Minor things that bother you

[SSOWorld]

I still carry the Apple-included wired headphones for watching movies on flights. Sometimes the airline offers free headphones, other times they charge you (which was formerly the more common option; making it one of the very few "free" services airlines have given the flying public...

They rob either way - the only time you don't get charged extra (airline dependent) from my experience is if you fly premium class - particularly business or international first class - both of which are a shit-ton more than the cattle car.

I'm surprised they hadn't figured out a way to charge you for using their apps.)

Don't give them any ideas

Related...  Should your eye doctor's office sell eyeglasses?

I believe this practice is actually illegal in Oklahoma.

My experience is that you're allowed to request the prescription and take it to any other place you wish. Lately, the local eye docs have loads of shelves with $600 frames and just one tiny shelf with sub-$200 frames that just seems sketchy. I know quality counts to a point (and insurance might cover the first 150-200 in frames), but I feel a little robbed at that price level, since I require all sorts other needs and conveniences with lenses, which push it to $400+ overall.

I kind of loathe picking out new frames because it's hard for me to see what exactly I'm trying on.

Always easier to do it at one stop - but then again, it bothers me how people spend more (also known as "waste") time and money in order to spend less (also known as "save") money on other things. It also makes it complicated for your benefit provider (also known as "insurance"). 😛 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[bulldog1979]

Related...  Should your eye doctor's office sell eyeglasses?

The various states are either "one-door states" or "two-door states" when it comes to optometry and opticians. Michigan is a one-door state, meaning optometrists' offices can directly sell eye glasses and contacts to their patients, so you only need to walk through one door. There's no requirement to purchase the glasses from the optometrist, and they will provide a copy of the prescription to go elsewhere. (Last year I had an eye exam at Walmart and uploaded my prescription to Warby Parker online to purchase glasses and contacts there. Even if I had purchased my glasses from Walmart, I'd have had separate receipts to submit to my insurance because the independent doctor of optometry has a totally separate machine for payments than the store.)

In other states, these functions are separated. If an optometry clinic wants to sell glasses, it has to be in a separate space, hence two doors: one for exams and one for glasses. I've seen photos of Walmart stores with a single door out the front of the building under an awning labeled "Optometrist", meaning you have to go in that door for the exam before walking into the main entrance to visit the Vision Center. As noted above though, even without that extra step, or even if visiting a different clinic, there's no requirement to purchase glasses from the same place that conducted the exam.

[thspfc]

One problem with wireless earbuds I haven't seen pointed out is the tremendous amount of waste that throwing them away when they die causes. They're basically a bunch of rare earth metals in a shell of non-biodegradable plastic. Not exactly a great deal for the environment.

And it's not just me being stodgy and not liking changing technology. I would have no problem with them if you could pop them open with a screwdriver and swap the battery out yourself. What I have a problem with is the business model of selling you something unfixable so you have no choice but to buy a new one when the old one breaks. The world would be a better place if we forced every tech company MBA or marketing exec and forced them to sell salmon for a living instead.

Do wired earbuds not have that issue?

[formulanone]

Related...  Should your eye doctor's office sell eyeglasses?

The various states are either "one-door states" or "two-door states" when it comes to optometry and opticians. Michigan is a one-door state, meaning optometrists' offices can directly sell eye glasses and contacts to their patients, so you only need to walk through one door. There's no requirement to purchase the glasses from the optometrist, and they will provide a copy of the prescription to go elsewhere. (Last year I had an eye exam at Walmart and uploaded my prescription to Warby Parker online to purchase glasses and contacts there. Even if I had purchased my glasses from Walmart, I'd have had separate receipts to submit to my insurance because the independent doctor of optometry has a totally separate machine for payments than the store.)

In other states, these functions are separated. If an optometry clinic wants to sell glasses, it has to be in a separate space, hence two doors: one for exams and one for glasses. I've seen photos of Walmart stores with a single door out the front of the building under an awning labeled "Optometrist", meaning you have to go in that door for the exam before walking into the main entrance to visit the Vision Center. As noted above though, even without that extra step, or even if visiting a different clinic, there's no requirement to purchase glasses from the same place that conducted the exam.

