Throw up a cursive CAPTCHA.

Eventually, yes, but you forgot a bunch of steps:

• Hide the information in a tiny little link at the very bottom of the terms and conditions that nobody reads.
• Cap the speed and/or amount of data in a way that makes the service completely unusable for 99% of real-world customers.
• Impose income limits that make the service unavailable for nearly everyone who wants to apply.
• Require such a complex application process that nobody who needs the program can figure out how to use it.

Then, after about three years, they show the government that nobody wanted $20 Internet service, and ask permission to stop providing it. And the CPUC, being an industry lapdog, quickly agrees to whatever Verizon asks for. And *then* they stop providing it.

It probably helps to use a ridesharing platform that doesn't use multiple map providers. If all your map data is from one source, you don't have these problems. It's when you start to mix multiple map providers that things go horribly and irreparably wrong, because the workarounds for one platform don't work on a different platform. Given that we're talking about Waymo, I assume Google Maps is used for everything, so I wouldn't expect those issues to occur. But no way to know without trying it at your specific location.

And note that this will change over time, but your rails can't change over time. This is the peril of rail for intracity transit.

Rails make a lot of sense in ultra-dense areas (think Manhattan, *maybe* downtown SF, but not any of the rest of the Bay Area, etc.), because the roads can't handle even a fraction of the passenger volume.

Rails also make sense for long-distance travel. If you're traveling for several hours, you probably don't want to drive that, so it is worth the inconvenience of not having a car at the other end. Also, if the trains are fast enough for their average speed to exceed the average speed of a car, then after two or three hours, you've probably broken even with the extra travel time required to get to and from those fixed endpoints.

But for the most part, rail *doesn't* make a lot of sense, because they're too much slower than air travel for long distances, and they're too much slower than cars for short distances. If you really want rail to work, we need 250 MPH (minimum) bullet trains from city to city so that they are competitive with airplanes. And provide ample parking at the termini.

Twice per hour makes a transit system borderline useless unless you are traveling for multiple hours. Your average latency is half of that, so that means on average you will waste 15 minutes waiting for every train. That means to break even, even before factoring in the extra time to get to/from the station, you need to save a whopping 15 minutes by using the train. And if you have even one connection, that makes your median latency thirty minutes. When you're wasting half an hour just waiting for the train to arrive, you're not only uncompetitive with driving; you're starting to be uncompetitive with bicycling.

Successful transit systems run avery 3 to 5 minutes during rush hour, and no more than about once every ten minutes late at night or on weekends. If you can't keep trains running at that frequency, you aren't dense enough to need a transit system, and you probably will regret putting one in. You'll end up repeatedly reducing the frequency to keep the trains at high enough occupancy to be worth doing, and then you'll be confused when ridership drops because nobody wants to wait that long for a train, and eventually you'll end up with a massively subsidized waste of taxpayer dollars like VTA.

Yup. We're well past the point where the resulting economies of scale benefit the consumer. In late-stage capitalism, economies of scale benefit the corporation and only the corporation.

Full or at typical capacity? Lots of bus routes around here average a low single-digit number of passengers for much of the route. Even single-passenger cars compare favorably to that. Assuming a diesel bus at an average of 3 MPG, you need a minimum of 15 passengers on average to break even with driving single-passenger hybrids. And that's not factoring in how much dirtier a gallon of diesel fuel is compared with a gallon of gasoline.

Office wall Plinko with push pins.

I was 100% C=64 before I transitioned to Apple ][ before I went IBM-PC DOS, briefly Windows/OS2 Warp, then MacOS, then 100% linux, and added Android later.

(sprinkle in some brief CP/M, BeOS, and NetBSD sidequests)

I'll deal with the shift to the next phone platform OK, I think.

I should probably dust off my Pine64 and try the latest builds again. It's been a few years since they were unusable as a daily driver.

Folks, this might be a huge opportunity if you correctly pick the successor and are the first developers.

Anything that relies on voluntary responses to surveys is going to be unreliable, as it's going to skew towards the kind of people who respond to such surveys.

Most people don't want to waste their time with such things, especially if there's no reward for doing so. A lot of people will also be suspicious and suspect phishing or some other kind of malicious behaviour. They need to find a more reliable way to get information.

I kind of automatically assume that any company that can successfully replace a third of their workforce with AI is not doing anything meaningful. I mean, a company that does nothing but write crappy rehashed product reviews could pull it off, or a company that has no plans to innovate or grow could maybe do it by laying off all the sales/advertising people, but otherwise, it seems like a stretch.

So the question, then, is whether this company is genuinely circling the drain with nothing to lose or just has leadership who have no idea what any of their employees actually do.

Ostensibly, yes, I could. I could even use an ancient Mac Mini with a built-in FireWire port to do that. But at some point, the level of hackiness becomes high enough that you're spending all your time dealing with things not working, and that's almost worse than it not working at all. :-)

M1 Max MacBook Pro. The setup involves a Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter chained to a Thunderbolt 2 to FireWire 800 adapter, which in turn is chained to a FireWire 800 to 400 adapter, which is then connected by a cable to the device. It's dongles all the way down.

Getting Thunderbolt ports isn't the problem; Apple's Thunderbolt-to-FireWire hardware does that, too. Without FireWire device family support in the kernel, FireWire hardware can't be used, period.

I depend on FireWire audio interfaces, so everything from Tahoe on is dead to me for the foreseeable future.

My problem is that I don't do audio recording often enough to justify spending the thousands of dollars it would cost to buy all new hardware, but I do it often enough that I can't upgrade my operating system and lose the capability. It's that really annoying middle ground that Apple really doesn't support well, though to be fair, I've gotten thirteen years out of it after Apple stopped shipping built-in FireWire ports, so I guess that's not too horrible. :-)

I tried getting off of FireWire a long time ago, precisely because I suspected that this would eventually happen. But to keep costs down, my plan was to buy a MOTU LP32 ADAT-to-AVB bridge so that I could keep using 16 inputs from my existing interfaces and supplement that with a MOTU Stage-B16. The problem is, the LP32 has been on permanent back-order for about two years now, with no sign of things improving.

I'm also a late adopter after lots of bad experiences, so I just downloaded Sequoia so that at least I won't be stuck on Sonoma forever. I'm hoping that by the time they stop shipping security updates for Sequoia, either MOTU will have the LP32 available again, someone will have figured out a way to get IOFireWireFamily to build and run on later OSes, or I will have found some other low-cost solution for a large number of inputs. Not holding my breath, though, on any of the above.

I have a macbook pro here, and 2x 4k monitors.
The monitors support both type-c (displayport) and hdmi.
I tried connecting the macbook using hdmi, but it will only do 30hz. If connected via type-c it does 60hz and HDR.
So now i use 2 of my type-c ports to connect the monitors, and have a completely useless hdmi port empty that i can't use for anything else.