What's a good alternative though? Being able to launch Android apps directly as long as WSA is running in the background is useful. Instead of having a launcher like Bluestacks or Gameloop.
Using OBS show what the webcams are capturing spreading then into multiple scenes and automatically transition between them. For example you can have 5 scenes showing 4 different webcams. You can set OBS to show the result on an external display, this means that your customers don't have to interact with the computer to check the webcam.
Scene 1: 4 webcams in a grid
Scene 2: webcam A
Scene 3: webcam B
Scene 4: webcam C
Scene 5: webcam D
For having a test gaming setup
You can set the pc in kiosk mode. So it can only use select apps.
This feature can be found in Windows 10 (excluding Home ver.) and on the Dev channel on Windows 11. Alternatively there's probably a FOSS alternative out there.
Due to brexit it's not the EU but youtuber Max Fosh did that for content.
Aiming for some form of government recognition, in his case it was wearing a silly (religious) hat for his profile picture accepted in his driver's license.
They will supposedly release a 4TB 990 Pro model sometime this year, but they are probably waiting to work out the kinks in the models that have already been released.
4TB models are expensive anyways, so it's not like the competitors have many options to choose from in that regard either. Most companies still figure people would rather go for HDDs or 2.5" SSDs for mass storage.
"Hailing from Japan" ... Your team may have ordered this product from CoolingLab, a Japanese vendor, but Bykski is a Chinese company based in and operating out of China. If you take 20 seconds to find their company website, it clearly states "Dongguan Jiazixing Hardware Products Co., Ltd. was established in 2008, and it owns the computer water-cooling brand Bykski. The factory is located in Zhangmutou Town, Dongguan City, Guangdong Province, China." I expect better from LTT...
https://www.bykski.com/
I agree that it's likely that it's a Chinese manufacturer masquerading as a Japanese product due to the font being used. It is common to find Chinese only characters used in place of Japanese. Subtle differences. The strap is marketed as a health device and not for static discharge.
I can give two examples. First (left) would be the green text in the front
チタソ＆グルマネツクレス
which should say
チタン＆ゲルマニウムネックレス
The other example (right) would be the title in the back of the packaging
负ィォン
which should say
負イオン
I agree that it's likely that it's a Chinese manufacturer masquerading as a Japanese product due to the font being used. It is common to find Chinese only characters used in place of Japanese. Subtle differences. The strap is marketed as a health device and not for static discharge.
I can give two examples. First (left) would be the green text in the front
チタソ＆グルマネツクレス
which should say
チタン＆ゲルマニウムネックレス
The other example (right) would be the title in the back of the packaging
负ィォン
which should say
負イオン
I agree that it's likely that it's a Chinese manufacturer masquerading as a Japanese product due to the font being used. It is common to find Chinese only characters used in place of Japanese. Subtle differences. The strap is marketed as a health device and not for static discharge.
I can give two examples. First (left) would be the green text in the front
チタソ＆グルマネツクレス
which should say
チタン＆ゲルマニウムネックレス
The other example (right) would be the title in the back of the packaging
负ィォン
which should say
負イオン
I would not want the cartridge to be writeable, because that just leads to the inevitable "oops, I erased the game cart because I ejected when it was writing"
NAND flash sucks when it comes to electrical survivability. In an ideal situation they would have required a SD card of a specific performance spec to be inserted into the console in order to enable "play from sdcard", when an appropriate performance card is found, it will then make a copy of the game to the SD card, and download whatever patches to the game from the cloud (eg Mario Kart 8) and only use the card's presence in the same way a "cd must be in the tray" of PC games. Basically it just checks the checksums on the card every time the game boots.
That said, back to the point. These companies suck, and it's been up to collectable-pirates (eg ones that buy things just to collect and dump them) to keep legacy consoles alive by making those files available to emulator developers to develop.
Do you really think ANYBODY owns a vintage arcade cabinet? The odd person owns one or two, but the majority own zero. Do you think MAME has any purpose other than to play out-of-production Arcade games? Does Nintendo lose any money if you play the original arcade version of Mario Brothers or Donkey Kong? No. That machine was shipped to an arcade and that was the last they saw of it. For all intents, the pirated ROM's people use on MAME are all out-of-print arcade machines, and if you were to play them on youtube/twitch, you are doing so at your own personal risk.
