To each their own. I prefer having the ability to adjust things from 1 central source. I’m prone to losing remotes.
Also, how would you do such a remote. You would also need a screen for feedback etc, which puts you back at square 1.
Also, a remote would be considerably more expensive than the extra cost of a ZigBee/Wifi enabled microcontroller.
Ideally yes. However some meals aren’t suitable for toddlers, others that simply don’t like. Particularly for exhausted parents, having a healthy, tasty fallback can be a sanity saver. Doubly so when on trips.
Treat them like the toddler equivalent of a McDonald’s. OK for 1 off meals, a problem when they become the default diet.
The ability to play with it, without having to fiddle with tiny switches is a big feature to many. Often these are used by people with mobility issues. The ability to add an extra feed, due to exercise, or adjust the timings to account for changes in life plans are a godsend to many.
Smart home devices are a balancing act. The extra control means more can also go wrong. Minimising that is a big part. The most critical is making it behave sanely when it suddenly goes offline. E.g. smart light switches become dumb ones, when the central hub goes down.
A friend of mine (sadly now passed) was a chronic alcoholic. It got to the point where the doctors told him to stop trying to quit. Each time he did, he would have liver issues and turn Simpson yellow.
Ulefone armor 27T pro
It’s a bit of a brick, but is ruggedised to hell and has a stupidly large battery. It also has thermal and night vision cameras. The only weaknesses I’ve found are the camera being less good than the top end pixel phones, and it’s heavy.
I just said f*** it, and got a waterproof phone. It actually has an awesome underwater photography mode.
As for the speaker. There are sound generators that blast the speakers clear of water. You preferably don’t want to just let it air dry in the future. A build up of crap on the speaker could mess with sound generation.
Could you use a long rifle as a stick for a protest sign?
Ignorance, rather than stupidity. In many ways it’s worse. Stupidity can at best be outgrown with time. Ignorance is, in the modern world, a choice.
Fair, fair.
I will settle for a company who’s demonstrated long term strategy is mostly in line with my interests. It’s not perfect, but I’ll take “morale because it’s profitable” over “enshitifcation for a quick profit”
I’ve noticed there seems to be a divide between deep thinking and wide thinking.
Deep thinking tends to be directed and has a tight focus. It covers a lot of intellectual thinking.
Wide thinking is a lot more integrated, it’s how we instinctively know how a particular action will affect others, both directly and indirectly. It integrates a lot of topics, but at a far shallower level.
As an aspie, I’m good at deep thinking. I struggle with wide thinking. I suspect I am fairly blind to a lot of wide thinking effects. Whether their more intuitive thinking is better or worse than my logical deep thinking is a different matter.
Very true. It unfortunately doesn’t include the delays from bureaucracies throwing excessive red tape at the project, with the goal of, if not killing it, kicking the decision down the road till it’s someone else’s problem. The UK government has been problematic on that front.
I might be an optimistic pessimist.
Fusion has been 10 years away, with proper funding. It never got that funding. It struggled to maintain the break even funding to keep skilled people employed, and the lights on.
The difference is that over unity has been achieved, in a normally sustainable manner. The funding is such that it’s 5-10 years at current funding. Most of that is building the actual test plants.
I fully agree that renewables are currently the best cost option. The catch is that they are not viable everywhere. They are also inherently low density, so can get expensive in certain areas.
Basically, we want a mix of options, to fit local requirements. Nuclear (and later fusion) should be part of the plan.
In practice, I’m of the take what we can get. We need to crash CO2 output, and we need to do it yesterday. Anything speeding that up is a win, as far as I’m concerned.
Fully agreed, though it’s also something you really don’t want done on too much of an accelerated timeline. Rushing the construction, when the fail-safes rely on it, and it will be an absolute bitch to fix later, is a poor plan.
Unfortunately the red tape has become far too risk adverse. E.g. the reactors china is now building were designed in the UK. The UK government killed 5 attempts to get them built through red tape and time killing. Eventually a Chinese scientist found out about the plans. (With permission) he contacted the Chinese government. Sufficient to say, those plans formed the basis for the newer Chinese reactors they are building out now. They are also exporting the expertise, since most western countries have had their skilled engineers reach retirement, before passing on their skills and knowledge.
In practice, you are looking at 5-10 years minimum, from site selection to power on.
It’s relative harm. New nuclear is far cleaner than coal, and can slot into it’s place in the grid. We should have done this decades ago, but the plans languished till china found out about them. (Much to the designers joy)
It’s also not an either/or situation. As china is demonstrating, there is a limit to how quickly you can roll out renewables. Doing other, pollution reduction in parallel makes sense.
Taking nuclear off the table was the biggest win the oil barrons pulled off.
On a plus side, we will finally find out if fusion is viable in the next 5-10 years. The first over-unity test reactors, designed for sustained operation are being built.
Coal plants put out more radioactive material than even the bomb factories they call nuclear power plants. Newer plant designs are FAR more fail safe too, and some can actually ‘eat’ the waste from older plants.
New nuclear is right up there with renewables, with the added bonus of being great for baseloads. The only problem is we needed to be building it 20 years ago, since it takes a long time to design, permit and build them properly. If we try to rely on them now, it will be too late.
If I’m going to the bar, and it’s busy, I’ll grab drinks for the people I’m explicitly with. I also keep a vague mental track of if I’m in a deficit with someone (I owe them a drink to balance out).
I don’t do it with the expectation that they will buy my next drink however.
As I read it, it basically comes off as the author being grumpy that it’s harder to sponge off people who drink less, or slower.
I will do reciprocal drink buying, but hate formalising into “rounds”. My drinking rate can vary wildly. I don’t want to be forced to drink faster, to keep up with others.
Gen Z is the most financially squeezed age group in my memory. The fact they want to be more discerning in how much they drink and pay makes complete sense.
It’s also worth noting that contactless card machines also remove a major bottleneck in going to the bar.
Agreed, but with a few provisos.
Turning a peaceful protest (march etc) violet is a big no no. If there is seen to be a risk of this, the popularist section will rapidly hemorrhage members. The radicals can use the events as cover/meeting new members, but not go hot on the march. The exception to this is if the government/police go violent. Defensive counter violence is then acceptable. The goal should be to get the “civilian” supporters (think families etc) clear. Then, it’s down to them whether they bolt too, or play whack a mole with the police.
The other proviso is that the radical groups actions should be proportional. The IRA walked this line. When they set major bombs, they gave the authorities enough warning to clear the area of civilians. They were mostly aiming for property damage and disruption, not mass casualties. The times the IRA went past that line did severe damage to their reputation. They need to act to reinforce the position of the other 2 groups, not undermine it.
It’s worth noting that I think both should exist.
Agreed, I just want a ZigBee endpoint as well.
As for the smart home stuff, I already have it in place, so it’s no additional expense.
Control wise, your method would be fine for someone techie and motivated. It would annoy the hell out of some non techies, particularly if they had vision issues (think OAP). It would also close down the option of relatives helping out by monitoring it remotely.
As I said, different target audiences. Both have their places. I just wish the smart option did its job properly, rather than the half baked options we keep getting.