Jump to content

GhostRoadieBL

Member
  • Posts

    1,734
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GhostRoadieBL

  1. That's what I was thinking too, I was able to find another post on HP forums about the printer and pc pinging each other thousands of times a second when on wifi to imitate a usb connection (very janky way to do status checks) The solution was them uninstalling the HP software from the computers on the network since it was the cause of the non-stop status messaging. That's my next step if the usage hasn't changed tomorrow.
  2. first image is the past week's worth of network traffic. second is today's alone. It's multiple times more traffic than the rest of my network combined. The amount of uploading is the biggest concern since I only print a few times a month, there should be no or next to no traffic on this device. after seeing this, I've gone ahead and blocked all traffic to it through my router so it's currently LAN only and I'll be checking in on it in another week to see if the upload is still this high. Even the down traffic is excessive compared to the single (few kb) file I sent to it this week. It is on wifi but WTF HP? A hundred gigs a week is obscene. anyone have ideas on what this could be? I'm thinking it's calling home and updating the status thousands of times a day or is live telemetry of what the printer is doing but that would only be confirmed if the data throughput goes down now that I've blocked it from outside services. Very confusing how a printer uses more data than streaming videos most days. --------------------NEW UPDATE!------------------------------------------------------------ blocking the printer from outside traffic did nothing to change the network traffic to and from the printer. This at least confirms the transfers were internal LAN traffic and not dumping data outside to the web. Removing HP software from all the computers did nothing to the traffic either. Now it's just a USB printer on a share and the traffic is fully cleaned up. Best guess is whenever the printer was on wifi, it would constantly status call each system on the network over and over thousands of times per cycle even when nothing was being printed and the systems were responding to the pings or status calls giving the printer a combined higher traffic than the individual systems. Very dumb rabbit hole to go down for the sake of reducing unnecessary network traffic. HP should really fix their old drivers to only status call once per minute or only when an outgoing data stream from a computer is sent, since there's spool up time anyway when the printer is idle, noone will notice a 30sec delay in a print job transfer anyway.
  3. From a monopolistic perspective of apple, this makes a lot of sense. AR headset for the 'want to look rich' posturers and industry professionals, the former who will have cloud everything making these a glorified iphone. The latter who want it for real work being tethered with real processing and storage or have a very specific use case like site previews or AR virtual workspace requirements where they have support hardware making these a replacement for $3k worth of ultrawide or multiple screens.
  4. when you can't figure out how to make it faster, make it slower to keep shoveling out models for the marketing team longer. Waiting for the 2025 model with "wow look at the 5% improvement compared to the last model!" Between this and the Dell/Alienware announcement it's looking like major players in the industry are taking a generation performance hit leading into the expected world recession before pushing the numbers back up in the next or next after that generation. Imagine if they just skipped a generation giving their teams an extra year to make things even more polished? I think I'm just tired of the single digit % improvements when you know a company like Framework is swinging for the fences whenever a "new" model comes out. (mainboard upgrades aren't "new models" just upgraded parts) Wish other companies would get on the modular bandwagon. Let me just swap the mainboard, there aren't even that many changes between generations. Not like these companies NEED to shuffle the ports every year. How many laptops have 2-3xUSB-C ports, an HDMI, a Headphone jack and a microSD (should be full size) in similar enough locations to swap between companies? same vents at the back and a pair of fans in the bottom, it's effectively standardized but just different enough to force you to use one brand's entire system. This is where port and ribbon cable standardization between generations and companies would make so much more sense! Let me have a Dell screen and keyboard with an ASUS mainboard/cooling. Somehow this works fine for desktops, why can't my keyboard and monitor have drivers from one company and the IO and WIFI come from someone else? Companies can still make their complete systems, just use standardized pin layouts and chassis mounting points. If it's too much trouble to keep the ports the same just swap the bottom cover and mainboard as an assembly, keep the old battery, screen, keyboard, trackpad and replace the bottom half.