By the time these games will be in the public domain, no working hardware will exist, and neither will anyone with the skill to reverse engineer them. That's why the pirate copies are basically the "time capsule" . Sure, maybe that's not going to result in a perfect re-creation 50 years down the line when nobody born has the opportunity to play the real arcade machine.
A case-in-point example of this, is how many games were designed for CRT displays. CRT's are already impossible to get in any viable shape. You pretty much need people who experienced the CRT and have played the original arcade machine to go "yes/no, that is accurate". Yet, go look on youtube and see how many times you run into games being emulated in the wrong aspect ratio or color mode, so they end up washed out, squished or too dark (Even the Switch, WiiU and Wii emulates some games wrong, and they end up too dark because they were intended to be 1976 NTSC colorspace, not HDMI rec 709 used in HDMI/HD televisions.) Remember, sRGB is only like 72% of NTSC. Of course it looks wrong. There is no way to make it look correct, and the closest is rec.2020 (aka 4K UHD.)
Anyway, the point still stands. Nintendo sucks at preserving games, providing paths to play older games customers already have, and steals away games by closing the e-shop. They do not permit you to make a backup, and you can not make a usable backup in most cases anyway. If your Wii/WiiU/Switch dies, it takes the internal memory with it, and if there are no replacement consoles on eBay, well sucks to be you who spent money on games digitally.
wire gauge BARELY matters and when it does matter it's over longer distances.
I'm going to assume you've got non-defective cabling that is thicker than a hair.
Don't worry about wires until you've done the following:
0. have NOT BAD speakers. Much higher end than what you have
1. positioned speakers precisely and angled them directly at ear level of the listening position
2. implemented sound absorption at the first reflection points
3. have MULTIPLE subwoofers
4. bought a calibration microphone
5. applied room correction software/eq
All of those things are hundreds or thousands of times more important. I'm not exaggerating.
50/50. Not every webadmin have the best intent and the biggest pocket, and not every user have the most pristine internet infrastructure and conforming ISP, thats why everyone in this thread is saying to eliminate the server as possible part of the issue by trying to download similarly large files on other sites, with graphics card driver like @Agall mentioned being a pretty good test. Its benign, safely sourced (unless something very fucked just happened and the servers are compromised) and its sufficiently big enough for the downloads to rev up. Other good ones are OS images, either Microsoft with Windows, or Linux, usually either Ubuntu or Raspbian.
Linus, I'm going to post some resources because I recognize that both as a Canadian, Amazon's monopolistic powers may be felt less for you. Additionally, given you high rate of involvement along with other staff in accessing "alternative options", you my not be as familiar with the factors surrounding Amazon and what constitutes Monopoly powers—Oligopoly/Monopolu because, let's face it, not everyone geeked out in Microeconomics and then deep dived so long and hard that they came out the other side.
Remember my previous comments about "economic rent" regarding Adobe and other firms that are seeking to profit without producing anything? If not, I don't blame you—you probably read a lot of comments. That said, economic rent and economic control over markets (we can refer to it as monopoly powers for simplicity) are factors in understanding what constitutes Monopoly.
A firm can be a monopoly without necessarily having 100% control over a market. Yes, some firms, such as De Beers, the UK/Dutch, South African Diamond Mining firm have, historically been textbook examples (or exemplars) or Classical Monopoly where a firm has effectively total control over a market. Likewise, other firms such as the historic Big Three Cereal manufacturers (Kellogg, General Mills, and Post) are used in Microeconomics textbooks (and have for decades) as examples of Oligopolies, or markets controlled by effectively a limited handful of firms (basically, most markets today due to Private-Public collusion, and the hijacking of classical economics, political economy, and antitrust legal theory by rentiers and monopolists starting most prominently in the 1970s) who can exert economic power and price power when they collude (most recently, like the meat packing industry, or something you might be far more familiar with in the tech sphere—the "price fixing" class action lawsuits against memory manufacturers for economic collusion—where a small cabal of firms collude to fix the price of particular commodities at the expense of the society or globe—something we, collectively, deam harmful harmful and usurious, or rather, seeking to extract a form of economic rent from the general public through their power to control the price of goods throughout the marketplace).
