Libcat99

How many people have millions on hand to buy an apartment building?

Just to have a place to live?

484.854.1582

I built a completely useless ai phone bot. You call it and ask it a question, and it responds with an answer that always involves sandwiches.

It adds no value beyond entertainment, but I suppose it does do that.

Presumably you would not be able to get Ota fixes for recall events, though.

Does tesla even have a procedure to install such updates without Ota?

I was randomly billed for tolls up to 6 weeks after I had a rental car for a multi state trip, so yeah, that's probably what they would do.

I went back and checked the prices. None have changed since my prior update except a Lego friends set which is now on clearance, so they should be evaluating even better against inflation.

They cost less even before inflation. Here's a write up I did a few months back.

https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=37657077

As far as I can tell, Lego just keeps getting more affordable.

I gave up on it for the same reason. Kept getting flagged for commercial use when all I used it for was ham radio stuff and helping my parents.

Sounds like a shakedown to me.

I have half a dozen of these and have never needed anything else.

Bonus: way easier to get everything inside at home.

Even if it never touches the battery, I'd imagine there's a noticeable efficiency loss running from inverter at all times, which means higher power and cooling costs.

If humans can reason, then physics allows it, and software can too, eventually.

Software engineers destroy plenty through data breaches, lost time due to (often deliberately) terrible design, etc.

If organizations and software engineers were held to account for data breaches, we'd have a whole new landscape.

Lives are lost to software failures as well.

Be careful what you wish for. They'll grant this, at $4 an episode.

Sounds like apple should be liable for any damages from malware or malicious software that does make it on their platform.

If you need a book to tell you this is wrong, that may be part of the problem.

> Citation needed

https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/24/24049848/no-car-company-h...

A shame for who? Boeing had the option of not destroying their reputation and chose to do so in exchange for a few good quarters.

I use the self check out unless my order is huge and I need more space to pack it. The scan->wait->scan drives me nuts though.

A lot of the longest living people (and maybe more telling, communities with the longest living members) are not very gym focused at all.

If you walk everywhere every day, do most of your daily chores by hand, and don't sit in an office all day, you are likely getting plenty of exercise even if you never touch a set of weights or treadmill.

It's a very different product then.

The fixed ip product more or less lets a user use it for anything they could with their own static ip.

The single ip product only allows the end user to use protocols for which you have built forwarding logic. For some, like sip or http, this would be simple, but for others you would need a much higher understanding of the application protocol.

One is a geeks Swiss army ip, the other is "now you can self host one of these 5 services, some or which might stop working if the application makes breaking changes."

I'm not sure it can?

My interpretation of what's been suggested is basically an ip you can port forward, as if you had a public ip.

For example, let's say you want to run a minecraft server for your friends from your home. You use this hypothetical service to get an ip you can use, and tunnel the needed ports in to your network (and ultimately, your minecraft server).

This couldn't be provided with a single ip, since at best that would limit you to selling off individual ports. The product becomes worthwhile if each customer has their own ip.

This is a non issue if putting on the seat belt fixes it.

Or ride with the damn bell ringing the whole time.

I have a co worker who I won't ride with anymore simply because of that.

Parental controls on devices suck, and are wildly ineffective.

I'm not in any way saying the solution is requiring uploading id or similar verification, but thinking parents can actually effectively control what their kids access is just plain wrong. Always has been.

Last year my father in law passed away. While dealing with the estate I had to write perhaps 20 paper checks and received a similar number from various sales. Many of the vendors we dealt with only accepted paper checks or cash.

I did, however, pay one tow truck driver with chairs.

I think you are misunderstanding my comment. I'll add some context that may help.

The discussion centers around automated tools to detect infringing content. These tools are not 100% accurate and may cause false positives. I am of the opinion that issuing takedowns on false positives should come with consequences.

If an artist wants to enforce their copyright on every case of infringement, no matter how minor, they're welcome to do so. Where I take issues is issuing takedowns because an automated, unreviewed system flagged the content, and no manual review took place.

Automated review puts the onus on the secondary content creator to prove that their work is not infringing in response to bogus requests. They must take on the cost in time and energy to do so. The cost should be on the copyright holder, and if that means automated reviews are not economical, so be it.

Automated review doesn't need to be 100% accurate. You don't actually need to automatically stop 12 year Olds from using your music in the background of their minecraft video to turn a profit.

Manually review cases where it's actually worthwhile.

And yet, many of the products we buy are exactly that. Gaming consoles dependant on online stores, smart TVs with software that could become useless at any moment, hundreds of little iot devices that are dependent on the manufacturers cloud being online... The list goes on.

This kind of thing is all over the consumer world. In a way it's cathartic to see it hitting businesses too.

Is it actually more complex to provide good results, or is it just more profitable not to?

I have a hard time believing an organization like Google doesn't have the resources to provide a search engine that's just as usable as what they had 6 years ago (around the time I feel like the decay really set in). Seems a lot more likely that it's just more profitable to serve up garbage sponsored content.

They chose to buy a product with a set of known characteristics

The manufacturer then changed those characteristics.

If a manufacturer makes changes post purchase to a product resulting in harm, they should bear the majority of the liability, if not all of it.

If I had a microwave that for years cooked a potato in 3 minutes safely, but then was modified by an update to catch fire under the same conditions, I shouldn't be the one on the hook for pushing that button.