It's fundamentally a security camera, for many people. People buy them to see what's going on, record crimes for reporting, and to feel safer. I think there's significant overlap in people who want to feel safer and people being ok with the police being able to look through their cameras, since being able to record events, for the police, was part of the motivation for the purchase of a security camera. My frail elderly grandpa, who has seen his neighborhood go to shit with the reduced police funding, would definitely see this as a "nice feature".
Yeah, I ended up using an old mac mini for my Home Assistant needs. It draws a whopping 7W from the wall at idle (and it's near always idle), but the price of a new RPi is the same as 13k hours of electric usage for this.
Using whatever compute you have sitting in a drawer usually makes the most sense (including an old phone).
After hopping between several in the past, I've learned to avoid services that blatantly violate TOS for their existence, since they rarely last long, usually going private once the cease and desist letters start coming.
I ended up just going with the non-music youtube premium "lite" for $8/month.
> preventing you from accidentally rebasing changes that have been shared.
I think this ruins it for me then. I push my in-progress work, to my in-progress branches (then git-squash or whatever later, if needed). It makes switching between (lab) computers, dead or not, trivial.
Is there some "live remote" feature that could work for me, that just constantly force pushes to enabled branches?
Yes, almost all JJ users do this constantly. Just "track" the particular branch. JJ has an idea that only some commits are immutable, the set of "immutable heads", and the default logic is something like "The main branch is always immutable, remote branches are immutable, 'tracked' remote branches are mutable." In other words, tracking a remote branch removes it from the set of immutable heads.
Nothing stops you from doing the equivalent of `git push --force` in `jj`. The flag is just named differently: `--ignore-immutable`. This is a global flag though, so it's available to all commands, and `jj` requires it whenever you're making changes to immutable commits, even locally. I'd argue that this is one of the killer features of `jj`, since by comparison `git rebase` treats everything the same whether you're squashing your own local commits on a feature branch or messing with the history of `main` in a way that would break things for everyone.
I was going to go this route, but with all the GPU's sitting around in data centers now, you can get Steam cloud gaming for stupid cheap. I pay $10/month for 4k@120Hz (up to 80mbps video bitrate, they're experimenting with HDR), with my MacBook connected to my TV. It would take 12 years of subscriptions to equal the price of a PC, which is realistically more like 20 since I pause the subscription for months that I don't play. And, if I want to play some multiplayer game with a family member, I just add another subscription for $10, we play the game until they're done, then cancel.
I'll probably pick up a PC at some point, but this has been completely fine.
I think this is the direction they are pushing people to move towards. Cloud gaming on thin clients with out any ownership model. You are uniquely primed for the world. Owning hardware or experiences will be a thing from the past.
Hopefully I'll be gone by this point. This is not a world I want to live in. Feels like Bladerunner 2049.
Seems what it is, but with a "waveguide" instead of an "optical fiber" wiggling about. Seems like a sneaky use of the word "projection" though, since the "surface" the image is "projected" is just what the flopping waveguide head traces, with no projection extending beyond the end of the waveguide.
Yes but one could argue the frame refresh/redraw cycle of a laser projector or lcd projector is the same at slow speed. It’s not just one giant ball of light. It goes through a process and the frame itself has to redraw.
Sure, the image doesn't come from nowhere. In this case, it's a wiggly piezo pushed raster scan with the light source varied to, ideally, match the frame contents for any raster position.
But the "projection" is only to the end of the waveguide, which makes a real image, which could then be protected onto a real surface. It would be as misleading as saying a CRT screen projects an image. Well, not really. A CRT screen uses electron beam projection in the image generation. After that image is generated, it can then be projected.
A scanning beam laser projector can, by all definitions (including that pesky dictionary), project an image as part of the generation. An LCD, a CRT, and this, cannot project an image without additional projection optics attached to it to throw that generated real image.
I understand what they did (very neat), I'm just complaining about the press release wording. And then there's this shoved at the bottom "Because the chip can project so many more spots in any given time interval than any previous beam scanners, it could also be used to control many more qubits in quantum computers". Might as well throw "AI" in there. Or, maybe I'm just confused about it all because I stupidly read a university backed press release.
It's a popular conspiracy theory, without evidence, and without any perspective on any information that intelligence had. Using civilians as shields is well documented/known for Iranian military and groups they sponsor. For example, hospitals [1].
> Gatestone Institute is an American far-right think tank known for publishing anti-Muslim articles.
> The organization has attracted attention for publishing false or inaccurate articles, some of which were shared widely.
> The Gatestone Institute has been frequently described as anti-Muslim, regularly publishes false reports to stoke anti-Muslim fears, and has published false stories pertaining to Muslims and Islam.
The US and Israel have repeatedly claimed that schools and hospitals are legitimate military targets with no evidence. A highly partisan think tank which is known for putting out misinformation is not a valid source.
If you're going to destroy hospitals and target civilian infrastructure and kill children, you should be accountable on a world stage and provide evidence. Unless you would you accept Iran bombing elementary schools in the US because they claim to have intel that there are terrorists hiding under them?
There are MANY examples of Iranian backed terrorist organizations doing this (which I thought might be too indirect), but here's something more recent [1].
Regardless, left leaning news reports things that make them look good and the opposition look bad. Right leaning news reports things that make them look good and the opposition look bad. Both are needed to find truth because they're all biased for profit corporate entities owned by 6 different billionaires that will only report what's convenient for that bias.
And no, I have no trust in the claims of the Iranian government. Do you? Who do you believe does?
reply