Microsoft, for all intents and purposes, remained an effective monopoly in the operating system market, as did Intel in terms of General Central Processing Unit sales. AMD was like the sweet little kid they kept around to keep the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) from ruling them a monopoly (well, assuming the FTC did it's job under the laws as written and under the law/economic theory as classically understood). For over a decade, Intel could have crushed AMD with their pricing power and monopolistic control over the CPU marketplaces. By the early 2000s, this was especially true. Intel, had they not been limited by anticompetitive practices had the manufacturing and market capacity to pull a John D. Rockefeller, Sr.—either sell your firm to us or we'll crush you in business. There's a scene from the HBO series, The Guilded Age, that does a remarkable job expressing this sort of situation where one of the characters, the head of a large trust, threatens to build a railroad line directly next to a preexisting one just to ruin the other railroad. Not because it was an "efficient use of capital", but because by crushing his competition, he'd set an example, demonstrating that if someone tries to compete with him/his firm, fails to sell or obey, he would destroy them, all so that he could gain monopoly powers and thus be able to enact economic rent upon the masses, or more specifically, the market, artificially raising the price curve and forcing people to pay his demanded rates because he was the only game in town/only option.
This last bit is where I want to draw our attention—you mentioned that people have "other options", but in many cases, at least, in the US, this is not true. Oh, it may not be universally true, but because of ease, convenience, dominance, availability, and other factors (including Amazon's own actions on their very platform), Amazon throughout much of the E-Commerce marketplace is, effectively, a monopoly. And Amazon has acted with intention to make sure their market share in general E-Commerce continues to solidify.
Now, you used Apple, Inc.'s platform as a model for "a monopoly", and yes—given how Apple chooses to control (effectively, lock the frack down) its mobile devices (particularly, its mobile phone infrastructure), the Apple Apps Store acts effectively as a "Classical Monopoly" (similar to our previous example, De Beers). Google, Inc., on the other hand, because the Android OS, in theory/in principle, enables its customers to use alternative marketplaces or to directly install custom applications via Sideloading or custom app installs (those lovely little .APK files), one could argue that Google's Play Store, unlike Apple's Apps Store, is not a monopoly.
However, the world is not as simple as all that and there are more than one type of Monopoly. Google, while not necessarily a "monopoly" in the classical sense, is, however, an effective monopoly (as in, it is effectively a monopoly by way of the means by which is exerts power over market forces, limits access to competition, is synonymous with e-commerce [at least, in the US], and through the shear quantity of the relative E-Commerce marketplace that Amazon, Inc. controls). By sophisticated means, it, like numerous other firms in other markets, have found ways to hedge in consumers such that, in particular on their own platform, but also throughout the markets in general, Amazon has set itself up as effectively, the only game in town.
Did you know that the vast majority of people who search for products don't even bother with regular web searches, but go straight to Amazon?¹
This "straight to Amazon", and in particular, PRIME's free, 2-Day shipping, is what helped turn Amazon effectively into a monopoly (it is also why the United States Postal Service started hiring people outside of their traditional methods, and doing so in such a way that was highly exploitative in order to subsidize Amazon's shipping fees). Initially, Amazon contained themselves to books, where they effectively became a monopoly², exerting massive economic power over the global book marketplaces and forcing most independent booksellers, particularly, used booksellers, to use their platform or risk going out of business because of a lack of traffic as people moved from brick-and-morter store purchasing to online sales because of the far lower costs associated with online direct sales (if you only have to pay for the upkeep of a website and warehouse, with enough volume and purchasing power, a firm could quite readily undercut their competition [much like what I previously have said about Intel being able to dump a ton of chips onto the marketplace, historically, at a moments notice, much like De Beers could with diamonds, and through the flood of commodities, crash the commodity's market price, thereby putting their competition out of business³]).
It's for these reasons (amongst numerous other related and unrelated factors), as well as Amazon management's/Bezos' continuous efforts to build a monopoly (vertical or otherwise) that it is reasonable to define Amazon as a monopoly.
Furthermore, and I know I'm getting way into the weeds here, the whole dialogue around "What constitutes a monopoly?", "What constitutes anticompetitive practices?", and "What should governments, in particular, the US Government, deem as 'dangerous' anticompetitive practices that should justify the breaking up and limiting of firms from acquisition of their competitive or their expansion into other markets?" (For this later issue of expanding into other markets, specifically, horizontal monopoly, where a firm has control over a vast swath of an economy; they might not hold vertical dominance, but they may, like Amazon, effectively control vast swaths of a particular economy or market whereby they are capable of exerting effective control over the marketplace, taking pricing power away from consumers, distorting market equalibrium on the supply demand curve, and ultimately threatening the integrity of the societies in which they may participate.) is relevant here because of a vast and intentional shift in antitrust legal theory that occured during the latter half of the 20th century.