These are things I've never thought about before, since the two states I'd ever bought glasses had both options in the same place without the extra doors. It's weird to me but it sort of makes sense. There's certainly a convenience factor (I went to my local optometrist for 30 years, except when I needed an emergency set).

But does that affect all sorts of medical practices in those states? Can hospitals or clinics have onsite pharmacies? Or does that just affect specific fields?

[7/8]

One problem with wireless earbuds I haven't seen pointed out is the tremendous amount of waste that throwing them away when they die causes. They're basically a bunch of rare earth metals in a shell of non-biodegradable plastic. Not exactly a great deal for the environment.

And it's not just me being stodgy and not liking changing technology. I would have no problem with them if you could pop them open with a screwdriver and swap the battery out yourself. What I have a problem with is the business model of selling you something unfixable so you have no choice but to buy a new one when the old one breaks. The world would be a better place if we forced every tech company MBA or marketing exec and forced them to sell salmon for a living instead.

Do wired earbuds not have that issue?

To some extent yes, I've had many pairs of earbuds die when one of the wires comes loose and ruins the connection on one side. One point though is that wireless earbuds have batteries while wired ones don't.

I hope the EU or another consumer-focused government agency is able to push through some mandatory design rules for smartphones. All of them should be able to charge off USB-C and have a usable 3.5 mm jack.

Yes, I couldn't care less if lots of other people enjoy using wireless earbuds/headphones. Heck, some day I might have a pair myself. But don't take away my ability to use my pair of wired headphones that I really love, especially since it's clearly a cash-grab to sell more expensive Bluetooth headphones/earbuds. It's annoying having to use the dongle to connect my headphones on my tablet (unfortunately it's hard to find a tablet with a headphone jack these days). I find the dongle frequently has a weird issue where it often makes a static-y noise and I have to unplug and replug it in to fix it, not to mention it's easy to lose. Thankfully my Samsung Galaxy S10e phone has a headphone jack and I'll try to keep this phone for a while!

[abefroman329]

Related...  Should your eye doctor's office sell eyeglasses?

As long as they're required by law to give me my prescription so I can take it to Costco, why not?

I don't think eye doctors have a habit of pushing vision correction on people who don't need it.  Now, sleep centers, on the other hand...close to 100% of the people who get a sleep study are told that they need to buy a CPAP right.  this.  very.  second.

[kphoger]

Related...  Should your eye doctor's office sell eyeglasses?

I believe this practice is actually illegal in Oklahoma.

The various states are either "one-door states" or "two-door states" when it comes to optometry and opticians.

Yes, yes.  That's precisely why I didn't ask "Why is your eye doctor's office allowed to sell eyeglasses?"  I know that it's a state-by-state legal thing.  The question I wanted you to answer is, Should they sell eyeglasses?

To me the idea is unsettling:  you go to a medical professional, they say you need to purchase something, and on yeah they just happen to have some of that for sale.  But what's even more unsettling is that, if your eyesight improves (say you were near-sighted and your eyes change shape in your upper 30s such that they're basically normal), is your eye doctor actually going to tell you that you no longer need glasses?  Maybe so, but they have a financial incentive to keep you buying glasses even if you no longer need them.

[CtrlAltDel]

To me the idea is unsettling:  you go to a medical professional, they say you need to purchase something, and on yeah they just happen to have some of that for sale.

Is it? I think it would be worse if it were the opposite, like if a doctor were to say, "Your arm is broken, be careful out there. Good luck."

But what's even more unsettling is that, if your eyesight improves (say you were near-sighted and your eyes change shape in your upper 30s such that they're basically normal), is your eye doctor actually going to tell you that you no longer need glasses?  Maybe so, but they have a financial incentive to keep you buying glasses even if you no longer need them.

How much can they really mess with you with this, though? It's not like you can't take off your glasses and notice that you can see better without them.

[kphoger]

How much can they really mess with you with this, though? It's not like you can't take off your glasses and notice that you can see better without them.

