monkeynotes

I do wonder about the actual material constraints. My thought is, will it even be possible to make something so slight that it becomes an everyday piece of tech like the iPhone, or is it destined for entertainment and casual work?

Batteries are heavy, the optical aspect is bulky, heat dissipation is challenging. I haven't seen any tech on the near horizon that can answer those challenges. I wonder what Apple has in their R&D plans.

It doesn't really balance it all that much. I still get jitters from green tea.

Ultimately even the behaviour of big polluters is driven by consumer demands. Consumers make financial choices that are incongruent with their values, all the time.

If consumers didn't demand so much cheap energy we would have less coal burning power stations, for example.

People fund corporations, we have to pay for alternatives which are usually a significantly higher cost that we refuse to accept.

Narratives that corporations that are responsible for a majority of pollution are BS. The corporations are at the mercy of our individual wallets.

I do think it's a government's role to unify and lead people through this. Provide quality alternatives, support offramping, etc. Without this essential cultural contract it just won't work.

Individual effort is only meaningful if it's coordinated and a majority of people buy into it. But we can't get that leadership behind the effort if we, the people, just keep voting it out.

So while it's admirable to individually "do your part" we know for a fact the overwhelming majority of people don't actually give a flip enough to prioritize the planet and work together.

Raindrops do contribute to floods, but you need coordination to get there.

4-5 liters! Two liters of green tea typically contains over 400mg of caffeine which is the upper limit recommended for adults. This guy was consuming around 1g of caffeine a day.

A judge will simply throw out any evidence that was facilitated by a lie. Any good defence lawyer would wield this just like they wield bad chain of custody etc.

Relying on photos and signatures isn't ridiculous at all, we did that for decades and it served a purpose. What you are seeing is one government that is authoritarian on ID, and another that is prioritizing other things.

Of course the government databases via APIs is more secure, but that doesn't make everything else ridiculous.

Saying the US isn't modern because of this one thing is silly. The US ostensibly leads technological investment, has the an advanced military, puts rockets in space and recovers them, had the internet before most of the world, iPhone, all the software we all use the world over, the list goes on.

Is this[0] something you are questioning as being real news? Those are actual found bodies, 600 graves is significant amount of bodies that families never got to find out about. You know, people are alive today that have direct connection to those kids. It's not something that happened so long ago that it's just a tragedy of the past. People should be held accountable.

[0]https://apnews.com/article/canada-67da8a8af88efc91e6ffc64630....

No, the issue is it happens at all. Just because others are worse changes nothing.

I'm attacking an institution, not individuals.

Over 3k children buried with little to no documentation, families not informed, kids never returned to their loved one.

I don't think what I have said is strong at all. The reports are eyeopening, the level of care afforded to these kids is abysmal. The Church stood in the way of providing documentation for families to find their kids. Basically buried them and forgot where.

The fact we can't find these children is the "strong" complaint I have. You are suggesting that because we can't find over 3000 children.

The discoveries of unmarked graves began to make international headlines in May 2021, starting with the detection of 215 potential graves at the site of the former Kamloops Indian Residential School in British Columbia. This was followed by several other significant findings, including over 600 potential graves at the Marieval Indian Residential School site in Saskatchewan and 182 at the former St. Eugene's Mission School in British Columbia, among others.

All of that sounds like a very strong motivation to feel the way I do. I should not have to explain how this mistreatment is all racially motivated, too.

Lots of evidence of abhorrent mistreatment, over 3k lost children in hundreds of potential burial sites and you have the bravado to say "no one has been found" as if that means nothing is to be found.

People downplaying this stuff makes me want to vomit.

[0] https://ehprnh2mwo3.exactdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/A...

You should read the comments. The top comment I am replying to specifically opens the door on this stuff. They challenged that people have "misconceptions", I am showing how those concepts that are held about the church are actually very real and substantiated.

> Please explain the asymmetric treatment if it is not because people on HN in general don't like the Church, while they do like public schools.

When you find a post on HN that talks about public schools maybe this topic will open up there too, and you can have your day there.

> people on HN in general don't like the Church

I don't like psychopaths either, and for good reason. I don't like the Church because of what it has enabled, the lies, the hypocrisy, and so on. You are trying to frame it as HN folks have a hard on for going after the church for no good reason. Well, lots of reasons have been listed once the OP basically said "there is no good reason to object to the church, it's all misconceptions. Lol.

> My issue is nobody seems to care about the much larger abuse problem in schools.

This isn't true. You just happened to come to a comment section that is talking specifically about the church and you are mad because it's not talking about what you want to talk about. Why not go post a tech story about schools, and then find someone challenging misconceptions about schools.

