Like the Principality of Sealand?

Was Major Bates still there?

My analogy isn’t terrible, it’s spot fucking on. You just use the ice maker & wouldn’t want to lose it so you’ve attached more value to it than the Anova App.

Does the refrigerator not refrigerate without the ice maker? You didn’t buy an ice maker, you bought a refrigerator.

No one is pissed about the device not working. People are pissed that Anova is taking away a FEATURE.

Anova App = Feature included in original purchase price

Ice Maker = Feature included in original purchase price.

This isn’t about the value of what’s being taken away. It’s about the principle of taking away something that was already paid for.

If Anova wants a subscription based model, they’re welcome to it, but…

Their current customers did not buy into a subscription model & have the absolute right to be pissed off about being forced into one.

Would you buy a refrigerator from a manufacturer that wanted to make the ice maker a subscription service out of nowhere?

I get that the app isn’t a requirement for the device, but neither is an ice maker required for a refrigerator to function as designed.

They’re both features advertised as part of the original purchase price. Why does one get an expiration date out of the blue?

The people who are likely to be losing Bluetooth functionality are also the most likely to be from the original kickstarter batch.

Even if some-many of them have already upgraded to a newer model, that’s still one hell of a statement to make to your original backers.

It’s more about the principle. Why is it ok for a manufacturer to remotely disable a feature that was bought & paid for by a decades worth of customers?

Now that they’ve done it once, what’s stopping future attempts to gin up higher profits using the same tactics?

I don’t think anyone here is angry enough to go all Kid Rock on their Sous Vides, but I do think there are plenty who will look at a different brand when it is time for a replacement.

I have an Inkbird & really like it. Significantly less expensive than Annova, offers all of the same features from what I can tell, & it’s never given me any issues.

The app is of course a bit clunky & ultimately unnecessary, but it does actually function as advertised.

I think the bigger issue is that they’re bricking all support for the oldest models, trying to force customers to abandon a fully functional device just because they want more money.

The app subscription fee is obnoxious as all get out, but punishing your oldest customers for your profit margins is what’s a bit infuriating.

At least, imo.

It use to operate only off of Bluetooth, & then they added single band WiFi. They just added dual band WiFi as a new feature & are now removing Bluetooth functionality completely.

Absolutely a cash grab.

Another big factor was the Memorial Day weekend. Traditionally, movies released over the 3 day weekend haven’t fared well at the box office.

Specifically, this year, the whole Memorial Day weekend crapped the bed & pulled in the lowest revenue in decades. Dan Murell has a great breakdown on this, if it’s of interest.

Garfield picked up steam in its second weekend, but Furiosa just didn’t have the legs.

Which sucks, because it’s a very enjoyable film.

Removed by mod

Not interested in hearing it? It’s all I’ve been asking for, that clarification.

You won’t clarify, but you’re the one who’s outraged. AMAZON BAD!!! Remember?

Go ahead, lay out a logical reason that explains why you would make such a drastic decision when you don’t have all the information.

YOH DON’T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION. FULL STOP.

IF YOU CAN MAKE AN EDUCATED DECISION ON BOYCOTTING & ABANDONING YOUR BAND, WITHOUT ALL OF THE INFORMATION…

The please, by all means, poop out that magic answer. Share that magic shit with all of us.

Until you can, you’re being irresponsible.

And by the walls of text are because I’m sick of this shit. This blind outrage just clamoring for attention. It’s the same bullshit the right pulls.

YOU’RE PARTICIPATING IN CANCEL CULTURE WITHOUT REASON. YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

You’ve made your private boycott public here in this thread, and so has everyone else. Problem is, none of you can articulate why you think the Foo Fighters deserve this. At least not thoroughly.

That tells me one of two things. You’re either just angry and unwilling to think this situation through, so you’ve jumped on the hate wagon with ½ a story & every intention of bringing other people with you.

Either that, or you’re in this thread pushing an agenda & trying to whip up a misguided fervor for reasons that don’t involve the Foo Fighters.

Either way, I see this as you publicly lambasting another public entity & you can’t or won’t explain why. That just reeks of mob mentality.

Also, don’t be obtuse. You know full & well what I mean about a private performance versus a public performance.

Musicians perform publicly, with tickets on sale, and you know… the public is present.

Musicians also perform privately, for a single payer, with no public tickets available.

Are you really going to fault the Foo Fighters because they did a private show? Why do YOU care?

You don’t get a say in how that band makes its money. And if they aren’t doing awful shit with that money, then I don’t really think you have a leg to stand on here.

They didn’t cancel a public show to do this performance. They didn’t turn down a charity event to my knowledge.

No, they took a private a gig & the only thing you know is that you don’t like who the gig was for. Not why they took it, no, you’re too selfish to wait for that info… you’re just pissed that they took it & that makes you mad enough to spout off.

But you’re just spitting sparks because you really don’t care about the nuance of this situation or the band you claimed to be a fan of. You’re fair weather bandwagon rider & you just like saying angry shit on the internet.

You are simply pissed that the money came from Amazon. You can’t offer up a reasoning as to why the Foo Fighters don’t deserve that money, you can’t offer up a thought on who does deserve that money, & you refuse to acknowledge that the money used to belong to Amazon, while now it belongs to someone better. You just picked the one part you didn’t like & told yourself your job was done here.

