There's actual good reason for that. the X Formally Known As Twitter company has a content weighting system that punishes external links, regardless where the link is pointed to. So apparently Mr. Soham did the smartest thing to give that post the best chance to spread.
BTW, the X Formally Known As Twitter company is not the only one who conduced the world to this, all big names do link restriction. Look what we've become, such nice world :)
> Under the Energy Labelling Regulation, smartphones and tablets must display information on energy efficiency, battery lifespan and resistance to dust, water and accidental drops.
Just my two cents and a bit of reckoning: You guys know the types of batteries? Like AAA, etc? There are a whole list of them (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battery_sizes) and it's standardized, allowing different vendor to corporate with each other automatically.
But it comes to the smartphones and laptops etc, their batteries comes in with all shapes and forms, aka non-standarded.
I think if EU really wants to make electronic more durable, maybe try standardize the not-so-durable parts of the device. For example, battery, data drives, charger etc. This enables other vendors to create replacement parts without breaking copyright and other laws.
If they have to supply them for 5 years after they sell them, it will make more sense for them to use standard sizes. So hopefully this will naturally move in that direction.
I've bought smartphone replacement batteries in the past, so it's not really an issue. Most popular models have alternative vendors unless the manufacturer goes out of their way to prevent it.
Also the battery in my previous phone was at 83% of its nominal capacity 5.5 years after purchase, so I think this part is already durable enough.
The way I'm cycling the battery in my current phone it could last 8 years before it reaches that level.
Laptop battery packs used to use standardized metric battery cells (tool batteries often still do.) Those aren't very space efficient though.
Still. The cells they do use are all going to be the same voltage since the chemistry is the same. In theory you could swap them out with a set of same size or smaller lithium cells.
The example on the page don't really do it justice, because both of them are O(4), and the time delay is arbitrary.
The "" example should only consist of 3 operations: Dawn: REQUEST, Tim: RESPOND, Dawn: CLOSE. For example: "Hiya! What time was that thing?", "hey, 3:30", "Ta - seeya then!". Or even just 2, Dawn: REQUEST, Tim: RESPOND (auto close), this could imply that Dawn and Tim are really close, or really not close.
BTW: We are not designing reliable messaging protocols here folks. The chat software should tell if any message was lost.
> SanDisk/WD... noticed that they were sensitive to brownouts
Damn, I had a hit on this but this test made it clear.
I have few SBCs with SanDisk TF cards as their data storage. Those were powered with a cheap USB power adapter, and as a result, these SBCs completely locks themselves up after just few days and become inoperable. I even contacted the manufacturer of the SBCs for repair.
But before actually sending the boards out, I brought a new power adapter, replaced the old one with it, and the problem is completely gone. The SBCs are all good, the problem is the power supply.
Though, I still hope that those SBC manufacturers could switch to other storage device. SSDs, even the basic ones are much more reliable that whatever TF card listed on the test.
I recently, meaning hours ago, had this delightful experience watching the Eric of Google, which everybody love, including he's extra curricular girl friend and wife, talking about AI. He seemed to believe AI is under-hyped after tried it out himself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=id4YRO7G0wE
He also said in the video:
> I brought a rocket company because it was like interesting. And it's an area that I'm not an expert in and I wanted to be a expert. So I'm using Deep Research (TM). And these systems are spending 10 minutes writing Deep Papers (TM) that's true for most of them. (Them he starts to talk about computation and "it typically speaks English language", very cohesively, then stopped the thread abruptly) (Timestamp 02:09)
Let me quote out the important in what he said: "it's an area that I'm not an expert in".
During my use of AI (yeah, I don't hate AI), I found that the current generative (I call them pattern reconstruction) systems has this great ability to Impress An Idiot. If you have no knowledge in the field, you maybe thinking the generated content is smart, until you've gained some depth enough to make you realize the slops hidden in it.
If you work at the front line, like those guys from Microsoft, of course you know exactly what should be done, but, the company leadership maybe consists of idiots like Eric who got impressed by AI's ability to choose smart sounding words without actually knowing if the words are correct.
I guess maybe one day the generative tech could actually write some code that is correct and optimal, but right now it seems that day is far from now.
Meanwhile, folks like this ("I bought a rocket company") are essentially using it to decide where to plough their stratospheric wealth, so they can grow it even further.
Perhaps they'll lose a cufflink in the eventual crash, but they're so rich, I don't think they'll lose their shirt. Meanwhile, the tech job market is f**ed either way.
