floating-io

Signing up for services with a notoriously complex pricing structure, under the auspices of a company that is infamous for auditing its customers and forcing more money out of them on the basis of technicalities under threat of legal action, seems... unwise... to me.

No, it's not. You can do very basic selection with resistors, but you can't get above 5V (or more than a couple of amps IIRC) without using the actual PD communication protocol.

The problem is that design tends to be driven by the marketing department...

Do you think that "being competent at design" is the only requirement for designers?

I would say that it's more important to be competent in determining how design is going to be understood and used by users in their individual workflows. Few are more competent to judge that than the users themselves.

I'm pretty sure most folks have seen and experienced the negative impacts of designers changing things for the sake of change (or to justify their paychecks).

Not really that odd. It's easy to live without IPv6 until someone creates the IPv6-only killer app, and that makes it... not worth the hassle for most folks.

I'm in a moderate-to-high technology area in the grand scheme. They laid fiber here roughly two years ago, and lit it about a year ago, whereupon I immediately subscribed.

They don't offer IPv6. At all. That should tell you just how unimportant IPv6 is perceived as outside of its core cadre of proponents. Note that this is not a commentary on how important it actually is; just on perception.

In short, nobody cares.

Only if you ignore that streaming streams data in records. The creation of a record (or struct, or whatever term you want to use) is not "batching". Otherwise any 32-bit word is a nothing more than a batch of four bytes, and the entire distinction instantly becomes meaningless.

An audio stream can easily be defined as a series of records, where each record is a sample spanning N seconds, probably as provided by the hardware. Similarly, a video frame can also be considered a record. As soon as a record becomes available, it is sent. Thus, streaming.

Optimizing to fully utilize network frames can generally be considered a low level transport optimization, and thus not relevant to the discussion.

No, it really doesn't. The definition of "streaming", to me, can be boiled down to "you send individual data as soon as it's available, without collecting into groups."

Batching is, by definition, the gathering of data records into a collection before you send it. Streaming does not do that, which is the entire point. What happens after transmission occurs, on reception, is entirely irrelevant to whether the data transfer mode is "streaming."

From skimming the article, it seems that this is a munging of the terms in directions that just aren't meaningful.

I've had the following view from the beginning:

- Batches are groups of data with a finite size, delivered at whatever interval you desire (this can be seconds, minutes, hours, days, or years between batches).

- Streaming is when you deliver the data "live", meaning immediately upon generation of that data. There is no defined start or end. There is no buffering or grouping at the transmitter of that data. It's constant. What you do with that data after you receive it (buffering, batching it up, ...) is irrelevant.

JMHO.

I have a 10+ year old Cisco 2960G and a pair of 10+ year old Dell R620's in my homelab, still humming happily along.

So, no.

I see it more as having a sizable array of ingredients in the pantry, and using only what you need or want for a given meal.

This right here is why I bought the slightly lower-end two-speed system instead of the variable-speed system (it's a Trane, I believe). I'm just not interested in getting tied into their proprietary ecosystem.

I have a relatively simple Honeywell Z-Wave thermostat, and it works great with Home Assistant.

If your hardware has a clock >32Khz, you need FCC certification. It doesn't matter if it deliberately uses radio or not, last I checked.

Last time I looked, you still can't touch the DOM without a JavaScript shim. You can't use it to write "normal" client-side web applications without hacks and workarounds.

IOW, it's a VM-style environment that pretty much lives on its own and completely ignores the elephant in the room: that it's running inside a browser that deals predominantly in HTML and CSS.

Just like Java Applets, Flash, ...

Every day we get closer to reinventing the Java applet.

Again.

Reality is that the ones quietly holed up in the corner are usually doing all the unsexy maintenance-type work that the extroverts don't want to do (because it's not sexy).

Nobody cares about that work... until it doesn't get done. And so, nobody doing it gets promoted.

And dementia has Chuck Norris.

Seriously? Not everything needs to be xxxOps. And if you need a "FinOps" team to manage your cloud cost, I would argue that there's something wrong with your whole damn paradigm.

Right below this in my feed:

> Ingesting PDFs and why Gemini 2.0 changes everything

Be afraid.

Be very afraid.

The biggest issue I have with this proposal is that reading the code in naïve fashion comes up with the wrong answer for me; YMMV. The proposed form--

  foo ? { bar }

Reads naturally to me as "If foo then bar", when it's actually "If foo's error return exists then bar". I would suggest a different operator character, because this one reads wrongly IMO.

Maybe it's just because I originally come from C, where `foo ? bar : baz` meant "if foo then bar else baz", but the fact remains...

That gets an instant unsubscribe from me.

Sometimes it even works...

That's not at all limited to open source orgs and participants I've found. Seems to be a large percentage of the world these days, really...

...and?

Applying to all brands equally doesn't make it okay.

Are you so sure?

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/A2228?utm_ca...

Not quite the same, and hopefully likely to fail if it hasn't already, but it shows that interest exists in regulating 3D printers. When enough interest exists, things will happen.

JMHO.

Because people rarely go to space, and it was much more dangerous when the last person died than it is today. The vast majority of flights are unmanned, just like this test was.

If you want to continue playing apples to oranges though, nobody has died on a spaceflight in the last twenty years. How many have died on airplanes in that timeframe?

[correction: there was one additional fatal flight in 2014 with the destruction of SpaceShipTwo. I would argue that one doesn't count, though, as it was more akin to a relatively mundane aircraft accident than anything else.]

I thought the hoverslam was because the Merlin can't throttle down sufficiently to actually hover?

What makes you think this didn't happen in other industries? See the first iteration of the de Havilland Comet for a great example.

The Space Industry to date has killed many fewer people than planes, trains, or automobiles.

And his solution will still be cheaper.

If Falcon 1 is to be thrown into the ring for consideration due to engine similarity, then we'd have to figure out where Vulcan fits. It already flew the same kind of engines that powered New Glenn.

Just a thought.

I could buy that to some degree, but not to the current insane level of price disparity.

PCB production should be one of those things that is or can be mostly automated if it isn't already. Assembly is definitely already a mostly automated process. This is all existing tech. Thus the cost differential doesn't seem justifiable.

I have to think that this is very much "build it and they will come" territory if you can get within 1.5x to 3x the price, so it continues to boggle my mind that nobody has managed to make it happen.

The only blocker I can truly identify is the magnitude of the initial investment. That doesn't explain why the prices at domestic board houses seem to have remained pretty much exactly the same for the last couple of decades, though.

As far as I can tell, they just don't want the business.

It would help if they didn't charge $50 for a single raw PCB in low quantity when I can have the same board not just made, but also assembled in China for a fraction of that, shipping included. Literally.

I've often wondered if that's some kind of industry inertia issue, or if there's some underlying additional cost to build in the US.