2 ms·
Great, now someone has to explain to you that this is not an attack on your freedom to use whatever you product you prefer. > Unless I'm swapping batteries, wh
by Jedd 9y ago
Great, now someone has to explain to you that this is not an attack on your freedom to use whatever you product you prefer.
> Unless I'm swapping batteries, which is infrequent enough, I don't even notice I'm wearing them.
Presumably when you're swapping batteries, you're not actually wearing them, no?
Anyway, I think you have missed the points being made. For people who can't afford, or don't have access to the services around, hearing aids, consultancy, replacement batteries, and so on, there's an alternative.
- wl 9y agoMy point: Hearphones may be cheaper, but they aren't a substitute for hearing aids. If people want to use them in lieu of hearing aids, fine. But they're a poor substitute. Other products may be better in the future. A more exaggerated example: Someone who is nearsighted using their smartphone to look at more distant objects. Sure, it works, but it's not exactly practical.
- Jedd 9y ago> Hearphones may be cheaper, but they aren't a substitute for hearing aids. The fact that they are cheaper means that they are a substitute for hearing aids. They may not be quite as good right now ... but we've been over the affordability aspect already. For people without access to USD $5k for hearing aids, a 'poor substitute' may be a perfectly reasonable alternative.