I should have said his channel, not network.

I can understand the allure of this, but it's ghoulish and creepy at the same time. The parents & network have might as well have built an animatronic and paid an actor to put words in the mouth of a dead person for all the difference it makes.

Because having customers directly order a car from the manufacturer means through an official website gives them an anticompetitive advantage. Not only are cars more expensive, but things like loans, registration fees, servicing, trade-ins, insurance, parts, repairs etc become more expensive. And it's not like dealers can fight back because Rivian (or Ford / Tesla / Toyota) can drown them out. That has already happened for Tesla and is becoming a precedent.

As much as people despise dealers, they offer competition and value that would disappear if people are just buying their cars directly from the manufacturer. The easiest way to mitigate is require the manufacturer's website to show prices of similar vehicles across nearby dealers. And to do so in a way that a consumer can make an informed choice. It doesn't stop them still clicking "order" from the manufacturer, but if they know there is the same / similar car for sale up the road for $5000 less then they may choose that instead.

Rivian should be allowed to sell cars direct to users but be required to support agency / franchise dealers in the real world. And their website should list stock from dealers within a radius and allow a customer to ask for an "offer" to undercut the website price. i.e. Rivian get to sell direct but they still have to compete for business.

The Switch 2 pricing was announced well after Trump was elected, and undoubtedly included *some* additional markup for tariff increases from the get go, since he had been talking about tariffs the whole campaign, even if it has been a continual game of roulette trying to predict the *exact* tariffs. So it makes sense that the Switch 1 prices would be more sensitive to the tariffs than the Switch 2.

Just pay to have do CG in moderation within the norms of what the human brain & eyes expect, i.e. no "impossible" camera shots, physics defying action etc. I'm sure it adds a small % to the overall cost of the production for actual people to do this work but the payoff is in the end product. OR get "vibe" artists to describe a scene to an AI and watch as it shits out something absolutely terrible that neither the artist nor the director can finesse into something remotely acceptable.

While ChromeOS has its own issues, I really don't know why anyone would want a version of Windows that can't run the majority of Windows software. Basically there are about 80 pieces of software it runs and that's yer lot. I'm not surprised it failed hard.

Like trains for example. You know, the sort of mass transit you actually need to move lots of people between popular destinations.

And nobody has claimed any different. If code works and is stable then there is little justification to rewrite it. However if code is due for a rewrite or doesn't exist at all then why not write in a language that is not vulnerable to the problems that plague C.

You could write safe C too if you want to. You could write safe assembly too if you want to. Unfortunately real world code is replete with errors caused directly by C++ language issues. And even if someone might strive to write safe C++ the compiler doesn't give a damn if it is or not. It might compile because it's safe. It might compile despite being unsafe. Forgot to lock that resource properly before accessing it from two threads? Storing a reference to something deleted elsewhere? LOL C++ doesn't care. Perhaps that is why there is an extremely lucrative after market of static analysis tools because the language sucks.

It doesn't promise "perfect memory safety". What it does offer is a compiler that strictly enforces ownership and borrowing and will fail with a useful error message rather than allow the error to crash your code at runtime. Any programmer worth their salt would appreciate catching issues early on than suffering the consequences later.

But maybe you love it when your code has some random crash and it takes you hours or days to discover what the cause is especially when it was a pissed off customer who first found it. Ah but you write safe code so that never happens to you and if it never happens to you it must never happen at all right?

The AI slop is not what interests these companies. What interests them is how they can monetize people. While Apple & Facebook have different models I expect both want to use AI to spy on what the user does and then push products, services, and ads on their users and scrape a % for doing so.

Putin airlines, aka aeroflot is grounded by a cyberattack that destroyed pretty much their entire computer network. I will not be surprised if the CEO takes an unexpected flight in the next few days.

They probably don't think it's a mistake but it is. Operating a cloud costs a lot of money and they're pushing a lot of traffic through it with no financial reward. Then on top of that people lose their shit when Bambu tried to improve the security and broke some 3rd party apps. The outrage and the operating expense would be way less if it wasn't the default so less people were affected.

They would have been better off defaulting to LAN, but offering cloud for people who really wanted it. Maybe they could even have charged a $ amount for it, or bundled it up in some kind of subscription service that included some tangible benefits like free / discount filaments & parts, print farm analytics and other stuff.

As for the mobile app, cloud shouldn't be necessary but I assume they thought the phone and printer could be apart on different networks so they used MQTT or some other pub sub bridge to send messages between the printer and app.

It also sounds at best a surefire way to see your reputation and sales tank and at worst, be illegal (and also see your reputation and sales tank). It's corporate suicide and while I realise the company was the target of a buyout, presumably the buyer wants to maximize value, not see it crumble to dust.

So a saner course of action would be: "hey we can't continue to support cloud unless you pay us but we're leave LAN functionality alone". Even better: "hey we can't continue to support cloud unless you pay us, but here are the APIs if you want explore your own choices". Even better: "And we'll put the boot loader keys and sources in escrow just in case we have to shut services down entirely".

You can run Bambu printers in LAN only mode and IMO that should be the default. Bambu made the mistake of forcing WAN and then later they security hardened their APIs & service and broke 3rd party compatibility which angered a lot of people. I don't think its unreasonable to protect their cloud service but it was unreasonable not provide 3rd party APIs, or make cloud the default to begin with. The only thing cloud adds is the mobile app and some network flexibility (e.g. printer and computer on separate networks). But if you don't need that you're better off switching the printer to LAN mode.