  5. $65 isn't enough to replace the battery, this is such a slap on the wrist for a company like Apple. Not even a speeding ticket when it's only for approved claims if you heard about this and signed up for a claim. Better punishment would be having apple replace the device with a current model. Hit them where it hurts in their current product stack so the practice actually has a consequence. Prove to me the iphone didn't have more than $65 margin so this is something meaningful.
  6. There's a minimal but noted nuance to knowing there's a camera on the front of your phone with a lens and not knowing there's a camera in a mirror. I am under the assumption to not trust companies's motives and continue to be right about not trusting companies to be honest about what they are doing with data, images, video streams etc. Perfect example is eufy. You know there's a camera but they claimed and continue to claim it's private and secure when it clearly isn't. And I agree that this is possible now, making it more mainstream and even more obscured from detection isn't a good thing. Do you want stores taking video of you as you walk by to put your face in their ads? I don't, I don't believe they have any legitimate use for this tech outside of already toxic advertising profiling so it shouldn't exist.
  7. Summary Zeiss announced their 'Multi-functional Smart Glass' tech, which claims to float "holographic" and AR content on transparent surfaces. Applications for this type of tech is extremely broad including vehicle heads up displays, control elements in smart homes, and (most troubling) transparent video cameras inside panes of glass. The tech was first announced in 2019, then announced it's move to automotive applications at IAA Mobility 2023, and Zeiss is now pushing the wider mass adoption of the tech. At the IAA Mobility event Zeiss displayed augmented reality HUDs for cars which seem to be becoming more common in newer vehicles displaying speed and navigation information. Quotes One more interesting use of the glass is a tech called holocam which uses coupling, decoupling and light guiding elements within the polymer film to divert light to concealed sensors. (translation: the polymer can redirect some of the light hitting the glass towards a sensor) This can be used for everything from gathering environmental data, directing sunlight to solar panels for power gathering windows, displaying floating touch elements for buttons and access points, to reproducing an image by using an image sensor. However the IAA 2023 image reproduction demo was limited to monochrome as seen below. Zeiss has stated they are not looking to market finished products but act as a system provider to OEMs. (OPINION* likely to allow those OEMs to take on the legal and ethical choices of embedding invisible cameras into transparent objects and how they are going to be used) My thoughts HUDs - awesome! safer driving and essential info for the driver without taking their eyes off the road is usually a good idea. invisible cameras embedded into glass objects like mirrors, windows and even picture frame glass or shop windows is Minority Report scary for surveillance tech. There's already issues with AirBNBs having hidden cameras, what's stopping this tech from being added to a mirror? or into your smartphone to surveil your screen at all times? I'm classifying this as a pandora's box tech which should probably be put back on a shelf and not given to OEMs. Sources https://newatlas.com/technology/zeiss-multifunctional-smart-glass-ces-2024/ https://www.zeiss.com/oem-solutions/products-solutions/multifunctional-smart-glass.html https://www.zeiss.com/corporate/en/about-zeiss/present/newsroom/press-releases/2019/multifunctional-smart-glass.html https://www.iaa-mobility.com/en/newsroom/news/future-technology/zeiss-hologram-technology
  8. This has to be the 1000th+ time I've read about a company changing the wording of a contract after a period of time. When will governments start enforcing the contracts can't be single party changed? Their new inability to provide service or their faulty business models are not my problem, if they can't make enough money from the subscriptions (which, based on the profits and c-suite bonusses, isn't even true) it's not my responsibility to pay more for less so they can pad their pockets. new sign-ups sure, make a new value proposal, but a contract was signed based on the state of the platform when it was signed, not some imaginary future position where they are paid more and you get a worse end of the deal. Hoist the colours, bleed their accounts until they learn to behave like adults.
  9. for this year's black friday/cyber monday stream (assuming there is one) compare last year's sale price to this year and you are only allowed to spec a PC on parts which are better priced this year compared to last year.
