Sure you can. Just unplug the headphones.

First you have to stop whatever you’re listening to or you start playing it on a speaker for everyone. Doing that is an annoyance that you don’t need to put up with if you just use wireless headphones.

Playback stops automatically when you unplug a wired headphone

Maybe it does today, I don’t know, I haven’t used wired headphones in many years. Back in the day it didn’t.

Wtf? Lol. If you’re kitchen is that loud, something’s wrong with it.

If you are kitchen is quiet, you really should be using the fan to get the smoke and food smells out of the kitchen. Maybe if you’re just making pop-tarts then it isn’t a big deal, but if you actually ever do any serious cooking you’ll discover that it gets loud.

Yeah, you’re either trolling or a very special kind of person.

Why are you so scared of the modern world? Is it that you’re too confused by it all? Can’t handle touchscreens? Scared by https? It’s ok man, just take a course. You’ll learn to live in the present, not the past.

You’re the one that implied headphone jacks add cost to phones.

They do.

I’m saying that they don’t, and whatever cost they do add is minuscule.

Ok.

The implication that any cost savings is being passed to you is laughable.

It is, but it isn’t a major savings. But, it’s hard to know because the pricing of phones isn’t very transparent.

Look, they killed the jack because they could save a couple bucks of design time and get a few cubic millimeters of space

Yes…

most importantly they could softly force their users to buy wireless headphones

Why would they care?

Yes, replaceable batteries!

Yes, they are. Glad you’re finally on board the “batteries beat wires” train. Choo choo.

The cheap phones are cheap because they lack other features, not because a headphone jack makes them cheaper.

Go put batteries in your walkman, grandpa.

You sure wish those kids would get off your lawn.

Well, the reason not to have both options if you’re a phone manufacturer is that pesky port. Every port is a headache for them. There structural weak points, they’re places that can get dust and dirt in them, etc. As a user, I want as many options as possible, but if I can get a phone that’s $100 cheaper because it doesn’t have a headphone port, I’ll definitely choose that option.

And you’re like that farmer with his ass, glaring at all the newfangled technology, convinced it must be useless because you can’t understand it.

Run the cable through your shirt. Problem solved.

New problem created. Now when you want to take your phone out of your pocket to take a picture of something or scan it for an NFT sale you can’t do that easily because you have this wire running through your shirt connecting your phone to your headphones. Also, if it’s winter, now your phone has to go in an inner pocket not an outer one so you can’t easily access it anymore.

Or you can, I don’t know, unplug the headphones for 2 seconds.

And start blasting whatever you’re listening to to the whole world? Well, you could pause what you’re listening to first. Don’t you see how this is much less convenient than wireless headphones where you don’t have to make all these compromises?

Redundant. Also, put your phone in your pocket and stop whinin’.

Ah, accept a less convenient alternative because of the limitations of the wires. Sure, sounds great.

My man, are you allergic to speakers? You’re cooking in a kitchen.

You’re cooking in a kitchen. There are loud fans, loud kettles. Why would you use a speaker that you have to turn way up to blast over all that noise? What’s wrong with you. Use headphones, you’re in a kitchen!

Skill issue. Run your wire underneath your jacket and you won’t have this “”“problem”“”.

Now you have the other problems with your phone being inside an inner pocket and not easily accessible for doing things like taking pictures or doing NFT transactions. You really haven’t thought this through, have you?

they are cable-less, thus need to be charged separately

Not a major drawback, IMO.

they are cable-less, thus it is easier to lose them

True, but I haven’t lost any in the something like 6 years I’ve been using them.

bluetooth implementation is a potential security vulnerability

What’s your threat model? Who’s going to be attacking your security via your headphones? What happens if they succeed?

IMO this is a pretty ridiculous drawback, it’s like saying “wired headphones are worse because the wire can be used as a garrote”, which is true, but not an actual drawback for 99.999% of people.

transmission by radio will always be less energy efficient than transmission by wire

So what?

