golli @ golli @lemm.ee

Posts

1

Comments

301

Joined

2 yr. ago

And even then they'll think of the most malicious way to comply:

Forced to change the connector to USB C? Better only give it USB 2.0 speeds on the regular and Plus model.

Forced to allow third party app stores? Better give it as many restrictions and limits as possible. I assume/hope they'll eventually be forced to open up more, but they'll fight it for as long as possible.

Agreed. As you said it's a similar situation as with reddit, where I decided to delete my comments.

My reasoning is that those contributions were given under the premise that everybody was sharing to help each other.

Now that premise has changed: the large tech companies are only taking and the platform providers are changing the rules aswell to profit from it.

So as a result I packed my things and left, in case of reddit to here.

That said I think both views are valid and I wouldn't fault those that think differently.

I mean there definitely are some valuable metals in there, but I can't imagine that this is a competitive price to pay for them, especially since extraction wouldn't be easy. And some parts do have value, even if it ends up being the case that running the full cluster isn't economic anymore.

I do wonder who at this point could use all those processors (and Mainboards), but the ram might still be reasonable to use, maybe the cables, the cabinets themselves too. And I think the video also mentions that there are two managing servers. Those might be most likely to actually be useful for their original purpose.

Ian Cutress recently did a video on the topic here (I think he changed the title to reflect the end price of the auction), which does a bit of a breakdown. You for example also have to add shipping costs (from a certified company) to the price.

Pretty crazy to think that it is actually not sure whether spending less than 500k on a supercomputer is worth it. Goes to show how far technology has come.

I guess if everything sells you might make profit, but then it also comes with a lot of hassle and risk. And for actually using it, I imagine that electricity cost would be a huge factor.

I think the answer to this is both yes and no:

Yes, iphones have good build quality and especially in regards to software updates have been great, keeping even older models up to date. Whereas only recently some android manufacturers changed their update policies to support models for longer.

And No, because apple consistently has made it difficult and costly to repair phones, e.g. by pairing all kinds of parts to each other through software.

As said, i am not really that knowledgable in the whole blockchain topic, so anyone feel free to correct me where i am wrong:

• Why should i trust those parents/friends (or doctors if present)? Presumably this would be a global system? So why should i trust a group of random people from idk Somalia? I probably don't even fully trust any institutions there. My understanding (simplyfied) is that with bitcoin the coins themself are mined by finding solutions to hard math problems that once found can be easily verified by anyone. So at the base you have something i myself can verify to be true. Whoever finds the right number first gets the coin and after that you only need to keep track of trades and this is where the blockchain helps.
• What data would be stored on this block chain? Honestly seems like a bit of a privacy nightmare. I wouldn't want all family history and identifiable information to be public, so it can serve as an ID.
• To go along with the point above, how would you verify that a specific certificate on the chain belongs to you? Similar to a password for a crypto wallet? So that it can be lost without ability to be recovered, that your parents have control over it from the start, and that people who gain access to it can abuse it? Basically all issues similar to the US social security number? Or by having a passport or similar do the job, which kind of defeats a lot of the purpose of that blockchain being the source of ID.
• It wouldn't be enough to make a birth/death certificate. You would still need a system to change/add information. Like what if somebody changes their names? Also not every child will be added from the start, so you will need to handle late additions (that e.g. make date of birth even more unsure). What if someone goes missing or dies and it isn't reported? Also a small number of people might also require new identities for security purposes (think victims of abuse), how do you handle the need for an institution having the ability to create such fictional new identities?

I could probably find more issues.

So imo truth ultimately has to come from somewhere in the real world. And at places that might benefit from some system that is seperated from institutions (because they are poor, authoritarian, oppressive or have unstable governments for example) will at the same time have more difficulties providing something you can trust.

And in reverse regions that might have an easier time like the EU don't really seem to need it. Also as far as electronic IDs go the EU is planning that with eIDAS 2.0 and the EUID. Don't think it invloves a blockchain at any stage.

But the accuracy of this information would still depend on external institutions or persons that you have to trust, right? I have admittedly never dived too deep into the whole block chain topic, but that seems to go against the underlying idea.

To be fair there are still a bunch of other aspects that may prevent even full remote jobs to be outsourced to other countries. Among others: language skills, time zone differences, cultural differences, legal frameworks and probably many more.

To give an example for issues that may arise from these differences:

An employee might cost your german company triple the salary in Germany compared to India. On paper it seems like an easy choice, you just outsource and even if you have to pay 2 person to do the job you still save money. But suddenly you run into many problems:

• They will likely not speak German and maybe not even great English. This might be irrelevant for the actual work to be done. But do they exactly understand what the task is, can they give accurate feedback, can they make use of existing resources or do those need to be translated, can they communicate with the rest of the company or your customers?
• They work in different time zones. And while most remote work is probably time agnostic, meetings with other team members, departments or your customers suddenly become much harder to schedule.
• Their culture might be different. So e.g. they might not be as straight forward when running into problems and instead try to hide them, which will mean everything looks fine until the house of cards suddenly crumbles.
• Having employees in different countries means you will need to have different workflows for hr to deal with contracts, payrolls, retirement plans, health insurance and so on. Also how does the other country handle IP, patents and non compete clauses? Could the employee just walk away and start their own business or go to your competitor? Or in reverse can you ensure that they e.g. don't copy/paste code from somewhere else ignoring licenses.

