Every application kind of needs two modes: a default mode where the user is railroaded into making the right decision, and an “I’m not an idiot and will actually read the documentation before/after trying to make things work” mode. If you stick the toggle for the two modes somewhere that you’d only find by reading the documentation, people will automatically categorize themselves into the mode the ought to be in.

I don’t support this decision in any way, but I can at least think of some legitimate motivation for it (assuming the Synology branded ones aren’t marked up from the equivalent Seagate/Toshiba ones). I imagine Synology has to deal with a lot of service calls and returns for issues that are caused by shoddy drives (like those Seagate drives with the fudged lifespan numbers), not by anything that they can directly control.

In reality, the above was probably what sparked the idea, but I’m betting that they’re going to jack up the price of those drives just to squeeze out a little more profit for this quarter.

I’m 90% sure that would block no actual porn.

Sound quality will be exactly the same among any of the services that offer lossless files (ie all of the ones that aren’t Spotify). That’s literally the point of lossless.

Alright, hear me out: we split up Alphabet. Ads and search can be one company, since those two are always going to be related, while Chrome, Android, and the hardware division become the other company. This should help reduce Google’s current incentive for privacy invasion.

Where are you referring to? In North America, much of the infrastructure wasn’t changed, it was created for the first time to accommodate cars.

So after reading the article, are you editorializing or did Wired change their title? No where does it mention the legality of selling the Sakura in North America. It only mentions that Nissan has not chosen to sell it outside of Japan.

I never understood this one. What kind of course would you be doing that required very expensive paid software, but you didn’t know ahead of time that said software was required. I think the imaginary OP is just an idiot.

There’s always the chance that if you hit a red state hard enough, it might turn purple. That will very much get their attention.

At this rate, scavenging and cobbling together essential items out of trash.

I don’t think this is the shit hitting the fan yet, but the fan has been turned on, and the bean burrito has been eaten.

There’s nothing more true than Occam’s razor. And stupid is by definition simple.

Unfortunately, when you apply Occam’s razor along with the second law of thermodynamics to politics, you end up with the current mess.

It’s an HBO political-comedy talk show. As far as I know, that’s a category of 2. It doesn’t take a conspiracy to see how one would be constantly in the suggestions of the other.

You are underestimating how truly idiotic the corporate world actually is.

I wouldn’t even credit them with that much thought. It’s far more likely that it’s simply “you watched late-night political comedy talk show, so here’s another late night political “comedy” talk show.”

I’m confused. Is it Bill Maher or just the concept of “You may also like” in general that you take exception to?

I don’t think you’d ever have a peripheral power the tv. The use case I’m envisioning is power and data going to the panel via this single connector from a base box that handles AC conversion, as well as input (from Roku etc) and output (to soundbar etc.). Basically standardizing what some displays are already doing with proprietary connectors.

Headroom and safety factor. Current screens may draw 120w, but future screens may draw more, and it is much better to be drawing well under the max rated power.

I think it’s aimed at TVs in general, not computer monitors. Many people mount their TVs to the wall, and having a single cable to run hidden in the wall would be awesome.

If you are burying the waste, you’d be using a mine that is below the impermeable bedrock layer. There would be no leeching at all.

And using the most expensive project on the planet as your reference is disingenuous as best. Most other projects cost less than a third of that.

Additionally, almost no one is ever suggesting that nuclear is a 100% replacement. Most people suggest nuclear baseload with renewables+battery for peaks.