IMO the drawbacks of wired headphones are:

• The cable often gets tangled, and it’s a pain in the ass to untangle it
• The cable can often get snagged on things, and if that happens the best thing that can happen is that the headphones can go flying out of your ears. The worst thing that can happen is that the phone goes flying out of your pocket and smashes on the ground.
• The cables can get dirty and frayed, and if they get too frayed they can break or get worn down so they have an iffy connection.
• Even when the cable isn’t tangled, just arranging the wire so it’s out of the way, long enough to get to your ears, but not so long it gets tangled can be frustrating.
• Trying to use your phone for anything else while your headphones are attached can be a problem. Say you want to take a picture of something, or pay for something using NFC, you have to be careful of the cable. If you had the cable tucked into your shirt or zipped up in your jacket so it’s out of the way, now the cable might not be long enough anymore.
• Because of the wire, you’re limited in where you can put your phone, and your head has to always be within a short distance to your phone. With a wireless headset you can choose to put the phone in a knapsack if that’s more convenient, and when you put down the knapsack you can take a few steps away from it without losing your connection and interrupting whatever you’re listening to.
• If you’re doing something like working in the kitchen while listening to music or a podcast, you can’t put your phone down on the counter and use it to look at a recipe, because as soon as you have to move to go get another ingredient, or to move from the cutting board to the sink, you have to pick the phone up again. And that can be a real issue if you have goop on your hands and you’re moving to the sink to wash them off.
• In cold weather / winter you might want to have your phone in a jacket or something. If you go inside and take the jacket off you either have to pause things while you transfer the phone to another pocket and rearrange the wire, or you have to do this complicated dance where you clear the wire and move the phone without accidentally yanking the wire out of the phone or out of your ears. With a wireless headset you just take the phone and move it to a new pocket whenever that’s convenient.
• The headphone wire is a potential personal security vulnerability as a ninja can use it to garrote you.

The drawbacks for a wireless headset are:

• They tend to have batteries that can’t be replaced, so eventually they lose their ability to hold a charge and need to be replaced. It can get really annoying to use them when the batteries are starting to fail and they hold less than an hour of charge.
• They tend to be much more expensive than wired headphones.
• Wireless buds are easier to lose, and easier to drop. If you drop them they can bounce and roll under things, or into the street or who knows where.
• They do eventually run out of charge, and you do have to charge them, and sometimes they can be low on charge / out of charge when you want to use them.
• There’s a fair amount of lag, which can be annoying when you’re trying to skip commercials on podcasts and so-on.

Describing a person as an “illegal” immigrant is dehumanizing

How so?

given that only acts can be legal or illegal, not people

Yes, that’s why it’s “illegal immigrant” not “illegal person”.

“Undocumented” immigrant is the generally accepted term.

Among some people, among others it’s “illegal immigrant”. Undocumented is wrong, the people have documentation, they just don’t have the legal right to reside where they do.

one is clearly more dignified than the other.

No, they’re both equally dignified, you’ve just been snarfing down propaganda.

I’m sure you can see that term is intended to portray the person in a specific way.

No, it’s just a normal term, intended to convey that the person is an immigrant, and that they didn’t follow the legal process. Those are just the basic facts about that person’s situation with respect to the law. The legality of their immigration status is often the focus of the discussion. For example, it’s easy to take advantage of illegal immigrants because they might be afraid to go to the police due to their immigration status.

The term has been in use for almost 150 years. Sometimes clinical labels become pejorative over time. But, it doesn’t seem like that’s the case here. A right-winger is much more likely to say “illegals” or “illegal aliens”, if not just using some slur like “wetback”.

Alternative terms that have been proposed are much less precise. For example, “undocumented migrant” is horrible. Not only is “migrant” less specific than “immigrant”, because immigration is a subset of migration, “undocumented” is much less accurate than “illegal”. Most people in a country illegally have documentation, they have passports, birth certificates, sometimes even local driver’s licenses. The issue isn’t that they lack documentation. The issue is that they aren’t following the laws related to migration. Others like “undocumented noncitizen” or “undocumented American” are even worse. What does “American” even mean in that context? Is a fiercely loyal British person who is legally in the US on a work visa a “documented American”?

Ok, so you clearly don’t understand human drivers. There’s really no point in continuing this conversation.

There are also more lanes for the cars to move forward in.

So, you think traffic here would flow better if 4 lanes were completely unused, one lane was only used for passing, and everyone else was in the remaining lane? And you could achieve this without replacing the drivers with robots?

The best thing about that is that “the west” is such a nonsensical designation for a location on a globe.

The distinguishing feature of Communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of all the cool stuff American men enjoy, like beer, hot chicks, football, comedy that’s actually funny, guns, and Harleys.

– The Communist Manifesto, Chapter 2

So, all cars in the far right lane unless they’re passing someone in the far right lane, in which case they should be in the lane that’s second from the right? All other lanes should be empty at all times?

It’s too late to teach the entire population how to drive differently now.