> Bluetooth headphones didn't, those require special hardware, have to be charged (battery), have higher latency, reduced sound quality (lower fidelity), packet loss, and spyware built in, and DRM capable.
Here you're not stating that some extreme minority (read: probably <0.001%) have an entirely optional app which might possibly have spyware. You're stating Bluetooth headphones have spyware built in. Where's the limitation that its only some of them? Sure, later you walk back your extreme position, but you make yourself known off the bat in your original comment.
Thinking that Bluetooth headphones, as an overall concept, has spyware baked in isn't grounded in reality. The only way I can imagine you pushing that idea, which you 100% did in your original post, is an extreme aversion to it. Which its funny you then accuse me of not knowing how Bluetooth audio works, when you're the one arguing spyware is inherently baked into it. Which please, point to me any standard Bluetooth Audio spec (A2DP, LE Audio, etc) which has spyware baked in like you originally claimed.
Please, show me one pair of headphones which represent themselves as Bluetooth headphones but will not pair without an app installed. That somehow use the Bluetooth protocol to enforce DRM and enforce spyware. Or else get otta here with claims like "Bluetooth has spyware built in". Maybe its not me that doesn't understand the technology.
Ah, but I'm the one arguing in bad faith and doesn't understand technology. Not the one who makes non-factual statements like "Bluetooth has spyware built in" and later argues they didn't say it.[0] Its not straw manning to address something you literally did write. Its not pearl clutching to point out when someone says something untrue like "Bluetooth has spyware built in".
I never said that. If you actually read what I wrote, you'll see that I specifically mentioned that only some do that, and that they require an app to pair or access special features. That is the opposite of saying the spyware is baked into the Bluetooth audio stack. Not to mention, there isn't just one stack, there are numerous different implementations. Either you're arguing in bad faith or you don't understand the technology and how apps work, or both. If you want to actually have a productive conversation, you need to stop the straw manning and pearl clutching and address the arguments (of which there several more that you're conveniently ignoring).
And the attempt at accusation in a mirror[1] of "extreme bias" further demonstrates bad faith on your part. I think it's best to just go our separate ways on this one.
1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accusation_in_a_mirror