Jeff exists in a space that is dominated by people playing the algorithm for views, and has remained successful without having to engage in the same tactics. I really appreciate his video style and approach, it’s a breath of fresh air in the current tech YouTube sphere.
It’s been terribly unreliable in my experience (Bing) so I’m not surprised that it’s not getting wider adoption. Half the time I try to interact with it, it just resets the conversation randomly. Other times I can’t even get it to open without closing all running Edge processes from task manager first. It just seems the most buggy and half baked of all the major AI.
It absolutely does, and with the recent uptick in recreational nitrous use we have clear examples of what it does to people. This is just one of the handful of cases of nitrous overuse leading to long term mobility loss
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. That article appears to be about a women who is now in a wheel chair due to nerve damage caused by a b12 deficiency which supports my comment that one of the most concerning risks of nitrous use is b12 deficiency.
They are even matching the internal resistance of the cells, I can't think of much more a professional manufacturer would be doing. As long as they are getting their cells from reputable sources (big if) I don't see anything wrong with a boutique battery industry for niche applications.
A professional manufacturer would not put any cell in series but instead would have a charger/discharger with voltage per cell, with current and temperature sensors as feedback loops.
The danger of cells in series differs with the cell chemistries.
Using a BMS is another indication they are not professional or even had an engineer design them.
Sadly I know of only a very few small professional battery pack manufacturers, certainly none of the EV or bike makers.
> A professional manufacturer would not put any cell in series but instead would have a charger/discharger with voltage per cell
My Bosch e-bike has 4 cells in parallel and put 10 of those in series. This so called 10S4P is a very typical setup for e-bikes. Each individual cell does definitely not have their own current/temp sensor. The BMS will check voltage for each of the 4 cell blocks.
Each pack only had a single BMS connection for every clump of 74 cells! Presumably they only got away with doing this by doing extensive binning/characterization of the cells before building them into packs.
Among all the printers in our household the Canon model broke in the least amount of time, only fixable with a spare part which was "coincidentally" the same price as the whole printer. And the official scanning tool was just named "ij utility", which meant it was impossible to find with related search terms.
It was entertaining, but not in a good way.
Honestly I've never been satisfied with any printer, inkjet or laser. I eagerly await the day I just don't need one.
Even Brother is dodgy, depending on the model. I have a low-midrange Brother B&W laser printer that worked great until one day it decided to stop accepting print jobs, both via network and USB… it just stalls at “processing” and never proceeds. Googling around it seems like people with various Brother models have seen this behavior.
It may also be just random failure of some components that were simply costed to be less than bulletproof on their "low to midrange" model. Or a software issue as suggested by another poster. No evidence of any sabotage was presented.
I once had a similar problem with a CUPS/gutenprint driver. If you are using CUPS, load the ppd from brother.
It could also have to do with the detail/complexity of your document. Intricate PDFs or high-dpi graphics can overwhelm low-midrange printers. (I once had a print job that took the printer half an hour to process.) On some printers you can even install additional RAM.
We have a bunch of different Kyoceras at the office. The software is buggy as hell, yet they hide their security updates behind a super-expensive support contract with an “authorized” reseller.
Thats criminal in my opinion. Never buy again. Sharp does the same thing for their larger “enterprise” MFPs.
Indeed. I've alwaya found the Canon Pixma Inkjets pretty good because they are basic and print OK and don't muck you about with these kinds of shenanigans. Dispointed.
I was at RIM during this time and it was an absolute shitshow. It took so much in-fighting to get RIM to even address the iphone, so many people thought it was a passing fad and would never get polished enough to be a real competitor, despite the fact it was already destroying marketshare.
But even then, there wasn't enough buy in from the company at large with the device, and it was certainly rushed, I think almost intentionally to try to prove the point of how "bad" touch only phones were going to be.
> Competition rising
Mike Lazaridis was at home on his treadmill and watching television when he first saw the Apple iPhone in early 2007. There were a few things he didn’t understand about the product. So, that summer, he pried one open to look inside and was shocked. It was like Apple had stuffed a Mac computer into a cellphone, he thought.
To Mr. Lazaridis, a life-long tinkerer who had built an oscilloscope and computer while in high school, the iPhone was a device that broke all the rules. The operating system alone took up 700 megabytes of memory, and the device used two processors. The entire BlackBerry ran on one processor and used 32 MB. Unlike the BlackBerry, the iPhone had a fully Internet-capable browser. That meant it would strain the networks of wireless companies like AT&T Inc., something those carriers hadn’t previously allowed. RIM by contrast used a rudimentary browser that limited data usage.
> Publicly, Mr. Lazaridis and Mr. Balsillie belittled the iPhone and its shortcomings, including its short battery life, weaker security and initial lack of e-mail. That earned them a reputation for being cocky and, eventually, out of touch. “That’s marketing,” Mr. Lazaridis explained. “You position your strengths against their weaknesses.”
Internally, he had a very different message. “If that thing catches on, we’re competing with a Mac, not a Nokia,” he recalled telling his staff.
BB built for the carriers. Apple builds for the consumer. Apple's logic was that AT&T was going to upgrade it's network, or else they'd switch to Verizon.
I think it also highlight a talent gap. Apple managed to squeeze a desktop OS on a phone, and get the best touchscreen on the market, on their first try. Blackberry couldn't even match the original iPhone two years after it's release.
> I was at RIM during this time and it was an absolute shitshow. It took so much in-fighting to get RIM to even address the iphone, so many people thought it was a passing fad and would never get polished enough to be a real competitor, despite the fact it was already destroying marketshare.
Oh that's for sure, even just before the iPhone came out they were all classing it as an iPod that could make calls.
What really turned things was RIM ignored the consumer market but when they started to pick on that, they did at the expense of the business base and the Storm was the end-result - half-baked for both and not fitting either. That whole period from 2007 on was a case of chasing consumer markets at the expense of the business customers. But the whole BIS/BES thang was often two sides of a coin.
But darn, the politics at Blackberry - I recall getting chastised for asking a question at a Townhall meeting when a one of the directors asked if any questions and I was balls enough to ask if we was ever going to do QA for the director to respond that they was looking into it.
Proof of Stake changes things to the point where mining is no longer really a good descriptor of what is going on behind the scenes.
Proof of Stake starts out with a large amount of coins being generated out of thin air. These are then distributed, and owners add nodes to the network by locking in a portion of their coins as their "stake".
The nodes perform transaction verification, and over time a reward block is built out of the transaction fees involved. This is awarded to a psuedorandomly selected node weighted by stake.
Well yes and no: those staking coins do indeed get more coins but there's still lots of speculation going on. I mean: it's not a given that if, today, with x coins you can buy, say, a laptop tomorrow with x * 2 coins you'll still be able to buy that same laptop.
Stakers do definitely take the volatility risk. They're rewarded by getting more coins.
