GreyEyedGhost

That’s a much more interesting comment and link. Hopefully the production batteries do better than the trial run. We will see soon enough.

Wild claims? “‘We did this thing in the lab.’ It could be a breakthrough provided they can scale production.” The only thing that would make this a wild claim is if they didn’t actually do what they said or if it didn’t work like they said. They didn’t even claim this could be commercialized.

Also, Professor Zhao works at Western University, in Ontario, Canada. Here’s an article about this same research on their website. The only reference to CATL in the article you linked mentions that they are commercially producing sodium ion batteries using a different process.

I had this exact opinion when Amazon lost less money than expected in 1999. I’m sure people had similar opinions before 1929. This isn’t something new.

I support Steam on and with my deck for the great things they do for hardware and access. I support GOG for the DRM free software, which works quite well on the deck. I download free games from Epic, knowing their launcher is almost always off and hoping I cost them money.

It was the first commercial version, from the NT line that was user-friendly and capable enough for home users. Prior to that, it was difficult to get games to run on the NT line and permissions were more complicated than most home users wanted to deal with. After that, they were essentially the same product line.

Typical Microsoft. “Let the user decide when their computer wakes up? Nah, they let us decide what’s important or it stays asleep.”

Ive thought of it. Probably going to do sunglasses first, t’hough. Or rather second, after my single vision safety glasses.

Yeah, but that isn’t a one-time cost, either. That’s a recurring cost, typically on a biannual basis, and usually much higher than the monthly subscription. That said, being able to walk out with something that is going to reliably work for the next couple years definitely has its benefits. Ive just never considered something with a definite lifespan and a requirement to replace as a one-time cost. Kind of like the difference between paying property taxes monthly or yearly - I’m still paying and it isn’t going to stop.

21 years with the same frames?

I have a pair on right now. They’re better than not seeing correctly, but only being able to focus on a computer screen with less than a third of your vertical field of view sucks. There are options, but one of the best is having more sets of glasses, which isn’t convenient or cheap. These could solve that. I’m sure Amazon will make it not worth it at some point, though.

If you think glasses are a one-time cost, I feel like you’ve never worn glasses. I had 10 years in my life where my vision didn’t change, and now I need bifocals/progressives. Given the nature of the condition, I expect to have to get new prescriptions every 2 to 4 years until I die or go blind.

That said, the rest of your comment is quite likely painfully true, especially if Amazon has their fingers in it.

It’s been a couple years since I used it, but after you create a wall, you can edit it in a dialog. The User Guide shows the dialog in question under editing walls, as well as the steps to access it.

Having previously used tools like Inventor (which isn’t great for floor plans, but is great for parametric modeling) yes, Sweet Home 3D has a terrible UX. That’s doubtless why you didn’t find out how to adjust walls, etc. parametrically. I wouldn’t classify it as terrible, but it isn’t great, for sure.

This was sold by Foveon, which had some interesting differences. The sensors were layered which, among other things, meant that the optical effect of moire patterns didn’t occur on them.

This doesn’t appear to be made by the people from either the Raspberry Pi Foundation or Raspberry Pi Holdings.

Bad setup isn’t a reason why something is a bad idea. Whatever your opinions of cars are, talking about how bad they would be if everyone drove drunk doesn’t really prove your point.

In any security system, and this should also apply to home automation, one of the things you have to account for is failure. If you don’t have a graceful failure mode, you will have a bad time. And context matters. If my security system fails at home, defaulting to unlocked doors makes sense, especially if it’s due to an emergency like a fire. If the security system in a virology lab fails, you probably don’t want all the doors unlocked, and you may decide to have none of the doors unlocked, because the consequences of having the doors unlocked is greater than having them locked. Likewise, but of a much less serious nature, if your home automation fails, you should have some way of controlling the lights. If you don’t, again, it hasn’t failed gracefully.

You’re still not getting it. A proper smart home will know when you want certain things. You’re going into the bathroom to get ready for work, the lights are programmed for full intensity. In the middle of your sleep period, they go to the pre-programmed dim mode. And most rooms will be used in certain ways, as defined by you. If you’re in the living room and turn the TV on the lights dim, because that’s what you told it to do. You have an EV to charge, it knows how much time your EV needs to charge and how much electricity costs you during certain periods. So you plug the car in and it charges it when you want it to so you are ready when it’s time to go to work. This is where smart homes start to shine - they do all the usual things you would do if they weren’t so complicated and all the default things you would normally do, and you just live your life and deal with the exceptions as needed. If you use a room 3 different ways, you set up those 3 different ways and make the typical one your default. Now you’re back to exceptions. And the more rules you have to how you do things, the better it works for you. And most people have a preferred way they want things, modified by how much it takes to get there and other circumstances. With the right sensors, timers, etc., most of those can be accounted for.

So maybe you start with lights turning on when you enter the room, but if you do it right you get to the point where you barely think about lights at all - they’re just how you want them to be. Why would you not want that? However little effort lights take to manage, why do you want them to take any effort at all? And there are many more things than lights, some of which just make life easier, or more comfortable, or cheaper, all of which are good reasons to want this.

If they ramp up production and the bottom falls out of AI, they could be left with large product reserves, and people may still be reluctant to buy. One way to increase demand is to lower prices. Now, if they are the only company in this position, things may not change much. But if more than one are, the other can supply the market at a price that’s acceptable to them and the consumers.

Or those companies can collude and just completely fuck over customers. But that would never happen, right?

What you’re saying is mostly right, and in a practical sense is right, as well, but not as much from a technical sense. This is the specific block that is problematic.

Risc CPUs like the arm in the raspberry pi are really good at not doing anything, or doing a really small subset of things (it’s in the name!), but x86 is great at doing some stuff and being able to do a wide variety of stuff with its big instruction set. If you raise an eyebrow at my claim, consider that before gpus were the main way to do math in a data center it was x86. If the people who literally count every fraction of a watt of power consumption as billable time think it’s most efficient it probably is!

This is generally correct, per cycle. Overall, it really depends. The problem is, the x86 architecture does okay as long as it’s kept busy and the work to be performed is predictable (for the purposes of look-ahead and parallelization). This is why it’s great for those mathematical calculations you referred to, and why GPUs took over - they’re massively better performers on tasks that can be parallelized such as math calculations and graphics rendering. Beyond that, the ARM use case has been tuned to low power environments, which means the computing does poorly in environments that need a lot of calculations because, in general, more computing requires more power (or the same power with more efficient hardware, and now we’re talking about generational chip design differences). Now, couple that with the massive amount of money spent to make x86 what it is, and the relatively lower amounts that RISC and ARM received, and the gap gets wider.

Now, as I started with, even a basic x86 computer running at mostly idle is going to have pretty low power consumption, dollar-wise. Compare that to the power draw on a new router, or even a newer low-power mini PC, and your ROI is not going to indicate the need for that purchase if you have the hardware just sitting around idle. And it will still perform better than a raspberry pi configured to act as a router if your bandwidth is above about 250 mbps, if I remember correctly (and something like 120 mbps for the v4 and earlier generations).

While that would be nice to see, if they do it as poorly as this case appears to be going, the wrong group would benefit.