Like many other people, I dumped the Sonos ecosystem when they started killing support for their hardware I owned and still actively used. Even with their "trade in offers" to upgrade? It made no sense, when the new speaker or interface wasn't going to sound any better than the one I already owned.

I felt like the brand was nearly irrelevant in today's world where practically every audio device supports Bluetooth connections and everything has mobile apps.

But Sonos is right about this idea/realization: They're really not a "speaker company" (at least, not one of any consequence). What they really have to offer really is an "audio operating system". How well that works out for them depends on how well they design it. But at least there's some potential buy-in for me here.

If you can make it co-exist on top of everything else i use, like streaming audio from a Mac's Music library via AirPlay or my wife wanting to send music from her phone or tablet to either the soundbar on our living room TV or alternately to her little Sony bluetooth speaker? It starts to make some sense. It's great if it makes any and all Sonos branded hardware super easy to configure and use, but should also allow managing everything else under the same roof.

I suppose the question is if AI companies can really 'do their nonsense', as a big chunk of the assumed value is the ability for the AI to displace IP generation.

I feel like I've read a bunch of them had pivoted already. I recall one audio interview that had the guy point blank declare his pivot. They were all people and companies I never had heard of before.

Lots of posts here bashing this product while I bet exactly none of them have tried using one yet.

No argument Dyson makes a lot of high-dollar products that just attempt to be a little better/different than the norm -- and won't impress people who are always looking only for the lowest cost solution.

But I have yet to really use anything Dyson branded I thought was a bad/dysfunctional product. I owned the orange Dyson ball vacuum cleaner, many years ago, when it had only existed for a short time. It was 4x-5x more expensive than a typical Hoover or Eureka upright vacuum from a discount or department store. But I got a good 12-13 years or so of use out of it, before selling it to someone else. I remember when I first got it, thinking it felt "too plastic-y" with plastic hoses and attachments and levers. Wasn't confident it wouldn't just crack/break on me. But it never did, and my only real complaint with it was the ball design prevented getting the vacuum under the coffee table. (Obviously, switching to one of the suction attachments let you get around that.)

I feel like at $500, I don't want to be the first guy trying one of these out. But if early adopters decide it really works, and isn't too slow at sensing where gaps are between your teeth while brushing with it - I would consider buying one on sale and giving it a shot.

You know outside walls also have outlets.

Battery is a separate and optional concern, sounds like they largely expect these to be grid-tied.

So no particularly significant problems, though some folks may misunderstand how much a kilowatt of peak solar will give them in a given month, but it'll probably be cheap enough to be worth it.

Contracts. The user agreement must have a clause allowing these fines.

Let me quote your post back to you:

âoeOnly wimps use tape backup. REAL men just upload their important stuff on ftp and let the rest of the world mirror it.â
â Linus Torvalds

I can't help wondering what Gabe's real opinion on this leak might be. There is probably a lot of stuff in the leak that Valve cannot legally publish.

More like 'neutral', Cursor is by no means the only path to vibe code and OpenAI's models are by no means the only models (in fact, generally viewed poorly in those circles). So OpenAI making it harder for Cursor users won't make a dent in the general scheme of things.

From an economic standpoint, you absolutely have to count training as a facet. If everyone cuts back on scale up, then nvidia, memory vendors, and various other players in that space take a hit. Maybe a troubled AI company can cut out its capex by pausing training, but the downstream impact still is in the broader market.

But even the capex exposure may be hard to shake, given how much debt and purchasing commitments are in play.

Doing it in software means you can move CPUs from one machine to another based on the time of day. Your CI infrastructure can lose some resources from its UI at night and make another server for nightly builds when most of your users are away, without either having a VM layer in between or needing the builds to happen on a kernel configured with the features needed by the UI.

The Spanish call it "Canal de la Mancha" which is much closer to the French name, as do most other european countries.
In scandinavian countries it's called the english channel but in their respective languages, eg "Engelska kanalen" in Sweden.

He could have called it Lake Trump...

News Teslas have lithium ion 12 batteries.

To sum up, I broadly agree that one way or the other, much more sane and modest equipment will supersede the absurd designs of the bleeding edge high end GPU designs as they exist today. Beyond the facets you mention, they are fickle beasts to get working right with how they are designed hardware wise.

The push for concentrating in datacenters will continue, because there's much more money to be had to hold any facet of compute hostage for subscription revenue. See Microsoft Office, no need for that to be subscription only, and yet Office increasingly pushes the subscription model and diminishes the perpetual licenses.