Your battery drains more the more you activity use the device. Shocking…

If it is your phone just uninstall those apps, then you cannot use them. If the devices main point is those apps like gaming on the switch what do you expect? I think the only real problem here is the switch’s lack of customizability so you have no trade off between game quality and battery life like you can on something like the steam deck.

And undermine their own ai offering

They do mention it on that page:

However, if presented with a valid order from a Swiss court involving a case of criminal activity that is against Swiss law, Proton Mail can be compelled to share account metadata (but not message contents or attachments) with law enforcement.

The only ever claim to encrypt message contents and attachments. And explicitly call out account meta data here as something they can hand over if requested by law enforcement. They also mention they are not good vs targeted and governmental level attacks:

There are, however, some risks for users facing a strong adversary, such as a government focusing all its resources on a very specific target.

And explicitly mention they might be compelled to log and give up information like ip adresses:

if you are breaking Swiss law, a law-abiding company such as Proton Mail can be legally compelled to log your IP address.

Well, Redhat is owned by IBM now so basically spot on

How do we know these are the AI chatbots instructions and not just instructions it made up? They make things up all the time, why do we trust it in this instance?

There is no real technical challenge in displaying ads that are based on the page content. But ads based on tracking users is much more profitable. Plus they can sell the data collected to anyone else that is interested.

“We had relied and started to rely too much this year on self-checkout in our stores,” Vasos told investors. “We should be using self-checkout as a secondary checkout vehicle, not a primary.”

That is the key point here. Use them to replace the express lanes but dont replace all checkout points with them.

they actually increase labor costs thanks to employees who get taken away from their other duties to help customers deal with the confusing and error prone kiosks

Now that is bullshit… how can it cost more to have someone spend part of their time to help a customer when they have a problem vs having an extra person help them full time during checkout.

Still, 60% of consumers said they prefer self-checkout as of 2021, presumably because they’ve never seen Terminator (wake up sheeple).

WTH… I really don’t understand why this person hates them so much. Seems to have some hidden agenda but I cannot for the life of me tell what it is.

Not all phones need to play games and gaming phones don’t need to use this type of technology. I would love a phone that I don’t need to charge and most people could benefit from one. And for the select few that like to play intensive games on it then they can get ones that would need to be charged.

Though I doubt this technology will be the answer to that want though.

Sorry, clicked reply on the wrong comment :)

Theoretically you could build a male to male contraption from multiple adapters and a cable.

You already can as these exist:

letting you plug in any existing USB A to mini cables together to get a male to male device - nothing unsafe about that though. So this is not a very good reason to not allow USB C to mini adapters.

Also you could be providing too much current to a device, however this is specific to the combination of adapter, cable and power supply you use.

Current is pulled by the device - you cannot supply too much current. Devices take just as much current as they need or as much as the adapter can supply. The only way a device would take more than that is by badly designed or faulty - but that is a problem with the device, if the power supply can supply the power there is no issues on that side.

Also USB C connectors can and do by default operate with USB 2 power - supplying 5V and limiting the current to the USB 2 standards and so any existing charger with USB A or mini connectors on. Thus any USB 2 device will only have access to the power given by the spec. You would require a handshake from newer USB protocols to get access to more voltage/current that some USB C chargers can supply.

There is nothing unsafe about any other this baring faulty devices - but if we worried about faulty devices then we would not allow any electronics devices to exist as any of them could be faulty. USB C to USB mini does not dramatically increase any risk of fire or devices exploding no more so than any device using USB mini or USB C alone.

The real reason is there is likely just not much of a market for them so they are harder to find - but they do exist.

How? Anything with a mini will be USB 2 at most and USB c defaults to lower power of USB 2 without any handshakes with the device which one with USB mini won’t do.

deleted by creator

From the article:

A quick Microsoft demo video shows the Copilot key in between the cluster of arrow keys and the right Alt button, a place where many keyboards usually put a menu button, a right Ctrl key, another Windows key, or something similar. The exact positioning, and the key being replaced, may vary depending on the size and layout of the keyboard.

Don’t forget about the blue passports!

I think it is for travel and hospitality places. Not something you would typically buy in a shop or liquor store but more a hotel or at an airport or similar.

(for example) a 250GB drive that does not use the full address space available

Current drives do not have different sized addressable spaces and a 256GiB drive does not use the full address space available. If it did then that would be the maximum size a drive could be. Yet we have 20TB+ drives and even those are no where near the address size limit of storage media.

then I suspect the average drive would have just a bit more usable space available by default.

The platter size might differ to get the same density and the costs would also likely be different. Likely resulting in a similar cost per GB, which is the number that generally matters more.

My comment re wear-levelling was more to suggest that I didn’t think the unused address space (in my example of 250GB vs 256GiB) could be excused by saying it was taken up by spare sectors.

There is a lot of unused address space - there is no need to come up with an excuse for it. It does not matter what size the drive is they all use the same number of bits for addressing the data.

Address space is basically free, so not using it all does not matter. Putting in extra storage that can use the space does cost however. So there is no real relation between the address spaces and what space is on a drive and what space is accessible to the end user. So it makes no difference in what units you use to market the drives on.

Instead the marketing has been incredibly consistent - way back to the early days. Physical storage has essentially always been labeled in SI units. There really is no marketing conspiracy here. It just that is they way it was always done. And why it was picked that way to begin with? Well, that was back in the day when binary units where not as common and physical storage never really fit the doubling pattern like other components like ram. You see all sorts of random sizes in early storage media so SI units I guess did not feel out of place.

Huh? What does how a drive size is measured affect the available address space used at all? Drives are broken up into blocks, and each block is addressable. This is irrelevant of if you measure it in GB or GiB and does not change the address or block size. Hell, you have have a block size in binary units and the overall capacity in SI units and it does not matter - that is how it is typically done with typical block sizes being 512 bytes, or 4096 (4KiB).

Or have anything to do with ware leveling at all? If you buy a 250GB SSD then you will be able to write 250GB to it - it will have some hidden capacity for ware-leveling, but that could be 10GB, 20GB, 50GB or any number they want. No relation to unit conversions at all.

What?!? But then how are companies going to manipulate their pricing to attract new customers away from their competitors without actually cutting any revenue? They neeeed this to keep their numbers up so they look more attractive to investors and get more money. Are you not thinking of the shareholders? Why won’t anyone think of the shareholders!

/s … if that was not obvious

deleted by creator

Sorry, I was more talking about this in particular:

Well, things affecting you unconsciously should be plain illegal

It is far too general a statement to be enforceable. There are things you can better enforce that focus on the negative effects of marketing, but things affecting you unconsciously is to vague and affects both positive and negative behaviours.

There are regulations about what you can and can’t put into edible products. There are regulations about what you can and can’t use as fuel. There are regulations on materials used in construction, so that they wouldn’t be as toxic as 50 years ago, on paints, on glue and what not.

These are all specific things though, not general broad reaching unenforceable statements. Which I agree with, there is a lot you can do with regulation that prevents bad behaviours of corporations, but these are generally specific things that are trying to solve some actual problem. And in this case you need to specific what things you are trying to prevent.

Even for just adverts, trying to ban all adverts that affect you unconsciously would be a ban on all adverts and marketing. Is that reasonable? I would not say so. It would be better to go after specific things like the regulations around advertising cigarettes. Or more relevant to today, maybe something around the shear amount of information advertising agency collect on you, IMO that is one of the bigger problems with them these days. Or the shear number of them that you get shoved into every aspect. Or putting adverts in products that you have already paid for. Those would be far more reasonable things that you could enforce.