Didn’t say it was morally permissible. Just said it’s more nuanced than the current response of social shaming & individual boycotts.

Again, I’ll point that I’m not the one drawing lines in the sand here.

It is perfectly reasonable for you to be disgusted by this information. It’s also perfectly reasonable if you to acknowledge that this is not all of the information & that maybe going scorched earth is a bit hasty at this point.

I’m not saying the Foo Fighters aren’t dicks. If they line their pockets with this money & don’t do anything of value with it, then yeah, fuck em.

But I will remind you that this is the same band that waggled their dongs around in front of the Westboro Baptist Church.

I don’t even like this band & I’m willing to give ‘em a few minutes because of that moment alone.

Would you support the Foo Fighters playing a concert at anti LGBTQ+ rallies?

• Public performance, not a private one-off. False equivalency. The Foo Fighters did not publicly support Amazon or its Execs. They performed a private show for a private client, and you’ve happened to find out about it.

Where you’re being irresponsible is not giving them the benefit of the doubt, or even a moment’s patience, when it comes to why they took a private gig with Amazon.

Would you support the Foo Fighters playing a concert Neo-Nazis?

• Absolutely not. But then again, I didn’t support them in the first place, you did.

And again with the neo-nazi shit? Amazon, as awful as it fucking is, is still a decent part of the Music industry’s delivery system…

Hmmm I wonder if the Foo Fighters could phase out a relationship with Amazon as a distributor, now that they have millions of Amazon’s dollars?

Would you support the Foo Fighters playing a concert for the IDF?

If the band was willing to turn around do something good with that money, like help Palestinian refugees, yes, probably? I mean what a better fuck you to the IDF than helping Palestine with Israeli money?

Fact again… you don’t know what the band plans on doing with the Amazon money. What if they announce on Monday they plan to use the Amazon money to support unionization in Amazon facilities?

Likelihood they will is low, I know. But your response to all this isn’t to even hope something positive comes of it, it’s just to bitch how awful this is… while not yet knowing what this actually is.

So again, name a band untouched by Amazon. Or hell, name a band you love that is new, playing small venues & hoping to hop on a summer tour.

Now, kill their drummer & force them to end the remainder of their Spring tour early. After dates had been booked & sold.

Come Fall, when that band has to pay their rent… would you turn on them for taking Amazon money?

Your standard is that the Foo Fighters are wealthy enough to not need Bezos Bucks. But again, you don’t know what the band’s actual operating budget is.

And if they do happen to be operating at a deficit, which they likely are given their recent circumstances…

The band members themselves should give up their personal wealth, rather than take a paycheck from Amazon.

Would you pay your employer to keep its doors open, rather take Amazon money?

You keep saying that about gambling, like it equates to the Foo Fighters taking money from Amazon, but it doesn’t.

The foo fighters didn’t accept a sponsorship from Amazon, you’re not going to see smile logos on their instruments or expect their road crew to wear those blue uniforms.

They took a high paying gig.

Furthermore, until you can produce a balance sheet, your statement about the Foo Fighters wealth is conjecture.

You do not know where that band stands financially after losing a founding member’s death & on the heels of a pandemic.

You don’t know how much money the band lost having to cancel their tour after Taylor passed. You have no idea whether their insurance premiums went up.

There are whole slew of logistical factors that could’ve made it an easier decision on the band to take the gig, but you won’t consider any other possibility, will you? You’ve jumped right to the conclusion that your heroes turned greedy & took some money you don’t like, & you’re certain enough of that stance that after one article, you’re willing to abandon them.

The majority of all musicians operate at deficit & are not rolling around in the black. Where’s your proof the Foo Fighters are?

I don’t know either, but I at least have the presence of mind not to publicly shit on them until more information comes out.

Furthermore Furthermore, name a band who you follow that is not touched by Amazon? A band that’s not on Amazon Music, that has no physical media or merch for sale via Amazon. A band that doesn’t perform at any Amazon sponsored venues or Amazon sponsored concert series.

And if you’re not willing to do that, just tell me who should have received that money, if not the Foo Fighters?

You want to take a stand, fine, but don’t pretend your little personal boycott is anything other than a self serving pat on the back.

You did make that clear. But you haven’t stated why, other than Amazon Money = Bad.

There aren’t enough good musicians getting paid what they should be on this planet. And most of the ones who are making shit tons of money in music, don’t deserve it.

You, at one point in time, thought the Foo Fighters deserved to be making big money in the music industry, otherwise you wouldn’t have listened to them.

So now that the Foo Fighters have made it big enough that Billionaires want private concerts from them, your response is to abandon them.

You still have no idea whether they needed the money or plan to do something positive with it, you just know they took it from Amazon and you don’t like it.

That’s some fair weather fandom right there.

Excellent bro. I went for a hike on National Trails day & have avoided issuing judgements before hearing the whole story!

Oh, and I’m listening to North Fork Two-Step by Slang.

Oh oh! Wasn’t Chopin largely believed to be an antisemite? You gonna walk away from those tunes too?