> During my use of AI (yeah, I don't hate AI), I found that the current generative (I call them pattern reconstruction) systems has this great ability to Impress An Idiot
I would be genuinely positively surprised if that stops to be the case some day. This behavior is by design.
AS you put yourself, these LLM systems are very good at pattern recognition and reconstruction. They have ingested vast majority of the internet to build patterns on. On the internet, the absolutely vast majority of content is pushed out by novices and amateurs: "Hey, look, I have just read a single wikipedia page or attended single lesson, I am not completely dumbfounded by it, so now I will explain it to you".
I've experienced PhDs who can't (even, some may add) write shell script. Maybe they just hate the syntax, or specifically the $ symbol, maybe both. But, they did do fine job otherwise and has successfully replaced me, a person who can write a bit shell script :(
The point is that even very smart people in technical fields can just be bad at/not care/willfully refuse to use stuff like this. It's a non-starter for a general-purpose authentication mechanism if the user has to understand concepts such as "private" and "publc" keys.
Even 2FA solutions like Google Authenticator are simple enough that you just need to scan a QR code but very few people use them and even fewer actually bother to print/save the backup emergency codes for use if they lose access to their auth device.
People can (sometimes) handle passwords, and an emailed reset link if they forget.
> AI chatbots have had no significant impact on earnings or recorded hours in any occupation
But Generative AI is not just AI chatbots. There are ones that generate sounds/music, ones that generates imagines etc.
Another thing is, the research only looked Denmark, a nation with fairly healthy altitude towards work-life-balance, not a nation that gives proud to people who work their own ass off.
And the research also don't cover the effect of AI generated product: if music or painting can be created by an AI within just 1 minute based on prompt typed in by a 5 year old, then your expected value for "art work" will decrease, and you'll not pay the same price when you're buying from a human artist.
For that last point, as a graphic designer competing with the first generation of digital printmaking and graphic design tools, I experienced the opposite. DIY people and companies are DIY people and companies. The ones that would have paid a real designer continued to do so, and my rates even went up because I offered something that stuck out even from the growing mass of garbage design from the amateurs with PageMaker or Illustrator. I adopted the same tools and my game was elevated far more than the non-professionals with those tools further separating my high value from the low value producers. It also gave me a few years of advantage over other professionals who still worked on a drawing table with pen and paper.
I'm glad it worked out for you, but the testimony is objectively somewhat anecdote.
Opposite to your testimony, I know one designer who's an out sourced contractor for a game company. The last time we talked, he's genuinely worried about generative AI, and witnessed layoffs due to the expectation that such tech would replace workers (specially ones who has singular function).
So, yes, there are people who's livelihood has already being negatively effected by AIs. Maybe those are just "DIY people", not "pro-like-me", maybe.
> Windows Vista, then called by its codename "Longhorn", given to developers at the Microsoft Professional Developers Conference in 2003, included WinFS, but it suffered from significant performance issues
Odd, I did tried out a few Longhorn builds. Not knowing if they were shipped with WinFS, but in my case the "performance issues" of the system was caused by increased RAM demand (I only had 512MB RAM at the time).
The referenced sourced by Paul Thurrott from winsupersite.com mentioned:
> (https://web.archive.org/web/20070702131752/http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winfs_preview.asp)
>
> it was pretty clear that WinFS wasn't ready for prime time. As one might expect, WinFS suffered from huge performance issues and simply bogged down the regular builds. And while WinFS was indeed included with the WinHEC 2004 Longhorn build that Microsoft shipped in May 2004, Microsoft was surprisingly quiet about WinFS at that time. A few months later, we found out why.
One old discussion on the subject suggested:
> (https://ask.metafilter.com/129685/Why-did-WinFS-fail)
>
> posted by @troy at 3:03 PM on August 9, 2009:
> I read that as "slow as a wee lassie on anything less than 16GB and quad dual-cores". They're waiting for PCs to be fast enough.
>
> posted by Ptrin at 7:13 PM on August 10, 2009:
> Because Longhorn was cancelled. The WinFS project was a part of Longhorn, and when Longhorn died, WinFS did as well
But the exact cause for the issues remain undisclosed. Don't you just like these close sourced hypes? LOL
I think WinFS failed for the same reason the Cairo Object filesystem before it did. Microsoft required WinFS to use their SQL server rather than implementing the limited structures directly in the filesystem.
* The extended meaning of "hacking" is required to correctly understand this sentence.
reply