  10. that's more about ownership by possession of an object or item rather than ownership in the contract sense. The publisher pays content creators (sometimes) for the right to sell copies of the content for the purpose of profit. The publisher then advertises, creates copies or reproduces the content to provide it to the consumer. (this absolutely constitutes them being paid for the service) However, this is only due to the publisher having a large enough audience or reach for the publisher to make a profit on the creator's creation. I'm most familiar with book publishing so this is the standard process for most published authors using a publishing company. This actually changed when Kindle and E-books became the more popular medium. Amazon pays almost nothing to Kindle authors regardless of what the e-book is sold for and often puts books on kindle ultimate for even less payouts to authors. This has been common in the physical book publishers as well with most authors making 5-10% in royalties, before publishers take their 85% cut and add fees or additional costs for traveling to signings/readings/sending copies to reviewers. I would put the more accurate profit at 2-5% or under a dollar going to the author per book sold. e-books are a better margin at 25% but the e-books are often sold for <$5 so it's a bit more but no real difference and much worse when Amazon puts your book on sale without telling you. (valve has been caught doing this with games too) This is where the problem shows up, is the author's work worth 2% of the payment from the book or is the only reason the publisher exists is because they can extort authors by being the only way to reach a larger audience? This is why publishers exclusively want people to purchase new copies from them instead of having a second hand market. They make no profit from the second hand items, traded or self published works. The second hand market has been almost eliminated for most product categories by the hands of publishers; Movies, Music, Games, Cars (subscribe for heated seats/battery capacity) all have locks or methods in place for you to never be able to sell or give away the product you paid for exclusively to force people to buy new and remove the possibility of resale. The publisher already got paid for their effort on the initial sale, and the publisher didn't even create the content they're scalping to customers, why should scalpers receive payments for things they no longer own after the initial sale? This is a classic chicken and egg problem with a giant caveat. If someone makes something with the expectation of profit and the price/quality and availability attract customers, they will make the profit expected. If someone makes something and customers exclusively steal the product to the point the business folds, the business owner has not created a profitable product and failed to provide enough value to the customers who 'stole' the product. The business didn't value the product correctly to attract a payment. That's the chicken and egg problem, customers will only pay for something they deem valuable, value is currently dictated by the company (apparently) in response to consumer choices. I'd like to see Apple and Nvidia explain that theory by how their products are priced up with no value added. Neither of these is accurate for the commonly pirated industries though since it's rare to pirate a physical product. In reality, a movie studio pays $20 million for a movie while cutting pay for actors, writers, grips, camera operators, and everyone except the few headline actors and dumps the majority of the payment into advertising the film. Then they turn around and make $100million in profit for the studio and executives without sharing a penny with the people who created the movie. This is the problem with the "value" of the product, you could price movies at 1/5th the ticket price and still cover the cost of the film, make it 1/4 the price and still make a tidy profit while providing a more attractive value to the consumer. Best example is IronMan (>$750million profit for the theater and physical media sales from a $180million all in cost, not even counting merchandising profit) could have made every future Marvel movie free to attend at theaters and Disney would have still turned a profit from concessions, toys, paid appearances, theme park tie ins, blu-ray sales and Disney+ subscriptions. Explain the 'value' calculation when the profits vastly outrun the costs and the company doesn't adjust accordingly. Toxic capitalism causes piracy by degrading the value of products compared to the profits earned. I would never even consider pirating from a company pocketing 10% profit, even 20% but 400%? that's a tough sell for a company worried about "profits don't materialize".
