Ooh, nice! That was the point when I jumped on the Android bandwagon, the death throes for Nokia were kinda’ showing by that point…

Yeah, I remember the closed nature of their system was the main thing which killed any planned OS updates for the 5800 - they were planning on adding more video support, but nothing through which to deliver it, so they just kinda’ dropped the whole thing. I was left with Symbian 60, I believe:-?

And by the time they did start opening it up, with the Es, it was already too late, because the Marketing Wars began.

I haven’t seen the Blackberry movie, thanks for recommending it! I remember those being a big thing, too, mum always wanted one (and a PT Cruiser, so take it with a grain of salt) and I seem to remember pretty much everyone giving a Blackberry-like a shot. Nokia certainly had a full physical QWERTY model, one of my exes had one. But I remember it being, like… no different than the standard keypad Nokia at the time, except with a wider screen and a keyboard.

Jeesus, that genuinely sounds painful!:( I’m very sorry I honestly don’t know what to say… I mean, I understand it’s just A Thing™, but some things are more than just “things”…

That was my Goal Phone, yes! Either that, or the N8, but the 5800 was the only thing I could afford at the time:))

They were really nice phones, properly into “smartphones” by that point - the 5800 was more like a… clever phone:))

Oh, nooo!:( I’m so sorry, that’s how I lost my 5800, too! Got mugged at night, ffs…

Which, honestly, was another thing I’ve come to love about the old Nokia! They weren’t just phones, they were accessories as well! Every model had a clear personality and a target audience! I remember my mum had a thing for changing her phone often, especially with models only found in other countries (she would find THE weirdest salespeople, who brought in phones from friggin’ Spain and such, and they were way cheaper than retail), and… while I don’t agree with her somewhat rampant consumerism, I gotta say, every single model had a Vibe!

Besides my 5800, my other favourite from Nokia was my steel 6303 Classic. That was a downright sexy phone, and rugged to boot!

Edit: as opposed to the contemporary “my glass slab of phone from Asus has more personality than Samsung’s glass slab of phone because they set the cameras differently…” I made myself sad…

Edit 2: Smartphone Banana phone (I’m talkin’ the Matrix kind, with foldable screen, turns into AR glasses, and watch/wristlet-type thing when retracted!

Well, I can’t speak for that one as I’ve never used it (nice though, looks like a proper Nokia should, gone through war and still running fine!), but the 5800 was a completely new experience for me in terms of phone-mounted speakers. Like, this was like a miniaturised sound system. The levels were unexpectedly balanced, the speakers were mounted well apart (at either end of the phone lengthwise), the stereo definition was very clear and dynamic, and it was loud and crisp enough to use as background music generator for a light social gathering, like a dorm room mini-party, setting the mood for… other activities, etc. without sounding like frying bacon.

Edit: I’m not a “play stuff through phone speakers” kinda’ person, but the 5800, the Nexus 6, and the Zenfone 10 are the only phones with speakers so good, that they determined me to make an exception:))

Oh, maan… I still remember my 5800, I loved that phone to pieces… Excellent speaker system for the time (it was genuinely stereo and had a bit of meat on the sound, too!), my first touchscreen (which was a bit frustrating due to my thick logs, but worked perfectly with the stylus), and it was also my very first experience with multiplayer on a phone! Used to play that default racing game with a year mate in Uni, and it was very fun! And the OS was as an OS should be: so smooth as to not even register with the user!

Edit: oh, and the full QWERTY was very nice, although I was fresh off the keypad, so it was a bit awkward.

Well, yes, that’s the gist of the whole diatribe, “junk pics bad.” But you seem to have missed my point entirely, too, because my point was “sending junk pics* makes you look like an asshole and will probably ruin the other person’s mood.” Again, re-read my conclusion. And, just in case, that was the point of the post, too. Again, the job description only serves to drive home the point in that particular case.