Easy.  You're told to go in periodically for checkups, and they write you a new scrip every time.

It's not a matter of seeing better without glasses.  It's a matter of not realizing that not wearing them is adequate–when you're not used to that being the case, by virtue of it being inadequate for years.

[CtrlAltDel]

How much can they really mess with you with this, though? It's not like you can't take off your glasses and notice that you can see better without them.

Easy.  You're told to go in periodically for checkups, and they write you a new scrip every time.

It's not a matter of seeing better without glasses.  It's a matter of not realizing that not wearing them is adequate–when you're not used to that being the case, by virtue of it being inadequate for years.

So if I'm understanding you correctly, what you're essentially saying is that it is in fact possible to take off your glasses and not notice that you can see better without them.

[wanderer2575]

Yes, I couldn't care less if lots of other people enjoy using wireless earbuds/headphones. Heck, some day I might have a pair myself. But don't take away my ability to use my pair of wired headphones that I really love, especially since it's clearly a cash-grab to sell more expensive Bluetooth headphones/earbuds. It's annoying having to use the dongle to connect my headphones on my tablet (unfortunately it's hard to find a tablet with a headphone jack these days)...

I'm similarly annoyed at having to use a keyless fob to unlock my car doors and start the car.  Because it's such neat-o cool whiz-bang toy and eliminates the unbearable hassle of turning my wrist to do those things.  (/s)  Now I've got something else for which I need to buy batteries.  Or worse -- I broke some part of the plastic case last time I changed batteries and the thing won't stay together or make connection with the battery, and replacing the fobs and having the new ones programmed (sold separately even though a new fob requires it) would have cost close to $400.

[hbelkins]

My optometrist sells glasses, but I haven't bought glasses from them in eons. The first pair I ever had came from them, but none since. I did buy my contacts from them when I was still wearing contacts, but I gave contacts up about five years ago because they were such a hassle to deal with putting them in every morning.

[JayhawkCO]

I never buy glasses from the optometrist. Only from www.zenni.com. Sooooo much cheaper.

[kphoger]

How much can they really mess with you with this, though? It's not like you can't take off your glasses and notice that you can see better without them.

Easy.  You're told to go in periodically for checkups, and they write you a new scrip every time.

It's not a matter of seeing better without glasses.  It's a matter of not realizing that not wearing them is adequate–when you're not used to that being the case, by virtue of it being inadequate for years.

So if I'm understanding you correctly, what you're essentially saying is that it is in fact possible to take off your glasses and not notice that you can see better without them.

Not at all.  Compare the two bolded phrases above.

I'm saying that, if your eyesight improves to the point that your glasses make only a minor and not very meaningful improvement to your eyesight, then you likely don't need to wear them anymore, but your eye doctor will happily continue writing you scrips for glasses that correct what realistically doesn't need to be corrected.

I'm a personal example of this.  Growing up, I was slightly far-sighted, and I wore glasses since the early school grades (late 80s or early 90s).  One day in 2006 or 2007, I was getting tired of swapping my eyeglasses for sunglasses while driving my work truck, and it occurred to me that I'd actually gone a few days at a time without wearing them on occasion for this or that reason.  Why, I asked myself, was I still wearing them, then?  So I simply stopped wearing them.  It wasn't until about twelve years later (my upper 30s, which is when people's lenses tend to become less flexible and they therefore experience more farsightedness) that I started needing to wear glasses again.  Now I wear them everywhere I go, and my farsightedness is increasing such that it's already time for a new scrip.  But, in those intervening dozen years when I didn't really need glasses to live my life, my eye doctor would have been perfectly content to write me scrips.  When that same doctor's office is the one selling glasses, that strikes me the wrong way.

[J N Winkler]

I'm saying that, if your eyesight improves to the point that your glasses make only a minor and not very meaningful improvement to your eyesight, then you likely don't need to wear them anymore, but your eye doctor will happily continue writing you scrips for glasses that correct what realistically doesn't need to be corrected.