You may (or may not) be family with a candidate for the Supreme Court that the Reagan administration put forward for the US Supreme Court, Robert Bork. But, in regards to the undermining of antitrust laws and the hijacking of consumer pricing power, we can thank (or hate) Bork for his "contributions" to the mass consolidation and finance capitalist dystopian hellscape that is (arguably) our present reality.
In fact, I highly recommend you (and your staff writers/researchers) check out an article written by the US's current FTC chair, Lina Khan, "Amazon's Antitrust Paradox"⁴ for calling attention to the destructive powers Bork's theories cause the global world (and in particular, the US markets).
I'm going to throw in some other articles, but I highly recommend you check out the videos by the US Organization, More Perfect Union, and their YouTube channel for videos concerning this and other related issues.⁵
I recognize this is effectively a research paper on "Why Linus Sebastian Is Wrong—Amazon Is A Monopoly." that I just spent the last two and a half hours writing on my phone, but damnit! This stuff is important! And, as technology journalists, even if Canadian ones, this economics and legal theory stuff is super relevant to regular people and I suspect the LTT viewership, even if they wouldn't necessarily take the time to read all of this. And, no, I have no idea if anyone will take the time to read it from LTT. All I can do is post this to y'all's website in the hopes that the information has some potential impact. Even if it doesn't necessarily impact Linus' opinions, it might (and that's a BIG might) go so far as to provide some additional context that folks might not necessarily be familiar with who don't frequent the sort of deep dive ADHD political economy holes that I do.
Well, in any event. Assuming this actually posts and doesn't get deleted because I WROTE A FRIGGING ESSAY/REPORT on WHY LINUS SEBASTIAN IS WRONG and thereby exceed some predetermined character limit. Hopefully, this analysis helps or proves useful to your future journalism exploits!
Cheers folks!
TheDragonLord
PS. Feel free to reference anything if it does prove useful. You can email me for questions at christopher.vanderwallbrown@gmail.com
References:
1. I'll need to lookup the studies if you want references. I heard this statistic as part of a group representing Midwestern Farmers, seeking to break up Amazon and make its marketplace a government regulated "utility" or "public infrastructure" whereby, it, like say Canada's Power Utilities, are strictly regulated and held accountable by special boards to limit the power they hold over the marketplace because of how important their services are. It's just that in Canada's case (to my understanding), instead of say regulating private firms to run their own, private, nuclear fission reactors, Canada chose to have these as publicly owned utilities, which is why y'all have order of magnitude safer reactors than the US. [Just a little ADHD side tangent for the scientifically inclined.]
2. https://www.bookweb.org/sites/default/files/diy/American Booksellers Association 2020 Amazon White Paper_0.pdf
3. The reason Intel could have done this is because of their economies of scale. They could produce far larger quantities of CPUs than AMD historically, even when AMD was still in control of and doing its own fabrication (before the spinoff of the fab side of the business by let's say the "finance capitalists" into Global Foundries). By holding all that market power, Intel could have flooded the market with redonculously cheap CPUs that, even if AMD's were technically superior (at least, as for a time that I'm sure you remember at the turn of the 21st century, they were), Intel's pricing power could have bankrupted AMD because enough consumers (unless some outside variables like people seeing what Intel was doing and boycotted them by only buying AMD—something that I supported at the time precisely because Intel was a monopoly) would have chosen the vastly lower price over the somewhat more technically superior product. Intel also had more cash on hand to pull off this anticompetitive practice.
You may recall the commodity's market for oil crashing during the last decade when oil prices tanked because OPEC (specifically, Saudi Arabia) attempted to put (the largely Canadian) shake oil firms out of business by not reducing production, thereby crashing the per barrel price for crude. This in turn caused the price of gasoline at the pump to divebomb into prices not seen in many consumer's lifetime. I heard that prices dropped at one point below 50¢ per barrel, and due to contract preordering of crude and gasoline, firms couldn't even give away their crude and were having to pay people to take it off their hands because they were trapped in contracted purchase orders of a predetermined number of units per month and would face far more expense breeching their contracts than they would paying people to take the crude off their hands.