  11. just my 2c but if a publisher intends to no longer host content/remove content/change versions/stop manufacturing/selling purchasable copies of software,games,videos etc and doesn't provide the ability to 'buy a copy', there can be an argument for 'piracy' by the commonly used definition. Take some of the Atari or arcade games, how do you play any of these now when the vast majority are from companies which don't even exist anymore? Those companies no longer sell the games, no service or 'normal' method exists to obtain a copy even if you have the hardware/software to run them (except some on abandonware sites). Take the original Nintendo game library, Nintendo will never make a single penny from making obscure or third party games playable on the latest console. The company has made it very clear they have no interest in allowing players to continue playing games after Nintendo decides your paid for copy is no longer profitable for their company (ie Wii and WiiU digital stores). This is the clearest argument for piracy I have ever heard. Wait for Switch 2.0 to remove backwards compatibility and Nintendo shuts down cloud save servers. Even the recent CS-GO to CS2 "update" is one of the most obvious oversteps from a gaming company. 'Sorry, you can't play that game you enjoy because we say so. We know the new one is buggy but sucks to be you' there is no way to play CS-GO even locally as a LAN party title. This is the same with many MMOs or multiplayer games over the years which just had servers shut off, sure you paid for a game and you have a copy but it doesn't matter without the online handshake to run. This is the same as Disney's "vault" artificially creating scarcity to push up prices for old content only to bring it back when there's a lull in the release schedule. This has been done for decades and will become more common on streaming services where the subscription you pay for can have any amount of the content removed without your consent. Imagine a company repossessing your DVD library because they don't want you watching it anymore (or don't want you to watch the version you want ie StarWars or Blade Runner or LOTR) If I pay for something, I own it. Taking it away without consent is theft by every definition. If I apply the same logic to pay for a service based specifically on the content provided by the service on the date I subscribed, taking that content away is same as repossessing a DVD collection and removes value from the service. Since I'm not allowed to pay less due to the service not providing the content I signed up for, the other option is get the content I paid for another way. If the service increased the value of their service by adding more content, I'm open to paying more, but this isn't the case with Netflix/Disney+/HBO and all the rest of them who are more than willing to continue to remove more than they add while charging more (without consent from subscribers to approve the increased charges) Fix the company practices and you'll fix piracy, each of these companies profits are above most countries' GDP and yet they are the first to charge more. It's honestly getting to the point of piracy being justified as a form of protest against toxic business practices.
  12. You can always opt-in to features. I run windows 10 without cortana because I have no want for the program but I had to find a workaround to remove a 'feature' added long after windows 10 was created. There's nothing stopping a window to pop up with the optional features to try and have the user select which ones they want. This actually cleans up the development process where resources can be divided based on the majority wants rather than shot in the dark 'everyone wants this because we told them so' features. Software as a service also works better with this model IMO. The company can let users use the software they are paying for with as many or as few functions as they originally signed up for, when you want more features you can opt-in for more but don't force them on people who want a familiar program without any new junk which hide the fact companies only want your data and you are paying them monthly to sell the digital you for profits.
  13. It's definitely unpopular with many companies but most people don't seem to care. *Companies should not be able to alter terms after a user signs onto a service. New users, new terms but those terms hold as long as the user uses the service* ie Alphabet/YouTube, Microsoft, all streaming companies, and many car companies are enacting policies retroactively and choosing to change privacy/policies after their user base increases to a profitable volume of accounts. This is all happening without user consent to the changes and the policies would never hold up in other industries. Imagine a plumber showing up after a job weeks later to install a camera because 'their policy changed and continued use of a serviced bathroom requires a camera, you can only choose to stop using the room to avoid the camera'.
  14. I don't mind park assist or lane keeping, auto - drive functions being paid extras (assuming they are continuously updated) but the moment the feature is out of development and no longer receives updates, your customers have already paid for the feature and shouldn't continue paying. I treat it like an MMO(without the operation cost of servers obviously), keep developing it, keep adding features and perks and people should pay for your time. Stop adding features or stop production, you've been paid so time to stop charging people for something you're not working on.
  15. GhostRoadieBL

    Beer

    Might be good to start with Short Drink-It first to test the audience before jumping into a full production length upload schedule. Sit down, crack it open, and thoughts on the spot Labs testing with the atmosphere and anechoic chambers, robotic arm opening to measure cap or tab force/consistency.