These comments aren't trying to nefariously undermine the problem in schools, that's just you being frustrated, or whatever is motivating you to get mad.

> I think it's valid to point out that these flaws are not unique to Catholicism.

In what way? Does pointing it out change the facts? Why can't we have a discussion about how Catholicism is objectively hypocritical and not have to discuss all of the other things that are wrong in the world?

> You're sort of singling out Catholicism though.

Yes, because church is the context of this post, and the OP opened the door. What does your comment have to do with the facts?

Check the comment this is spawned from. The comment elicited all of this by saying there are misconceptions about the church.

I still don't get what the problem is. What does the asymmetric treatment between schools and church abuse have to do with the facts?

> If people actually cared about making abuse and coverups known they would bring it up every thread schools are brought up.

So you are saying I don't actually care about the abuse coverups? You think I have another agenda? You have a sick mind.

> It is almost as if they just want to attack the Church and ignore it in their own preferred abusive institutions.

It's not that, at all. Shame on you for trying to reframe it as such.

I wouldn't be surprised because an LLM is a viable shortcut to get shit done. Why would the Pope's press office not use one? You think they are too honest, too benevolent to do that? Why?

Let's not forget about the abortion.

So what??? If my neighbour murdered children would that be mitigated by a serial killer in the next town over?

Do people really have this much cognitive dissonance that they lose the ability to think? Like how much delusion do you have to be under to even say the above and think it makes it better for Catholics.

Even one priest raping a child under the protection of the church is entirely unacceptable.

Because that's how political messaging is usually curated. I see no reason to expect the Pope to be different. The idea of him finding time to sit down at his desk, doing all that research, finding citations, have time to understand all the technical neauance, etc. etc. sounds totally unreasonable for a person whose time is split in so many directions.

So what if it's not unique to Catholicism? I was asking specifically what the misconceptions are. You've redirected.

> It makes me immensely sad that people have so many misconceptions about Catholics.

What are these misconceptions? Catholicism uses shame to induce conformity, has had numerous priests abuse children (and protecting the offenders), has a long history of violence against non-adherents, historically deeply homophobic, and so on. All of that is factual.

Edit: Oh! And now I remember, they killed and buried hundreds of children in Canada at their "schools" for indigenous people. Graves unmarked, families never knew what happened to the kids. But it's OK! Pope here said sorry, sort of, after being pressured, for decades. Also they found graves. Canadian govt. couldn't give a rats ass because the church is as powerful as governments.

But remember! We love all of God's children.

Basically what ChatGPT says when asked about the future of AI without consuming the article.

This is about as vanilla message as any.

And by "globally" they mean a subset of the global countries that they supported with Bard. So no Canada still.

This is news to me, I've always had low amp USB-A slow chargers in economy. Those old cigarette outlets can deliver 75 watt, but no idea about the amperage.

I am sure USB-C with PD will be available at some point, but it's not a majority of economy today AFAIK

Those outlets are usually low amp, slow charge. I mean a majority are still USB-A, and now you have to take an adapter with you. The whole thing is ludacris for a majority of people, they have other priorities for what they pack and how the hassle they are willing to accept for a movie. Parents are a non-starter, AVP is a selfish device for disappearing into your own world, parents have kids to keep an eye on. I personally would not want to be completely closed off from the cabin, first it's fucked up for the cabin crew to interact with, second I am now partially blind AND deaf to my surroundings. FOV is limited, and I doubt those cameras are very capable at low light.

I've defined this elsewhere in the comments. Please provide a common definition that aligns with yours

When I say AR I mean exactly what it's defined as. Put this in the previous comment, it's the Wikipedia definition:

"AR can be defined as a system that incorporates three basic features: a combination of real and virtual worlds, real-time interaction, and accurate 3D registration of virtual and real objects"

There is nowhere in there that says the output has to have pure optical through. Digital composition seems to fit into the definition.

I don't understand, every definition of AR I can find conforms to what Apple has made. This one from Wikipedia for instance:

"AR can be defined as a system that incorporates three basic features: a combination of real and virtual worlds, real-time interaction, and accurate 3D registration of virtual and real objects"

What is it missing?

It's not VR though. The AR angle of this device is why it's compelling. VR is completely blind to your surroundings, Apple Pro could in principle make your public park look like Jurassic Park with full size dinosaurs etc. Blending our reality with an overlayed real time rendering is a massive benefit over straight VR.

It's basically a laptop on your head, so a meaty 60w charger could be needed to power and charge it.

Bare in mind I am not anticipating the Google Home level of interaction, I am talking full sophisticated natural language. And there is no reason touch cannot play a role, I'm just saying these devices will be unlike our current phones. I've listed some use cases that I think beat out touch easily elsewhere in the comments.