Also, I genuinely don’t see how what I’ve written is insulting. What, the fact that I apologised that I don’t have the time to do reading comprehension? Well, yeah, because I genuinely did not have the time to do reading comprehension (which, again, may have been entirely pointless even if I did have it, as the commenter didn’t exactly demonstrate having read the entire text before jumping on “oh, so are only scientists allowed to feel offended?!”). Are you bothered by the “reading comprehension” bit? If so, why? That’s literally what that’s called.

You’ve jumped in defence of someone who hadn’t read the whole comment (at least I hope they didn’t read it, otherwise it’s worse!) (edit:) and who started out hostile from the go, and built your argument around misunderstanding my comment (again!). The initial question was (paraphrasing): “how is the job description relevant?” And I did just that in my first paragraph - explain the literary value of the job description as an element of this tale, what its value is in shaping the message and driving the point home. After which I returned to saying that, yes, one’d be an asshole regardless. (Edit 2:) I even went as far as to clarify that one would be an asshole even regardless of the type of junk one possesses in my Edit, not just one’s job.

The fact that YOU choose to hyperfocus on that element and not the vast tracts of text surrounding it on either side does not mean that the original text’s messaging is what you want it to be.

Right back at you!

I’m sorry, I really don’t have the time to do reading comprehension with you, I’ve put it pretty clearly in the very first Idea I’ve listed. Also, reread my conclusion and see how much someone’s job shows up in what I’ve written.

Have a good’un.

While I agree with the fact that this kind of behaviour [i.e. randomly “hanging brain” (my new favourite idiom), unsolicited, in someone’s DMs] is SO many shades of shitty in whichever context it happens, in this case in particular the job description* really does work for building up context and highlighting the dichotomy between the type of people who send dick pics and the type of people they sometimes reach.

As a bottom line, it should serve as a good enough cautionary tale about keeping one’s damned junk in their pants unless someone wants to see it, because one’ll most likely end up looking like an utter asshole while also potentially ruining someone else’s mood for literally no good reason whatsoever.

(still me, blahaj is down)

Edit: to avoid any pointless “but it isn’t just men” replies, of course it isn’t just men, but women seem to not have such a huge friggin’ need to expose themselves to unaware passers-by. This is me, speaking as an AMAB and approximately cishet. And I wouldn’t like to see a random centrefold on my phone while checking my messages, either, to be perfectly frank. There’s a time and a place, and many more factors before I get to that point.

Yep, may even be caused by certain forms of c-PTSD. I was required to develop hypervigilance as a method of survival, so everything bad/unfortunate/uncomfortable sounds the alarm, while anything good/normal/producing joy is *mostly glossed over (*extremes are still registered), as the main goal is staying alive and the latter won’t kill me.

Really haven’t heard it used in these contexts before! Thank you!

On the plus side, it’ll be a while before my brain rewires the context associated with the word, so now I’ll amuse myself imagining every political figure addressed as such wearing Pope hats and stuff.

(yep, still me, this is my second account, trouble getting into the other one, for some reason)

Yep, genuinely only ever heard it when talking in a monarchic context, about kings/queens, Lords/Ladies and such, and in a Church context - as mentioned, when referring to the Pope, and Archbishops and such (remembered this latter part only now that I thought about it again).

Funny, “Excellency” is what feels over the top to me, but may be due to the contexts in which I’ve heard it used - circumstances which have much more pomp and pageantry associated with them.

Anyway, thank you! Learn something new every day!

(yep, still me, this is my second account, trouble getting into the other one, for some reason)

See?! Who needs a Military when your average population can be so conclusive!

This discrimination so fucking dumb, that it circles back into becoming weirdly advantageous for those affected. Dunno about everyone else, but I would most certainly not be torn up over not being accepted into the US Army…

Agreed, both “mommy issues” and “daddy issues” are pretty much unofficial monikers for abandonment issues overall, which are generally caused by unstable relationships with either one or both parents.

The symptoms don’t seem to be related as much to the parent’s role, but to the minutiae of the relationships themselves, which can look the same in many cases whether it be an inconsistent relationship with the mother or the father.

Edit: I don’t say this to minimise OP’s issue, to be clear, quite the contrary - familial abandonment issues suck the soul dry overall…

“OMG, is that real cashmere?!”