• 0 Posts
  • 76 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 7th, 2024

help-circle

  • I don’t see any evidence that this product line is intended only for rich people. Things are generally more expensive in the early adopter stage, and Apple doesn’t make anything that they don’t want to see widely adopted.

    The original iPod held 5GB and cost $400 ($700 in 2024 dollars).

    The original iPhone came in a 4GB and an 8GB model that cost $500-600 ($700-800 in 2024).

    The iPod is gone, replaced by the ubiquity of the iPhone that it evolved into. The cheapest iPhone today is the SE at $430 and it wildly outperforms the original hardware.

    If you want an MP3 player with as close to the specs to the original iPod as you can find, you can get one for about $20, and it still outperforms the original iPod.

    If the Apple Vision line is successful, I expect to see $20 generic VR headsets that blow everything we currently have out of the water by 2040.





  • I’d say it is a bit more complicated than that for car doors.

    Car doors work fine on every car but a Tesla. They aren’t some new technology invented by Tesla where design flaws like this are understandable. Tesla just does things so badly that they invent brand new dangers that only exist with their vehicles.

    You don’t want it to fail and come open

    That isn’t what “fail open” means. It doesn’t mean that the moment the battery dies all the doors fly open. It means that when the battery dies the doors aren’t latched shut like a bank safe.

    At a minimum, the key should offer a way to open the car from the outside when the battery is dead. It’s completely asinine to put the only emergency latch on the inside of the car where you can’t use it, especially since it is hidden so deep most people can’t find it without the manual.

    What’s controversial or unpopular about what I said?

    You’re giving Elon Musk’s awful cars the benefit of a doubt by pretending that this isn’t a completely reckless design flaw that should never have existed in the first place, and you are deliberately misinterpreting what “fail open” means to make it sound like a ridiculous solution instead of the industry safety best practice that it actually is.

    Also, you’re complaining about downvotes, so expect even more now I guess.





  • I mean, they accomplished the first part mostly because they are cheap connected speakers, but I have yet to meet anyone who doesn’t absolutely loath their home assistants. Got rid of mine (Both Google and Amazon) not just because they are a privacy nightmare, but because they are completely fucking infuriating to work with.

    The exact same phrase is never guaranteed to have the same results. The assistant hardly ever answers a question right. It routinely takes repeated attempts to get it to control any of my connected lights. It responds to people that weren’t talking to it. I could keep going…

    If they tried charging me for it before I rage quit them, I would have just rage quit sooner.





  • I have some bad news for you.

    An AR-15 is really only good for wartime scenarios (and mass-murder). If your goal is self defense, you have chosen a terrible gun that limits your mobility and cannot protect you at close range. A handgun is vastly superior for the purpose of self-defense.

    Not that your choice of gun matters here. The choice to have a gun at all actually increases your risk of being victim of a violent crime, and that’s just the odds for you. Having a gun in your house at all greatly increases the risk that you or someone in your home will die accidentally, or by suicide. Those odds are greater than those of any violent lunatic breaking into your home and murdering anyone in it.

    If you want a gun because you expect to be at war with tyrants, more power to you. If your goal is to minimize the risk of harm to you and your family, unless you have some actual enemies you expect to have to deal with, you are better of without a gun in your home, or at least not one that is easy to access.





  • The article tries to say that this is ridiculous, but I don’t see it.

    Sure, he’s a cheater, and he got caught. Not particularly sympathetic.

    But, Apple markets their products as privacy-respecting, he deleted something he wanted to keep secret, and his Apple products betrayed him and revealed his secret to someone else, resulting in real-world consequences.

    Apple should be held to account for the privacy violation at the very least.