I'm a personal example of this.  Growing up, I was slightly far-sighted, and I wore glasses since the early school grades (late 80s or early 90s).  One day in 2006 or 2007, I was getting tired of swapping my eyeglasses for sunglasses while driving my work truck, and it occurred to me that I'd actually gone a few days at a time without wearing them on occasion for this or that reason.  Why, I asked myself, was I still wearing them, then?  So I simply stopped wearing them.  It wasn't until about twelve years later (my upper 30s, which is when people's lenses tend to become less flexible and they therefore experience more farsightedness) that I started needing to wear glasses again.  Now I wear them everywhere I go, and my farsightedness is increasing such that it's already time for a new scrip.  But, in those intervening dozen years when I didn't really need glasses to live my life, my eye doctor would have been perfectly content to write me scrips.  When that same doctor's office is the one selling glasses, that strikes me the wrong way.

To me this question comes down to the amount of trust you have in your optometrist and thus the amount of communication that occurs about real-world use of eyeglasses or contacts.  I have never encountered one who was unwilling to give me the prescription, and just looking at the diopter measurements is enough to give you an idea of whether your eyes are moving to or away from needing correction for most purposes.

I think most optometrists are used to customers who expect to be able to dispense with vision correction for some tasks.  For example, I am nearsighted and although I've been gently pressed to get glasses with inset lenses or progressive correction so I can read while wearing them, I have always refused to do so--I have glasses for distance vision only and take them off to read, which has worked well for over 30 years.  I also have enough astigmatism to require correction, but have requested it for glasses only since the mechanism for correcting it with contact lenses (basically concentric rings with differing levels of refraction) has never made sense to me at a conceptual level.  I have listened carefully as the pros and cons were explained to me, made my decisions, and had them accepted without any pushback.

On the other hand, I don't think you will encounter a competent and ethical optometrist who will issue a prescription for zero diopter correction unless the eye exam actually shows that things look more blurry when viewed through other than clear glass.  This has more to do with the exigencies of professional practice than with selling you glasses or contacts.  An optometrist can usually give you some idea of whether correction is actually required to meet certain legal thresholds (e.g., for a driver's license in Kansas, visual acuity of 20/60 in at least one eye with or without correction), but it would be malpractice to recommend no correction whatsoever when the vision exam says otherwise.

[1995hoo]

Regarding the whole earbud discussion, I refuse to wear them at all (wired or wireless) because I simply find them extremely uncomfortable.

[CtrlAltDel]

How much can they really mess with you with this, though? It's not like you can't take off your glasses and notice that you can see better without them.

Easy.  You're told to go in periodically for checkups, and they write you a new scrip every time.

It's not a matter of seeing better without glasses.  It's a matter of not realizing that not wearing them is adequate—when you're not used to that being the case, by virtue of it being inadequate for years.

So if I'm understanding you correctly, what you're essentially saying is that it is in fact possible to take off your glasses and not notice that you can see better without them.

Not at all.  Compare the two bolded phrases above.

I'm saying that, if your eyesight improves to the point that your glasses make only a minor and not very meaningful improvement to your eyesight, then you likely don't need to wear them anymore, but your eye doctor will happily continue writing you scrips for glasses that correct what realistically doesn't need to be corrected.

I'm a personal example of this.  Growing up, I was slightly far-sighted, and I wore glasses since the early school grades (late 80s or early 90s).  One day in 2006 or 2007, I was getting tired of swapping my eyeglasses for sunglasses while driving my work truck, and it occurred to me that I'd actually gone a few days at a time without wearing them on occasion for this or that reason.  Why, I asked myself, was I still wearing them, then?  So I simply stopped wearing them.  It wasn't until about twelve years later (my upper 30s, which is when people's lenses tend to become less flexible and they therefore experience more farsightedness) that I started needing to wear glasses again.  Now I wear them everywhere I go, and my farsightedness is increasing such that it's already time for a new scrip.  But, in those intervening dozen years when I didn't really need glasses to live my life, my eye doctor would have been perfectly content to write me scrips.  When that same doctor's office is the one selling glasses, that strikes me the wrong way.

