God dammit! STOP calling these things "cars!" THEY ARE NOT CARS!! etc.

Cars have two wheels and are pulled by horses.

https://romanvehicles.weebly.c...

Since Trump has "done more for NATO than any person since its founding" then "NATO should do something for the United States".

Honoring the only invocation of article 5 wasn't enough to even be remembered apparently. So I guess expell them?

Ah, the end of computing again.

4k is pretty shite for VR. The equivalent of my 4k monitor at a comfortable 1.5 m distance in a VR display 10 mm from my eyeball is... a lot more ks. Per eye. So that'll occupy us for a while. By then we'll probably be looking for some other senses too.

Not to mention that none of this is happening on your "individual computi" but rather on some giant pile of video cards that Google is still probably losing money renting to you for $250 a month.

Teams comes with Microsoft stuff and most organizations have Microsoft stuff. Possibly depending on where you are, many of the more security minded will just require you use Teams because they don't want to think about it. Most of the hospitals I've worked with currently do this, for example. One used something called BlueJeans that thankfully finally died and they switched to Teams.

The EU just has to produce a reasonable alternative and require that anybody associated with the government needs to use it (which is what the US does). Or they could require that anybody dealing with EU citizens' data needs to avoid products that transmit or store data outside the EU, which is arguably already the case but has special conditions because European alternatives don't exist.

You can still use Zoom for that annoying family holiday chat or beers with your remote buddies. Nobody cares about that. They're worried about Airbus and Dassault or von der Leyen - Merz meetings being spied on by the Americans (keep in mind the US has already done this) or the ability of German, Dane and English logistics to coordinate if Iceland gets invaded.

Just to add to what Sique said, you can always implement it the same way as a central server solution would: everyone sends their video to the person with the fastest connection and they send the mixed stream out.

You can do better (with peer to peer, not with a server) by considering the participants as a graph and figuring out the ideal set of connections. That's the "minimal spanning tree." Graph theory is very broadly useful so people have figured out a lot of very good algorithms for working with them.

Here's somebody's thesis I randomly found on the Internet if you're that interested:

https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/di...

that will only cost these countries a fortune

Video chat programs are practically a Hello World example. There are a bazillion of them, most of which are defunct because nobody wants to install half a dozen of the things.

I expect the EU and maybe more of the non-US world will get together and provide a critical base for a non-US one. We can hope it will kill Teams.

A NAT doesn't stop you from doing peer to peer. Both Teams and Zoom use peer to peer connections for 1 to 1 video. If you can do that then you can do multiparticipant conferences too, as WhatsApp, Bittorrent and a bunch of others do.

Converting air and water into fuel has been studied by navies for quite a while. The US navy in particular would like to be able to use some of their excess nuclear power to fuel their airplanes in the middle of an unfriendly ocean.

There's also a demonstration plant in Squamish, Canada that's been running for a decade. It's a potentially useful process for aviation and maybe some remote places where you have to us fuel for some reason.

It's interesting this company has managed to build a compact unit, but that's about all.

The summary is wrong. His PhD is in neoclassical social theory from the social science department of Goethe University. Here's his thesis:

https://d-nb.info/966060652/34

He apparently insisted on writing it in German even though he didn't have to.

Ask a coworker. You'll look like an idiot for about thirty seconds then they'll forget it ever happened. When you find out, repeat it three times immediately and again fifteen minutes later.

That's pretty much what all (well managed) companies do. It's certainly what the shareholders do.

Corporations came into existence because of pirates and coffee swilling Dutchmen.

So are we moving to a brick wireless hub in our pocket ("phone") that connects to parts of our body so we never have to worry about taking it out or sitting on the screen?

It's not a bad idea. Wireless lets you put the computing brick somewhere convenient and put lighter sensors and displays where they need to be. The watches are probably useful for certain people. My mother puts her phone in her purse where she can't hear or feel it. A watch solves that problem. I think the real reason lots of people get them though is that they stick a heart rate and other sensors where they can measure things.

They just want to figure out what the next killer product is. Smartphones succeeded like nothing ever has. Watches did okay. Glasses turned out to be too hard, at least for now. Pins are easy, but kind of useless.

I would be very surprised if Apple actually released one. "Working on" or "developing" means somebody thought they should check out the idea just in case there was something to it.

Sure you could make something like that. Do you trust that the other guy's also doesn't store images?

You could also learn to say "hi, I'm sorry I'm terrible with names."