While this aforementioned situation didn't last forever (nor were the House of Saud able to accomplish their stated objective of crushing the North American shale oil business), it does make for an excellent case study in monopoly powers, commodity price fixing, and the attempts by firms in capitalism to seek monopoly powers. (Ironically, the term "capitalism" itself actually refers historically to people [monopolists] who seek to use capital to obtain monopolist powers and control markets whereby thlse powers enable them to enact economic rents upon those markets. And we all know how much harm economic rent causes.)
4. Lina M. Khan, Amazon's Antitrust Paradox, 126 Yale L. J. 710 (2017). https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/e.710.Khan.805_zuvfyyeh.pdf
e.710.Khan.805_zuvfyyeh.pdf
e.710.Khan.805_zuvfyyeh.pdf Collusion to Control a Powerful Customer_ Amazon E-Books and An.pdf 45-CfDS-Case-Study-Is-Amazon-a-Monopoly.pdf
There's also the issue about the radiation causing bit-flips. You would have to have all the equipment effectively hardened against space...especially given that it's supposed to be for a backup having a bit flipped or corruption is out of the question but that means actively checking for random flips (which I'd imagine happens a lot more). Even in the ISS if you close your eyes you would see the occasional flicker of light as the radiation goes through your eyelids and triggering the perception of light; I'd imagine the radiation on the moon would be more so.
I totally agree with your sentiment, if you needed it on the moon you would have to be planning for some pretty big disaster. It's a good headliner, but practically it's worthless technology.
The way I also look at it, Falcon 9 costs $67 mill for commercial flights and carries 5,500kg to GTO...or $12,181/kg (This is GTO as well, so you would actually get less mass to the moon). That's going to get expensive very quickly, especially considering one would have to have solar panels, and batteries to make sure it remains online. For the price, it would be more worthwhile just renting out cabinet space in a datacenter at multiple points across the globe.
Well yeah, I mean I'm skeptical about a butterfly causing a hurricane, or whatever. But I don't think it takes a great deal of imagination (or logic) to see the obvious consequences of cause and effect. I wouldn't be overly worried about causing our extinction, if I travelled back. But I'd be very worried about messing up my own life (missing that job opportunity, meeting that relationship, etc).
I said earlier that I wouldn't do it, just due to the sheer grind of reliving all those days over again. But if there are no rules about cheating the system, and I could become rich, I think I'd most certainly do it lol. 10 years works though, because my daughter is 11. I wouldn't go further than that for anything though.
The thing about the butterfly effect you described is that it is essentially a fabrication of pop culture. The original butterfly effect was used by a meteorologist to describe his research in weather prediction and has nothing to do with time traveling and things like that.
Anyway I would try why not who knows could be pretty fun being Bitcoin billionaire 😄 .
Discord also was able to displace Mumble/TeamSpeak etc. as it was very easy to setup. You didn't need dedicated hardware / money because the business model was different.
Discord also was able to displace Mumble/TeamSpeak etc. as it was very easy to setup. You didn't need dedicated hardware / money because the business model was different.
Discord also was able to displace Mumble/TeamSpeak etc. as it was very easy to setup. You didn't need dedicated hardware / money because the business model was different.
Discord also was able to displace Mumble/TeamSpeak etc. as it was very easy to setup. You didn't need dedicated hardware / money because the business model was different.
mononymous got a reaction from Issac Zachary in Microsoft is "sunsetting" (aka, killing) Windows Subsystem for Android.
mononymous got a reaction from MMK21 in Any preview webcam program I could use?
mononymous got a reaction from Lord Szechenyi in How do I start a religion in the E.U?
.png "Funny")
mononymous got a reaction from BLKBRDSR71 in The SCAM of Wireless ESD Straps Feat. ElectroBOOM
mononymous got a reaction from dogwitch in The SCAM of Wireless ESD Straps Feat. ElectroBOOM
mononymous got a reaction from Mysteryions in The SCAM of Wireless ESD Straps Feat. ElectroBOOM
mononymous got a reaction from Mark Kaine in Offplanet backup anyone? Startup seeks to build a data center on the Moon!
mononymous got a reaction from Blqckqut in I’m breaking one of my biggest rules..
mononymous got a reaction from nekollx in I’m breaking one of my biggest rules..
mononymous got a reaction from Needfuldoer in I’m breaking one of my biggest rules..
mononymous got a reaction from SaperPL in I’m breaking one of my biggest rules..
.png "Funny"){kind=small}