Bloat and bad performance aside, you don't see a benefit in having a all-in-one solution that in a way acts as a drop in replacement for people wanting to switch away from the likes of Google/Apple? I certainly do.

Yes, having a dedicated app selected for each use case will likely give better results. But it also means more management. And many users don't actually need more than basic functionality.

But yes looking at the complaints, they should look at polishing existing features first.

I don't understand why there isn't higher demand for audio phones like there is for camera phones.

I agree that there should be demand for a large enough niche audience, but it won't be even near the same demand as for good cameras.

For most people smartphone are their primary and usually only camera. And there are plenty of situations where you want to take a nice picture or video.

With audio the trend nowadays is wireless for the vast majority of people. And for that a build in DAC doesn't really help at all.

This seems like a great idea and i wouldn't mind it getting expanded to become an EU wide norm.

That said it only adresses part of the problem. Another way consumers get tricked are recipe changes to substitute expensive ingredients for cheaper ones. And this one also subverts the mandatory kg/€ (or litre/€) price notices, which in a way already help with identifying shrinkflation. Although prominent warnings would help a lot fighting the psychological tricks involved in shrinkflation.

Personally i would also like laws to go even further and make it mandatory for companies to maintain public databases with product sizing and ingredients. Although i assume it wouldn't be easy to fight against companies trying to subvert such system and claiming that near identical products are something new rather than just a new worse version of something existing.

On that note i also miss the more standardized portion sizes we had here in Germany for a lot of products. Actually something that sadly had to be abolished due to eu regulations, which at the same time at least seemed to have given us the already mentioned kg/€ price labels.

I had to jog my memory with this article (in german) from 2009 when the change apparently happened. An example it gives is that e.g. sugar (up to a size of 1kg) could only be sold in portions of 100, 250, 500, 750 und 1000g. So no trickery with random inbetween sizes. Obviously not a huge problem with something like sugar, but it similarly also applied to something like chocolate bars. Which nowadays come in the most random, constantly changing weights.

Maybe a bit heavy handed, but i wouldn't mind fighting shrinkflation in some areas by simply forcing standardized sizes.

This seems a bit impractical. 2 phones to keep charged and manage.

Depending in your use case can't you just get some external USB storage?

It is unclear how it intends to house a higher concentration of people considering the proposed length (and therefore area) has been massively slashed.

I got a brilliant idea: extend it slightly to the sides, maybe in a round shape. This allows for a more efficient way to house a high concentration of people.

When all we had to do was pass a law that defense chips had to be produced in America

Are those actually using leeding edge chips? Unless you are also including data centers in here, I think most military tech probably uses mature nodes.

The NSA might need the latest chips to have as much performance for processing data as possible, and you probably also need huge data centers for the development of stuff. But you don't need 3nm chips to put them in cruise missiles or even aircrafts.

Sponsorblock, which unpads the vids.

Not sure if i'd say that Sponsorblock upads videos, or at least it only does so partially. It does remove in-video advertisement and selfpromotion, but it doesn't (and can't really) change anything if a video e.g. has content to fill like 3min, which gets drawn out to 10min.

Personally I don't understand it either, but I think the thesis is/was that Tesla isn't just a car company.

So beyond just the car business you'd also have the vertical manufacturing including batteries, eventually autonomous self driving, the charging network, and even at people's homes stuff like the solar roofs.

How that ever made them more expensive than basically the rest of the car industry combined I don't know.

I could see the high evaluation if they have a lead in self driving, but they don't have any edge compared to their competitors including Google/wamyo, Mercedes and so on

And the swap from physical buttons, which you can use by feel and that never change their location, to touch controls made this less of an issue?

Yeah, i'd have also loved if we moved to an "opt-out" system or one where you are asked to choose at some point.

If we had more than enough organs for everyone we might be able to afford the "luxury" to not adress the issue, but we don't. And compared to the very real consequences this deficit has, it really isn't a burden to reverse the burden through opt-out or at least force people to choose. Not making a choice has just as much consequences, if not more (since it leaves it ambiguous for others that might later have to make the choice for you).

And as you said the majority probably has no problem being a donor, but the default state is a form of apathy/lazyness/ignorance. So like with many other issues a top down approach would be way more effective, compared to putting the burden on every single individual to be proactive.

I am not registered, but I have a organ donor card (where I approve organ donations).

Background:

Germany just recently (18th of March this year) launched an online database where you can register your preference. Until then there was only a small organ donor card that you could fill out and carry with you.

Reason I haven't registered there yet is that I first need to unlock the online function on my passport (nowadays always enabled, but I still have one from when it was optional). So I'll eventually get around to doing both.

As for my reasoning behind being a donor:

• I would like to receive them in an emergency (or for someone I care about to do so).
• And in case I become a donor I am not there anymore to care about what people do with my organs.