- ngangagaI had no idea that piece of shit was associated with Ford at all.
- Nah, I've broken like three of those things and I just resent having another thing to carry around. I've just given up on using wired headphones for the most part with my phone. I just don't know why they thought it was desired to remove in the first place; I've had other waterproof headphones with a jack.
But, I also don't generally expect apple to make consumer-friendly decisions. The headphone jack invokes about 1/100th the rage that using the app store does.
- Interesting. I don't think I've ever tried to use this.
- Do you think that audio (or bluetooth) doesn't work reliably on ios? Why?
- > For everyday use, wireless headphones offer a superior experience simply due to the lack of a cable
Surely this is offset by a) having to charge it and b) not being able to replace the battery when it dies
Not to mention a cable can be debugged easily; i don't even know which device my bluetooth headphones is connected to let alone why it's not working as expected.
- I would characterize "hard" sci fi as "consistent" or "coherent", not necessarily "plausible".
- Reality is always more nuanced. That's kind of reality's deal.
- Well sure, if you're looking to be angry you can tie anything into your interests. But actual criticism of the moon landing is soberly connected to reality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goh2x_G0ct4
I'm just saying there's a reason why moon landing is such a funny topic to discuss—if you do deeply care about it enough to deviate from the accepted narrative, that's very odd.
- If point 2 is something so subjective as "deal plainly", point 0 should probably be "be honest with yourself". More to the point—why would anyone want to do otherwise? The hard part is satisfying your own evaluation.
> 4) There exists uncanny congruity between thought and experience.
Charitably, there must be a more effective way to articulate this sentiment.
I could go on, but that seems sufficient to address the overall tone of the writing.
EDIT: I apologize for being so critical. These are clearly well-thought-out points and I'm not trying to detract from that. I'm just not sure how to process someone else's internal understanding of themselves in a generally useful manner.
- I don't disagree that the engineering can be justified. But you don't need custom hardware to achieve radiation hardening, much less hiring fucking IBM.
And to be clear, I love power chips. I remain very bullish about the architecture. But as a taxpayer reading this shit just pisses me off. Pork-fat designed to look pro-humanity.
- I disagree—opinions on the moon landing don't matter because for the most part our lives are divorced from whether or not it happened.
It's much easier to get people to believe stuff that they already want to believe. In conspiracy terms, this looks like qanon's "liberals are pedophiles" and a belief that russia somehow has more influence over our politicians than israel does.
- > "Innovative new products would get much rarer without super cheap and scalable compute, of course".
Interesting conclusion—I'd argue we haven't seen much innovation since the smartphone (18 years ago now), and it's entirely because capital is relying on the advances of hardware to sell what is to consumers essentially the same product that they already have.
Of course, I can't read anything past the first tweet.
- I think it'd be pretty funny if to book travel in 2035 you need to use a travel agent that's objectively dumber than a human. We'd be stuck in the eighties again, but this time without each other to rely on.
Of course, that would be suicide for the industry. But I'm not sure investors see that.