Fair enough, I will edit my comment: How much can they really mess with you with this, though? It's not like you can't take off your glasses and notice that you don't really need them to see.

Overall, what you're describing is a situation with enough buffers to not be "unsettling." 1. You have your own eyes to see with. 2. You know, or at least can know, your prescription and can go without if it's weak enough. 3. You are under no obligation to get your glasses there if you don't want to. 

[TheHighwayMan3561]

When I'm typing something into a search bar, go to click my desired entry, and a delayed set of auto-fill options generates resulting in me clicking on something I didn't intend to.

[wanderer2575]

20th century technology was all about solving problems.

21st century technology is about creating new problems so they can sell you solutions you didn't need before they started changing things that were perfectly fine how they were.

If ever we needed an Upvote button, it's for this comment.

[kphoger]

How much can they really mess with you with this, though? It's not like you can't take off your glasses and notice that you don't really need them to see.

As I said, I was farsighted.  I wore my glasses all the time except when putting sunglasses on while driving, swimming, etc, ever since childhood.  Trying to read a chapter in a book without my glasses isn't something I had even considered trying.

[hotdogPi]

20th century technology was all about solving problems.

21st century technology is about creating new problems so they can sell you solutions you didn't need before they started changing things that were perfectly fine how they were.

I believe the turning point was 2010, not 2000.

[Scott5114]

One problem with wireless earbuds I haven't seen pointed out is the tremendous amount of waste that throwing them away when they die causes. They're basically a bunch of rare earth metals in a shell of non-biodegradable plastic. Not exactly a great deal for the environment.

And it's not just me being stodgy and not liking changing technology. I would have no problem with them if you could pop them open with a screwdriver and swap the battery out yourself. What I have a problem with is the business model of selling you something unfixable so you have no choice but to buy a new one when the old one breaks. The world would be a better place if we forced every tech company MBA or marketing exec and forced them to sell salmon for a living instead.

Do wired earbuds not have that issue?

Not to the same extent that wireless ones do. I have a pair of wired earbuds that are so old I don't even remember when and where I got them, and as well as the wired earbuds that came with my Galaxy S4. Both of them work perfectly fine whenever I need them, I can just plug them in and they work as good as they did whenever I got them. Eventually I'm sure they'll wear out or get damaged and I'll have to throw them away, but I'm not going to have to replace them as frequently as I would a pair with a non-replaceable battery (especially since I rarely actually need to use headphones). A non-replaceable battery on a device means it has a built-in expiration date.

[Scott5114]

When stores try to hide the fact that they're out of a product by putting another, similar-looking product in the spot on the shelf belonging to the product they're out of. For example, being out of meat lover's frozen lasagna and filling the space with veggie lover's frozen lasagna to make it less obvious they're out of the meat lover's kind.

[kphoger]

When stores try to hide the fact that they're out of a product by putting another, similar-looking product in the spot on the shelf belonging to the product they're out of. For example, being out of meat lover's frozen lasagna and filling the space with veggie lover's frozen lasagna to make it less obvious they're out of the meat lover's kind.

I'm betting that, at least sometimes, that's a stock-boy error rather than a top-down malicious decision.

I have a related one, though:  when people pick an item off the shelf, decide not to buy it after all, and then put it back in the wrong location instead–blocking the view of the thing you now have to spend three minutes searching for.

[formulanone]

When stores try to hide the fact that they're out of a product by putting another, similar-looking product in the spot on the shelf belonging to the product they're out of. For example, being out of meat lover's frozen lasagna and filling the space with veggie lover's frozen lasagna to make it less obvious they're out of the meat lover's kind.

I'm betting that, at least sometimes, that's a stock-boy error rather than a top-down malicious decision.

Yeah...sure...maybe.  Sometimes we just forgot to order things.

Back when I stocked grocery shelves, if I had a lot of stock-outs or "holes", then I'd put something similar in its place. Sometimes that incrementally helped to move out less-desirable inventory.

During quarterly inventory counts, we were told to put similar items with the same price in the place of empty spots, to alleviate the overall back-stock counts and simplify the process.