3 ms·

There's always someone who doesn't get it. It's free to the user, that's always implicit when you read "free". We all know that money doesn't grow on trees, no

There's always someone who doesn't get it. It's free to the user, that's always implicit when you read "free". We all know that money doesn't grow on trees, no need to treat us like children. > so that users can decide how much trust to place on its survival, and how risky it is to build a dependence on it Dependence? This is for people who have no other access to phone calls. I find it funny to complain about such a service when there is no alternative for the target users.

Rygian 2y ago
> that's always implicit when you read "free". Explicit is always better than implicit, when the word "free" is used. > Dependence? This is for people who have no other access to phone calls. I find it funny to complain about such a service when there is no alternative for the target users. That's exactly the point. Should target users treat these phones as a reliable alternative? Or should they make it one of their first priorities to gain some other access to phone calls? That question remains unanswered, and I argue it is very important for the target users.