  16. The vast majority of the mistakes were also missed by 99.999% of viewers and if it didn't actually effect the overall recommendation it doesn't really bother me. I'm comparing this type of unintentional mistake to intentionally misleading charts we all see from every single manufacturer when they release a product. People like you are vilifying a youtube channel for getting some charts wrong but praise another channel for cherry picking their mistakes. Who, let's not forget, uses single samples of pre-built computers to slam companies and often makes the same corrections to videos and charts as LMG does. If you watch GN's first video on this and then 'news' follow-up it becomes clear there is a preferred narrative focus on trying to take-down LMG (mostly) for their charts and information inaccuracies. That's the premise, "people shouldn't use LMG for information" and "LMG is directly misleading people" which implies that people's only source of information comes from LMG for them to be mislead. As if people are incapable of doing research or watching more than a single channel's content before spending on the newest gadget. It's insulting. Edit: as a point of reference, LTT main channel alone has 6500 videos. Their collective library must be over 10-12k when adding the rest of the channels and floatplane extras. So a few errors are going to happen.
  17. I've mostly been taking job reposts and public available data (ie LMG team members page history) as a metric of turnover, since it's a private company there's no public accounting for gaines and lost employees, along with minimal public info from former employees (disgruntled rage posts/got fired posts) When a company has a problem or is burning bridges with it's employees regularly, you do hear about it.
  18. Having watched the job listings for years (more out of curiosity than job hunting), there is a very very small amount of turnover for such a high paced pressured company. Average turnover for tech and media companies is 12.9% annually yet LMG seems to be stable and growing. There must be something about working there which keeps people there and even when employees leave it's quiet and rarely heard about.
  19. Being a human myself, I actually sympathize with the position LMG has been put in. Any chance I'd stop watching daily? Nope. Any chance I'd stop buying 'merch'? considering the clothes and water bottles I have purchased are leagues better than what I can get locally for 3x the price, I guess I'm just a sucker for quality. The whole GN calling out a handful of times LMG has made errors out of thousands of videos thing rings hollow for me as a fan of both channels. That type of thing is possible on any channel including GN. Does that change my opinion of either channels' overall content accuracy and quality? Nope, and GN attempting to set the precedent of LMG being the sole information source, while being in the same industry, is manipulative and caused me to lose more respect for GN than I expected.
  20. is it the same for AMD? looked like Nvidia 4090 founders on the b-roll bench can't you just use the Nvidia control panel to set browsers and non-games to run on the iGPU or turn off hardware acceleration in the browser so it's using the overhead available on your CPU? there are likely ways around this to help bring back fps lost to less optimized set-ups.
  21. Sometimes older is better, if the phone doesn't have gps it's more effort to triangulate. It's the same idea as floppy disks being more secure than usb drives, who has a floppy drive kicking around?
  22. still going to hang onto win10 for a few more years, win 11 still doesn't give me any reason trust Microsoft and linux is getting better but still not quite there for ease of use and compatibility with software I typically use.
  23. Oh good, another dead on announce power connection standard making more walled gardens and limiting customer choice. Any word on 12v only motherboards? Didn't see any recently. AMD with Nvidia's firestarter connection? Nope, reversed motherboard connectors are interesting but have yet to go mainstream despite being multiple generations old ideas. This looks like another way to limit people from building so I'm against it. Don't screw with what works if it means walling off your products from the rest of the industry standards.
  24. I guess the big question I have is Ryujinx PS5 version next? It has the cpu/gpu power, programming will be an epic pain if not impossible but a screen that size with solid control inputs would make the PS5 attractive when you could play switch and PS5 games. Seems like the only way to get back at the monopolies and walled gardens.
  25. This may be unpopular but I prefer a few walls between 7zip, rar and windows, nothing really needed to change when the programs are effectively free. By making native support the creators of the normally used software get nothing for all the effort making the file types standard and easy. Also, who thought it is a good idea adding bing to openai but only with pathetic subscription based programs (looking at you adobe) which only have long histories pushing for sales instead of quality features or keeping anything useful paywalled? It's going to be the same issue as ads have become in bing-chat, people I know are starting to leave the platform since they can't trust suggestions as being unfiltered. Adding ads only eroded the usefulness of the platform making some prompts as useless at online product lists.
×