Having seen new developers turn AI agents loose on existing code bases several times now, I can tell you that yes, "AI" is "good" at writing up excuses/justifications for what it's doing. However I've also seen in all these cases, the code is just wrong, or it's technically correct, from the basic 100 foundational level, but it's still falling straight past the existing library code and methods to do exactly what it was asked to do, and instead doing the 10-year-old workaround kludge from before that library existed, and writing a BRANDON SANDERSON NOVEL worth of explanations. Usually around pass 3 or 4, depending on how much of my review comments have been fed into the bot and echoed back at me, it might be able to write passable code that's not full of cruft and unnecessary work, then we can move on to the next section of code, or do more reviews because the code it's writing is still doing things in the wrong order or in such a way that it's at best redundant, and at worse, counter productive.

So I guess for those of us who aren't using your mysterious "popular code-writing tool" (How many of those are there now?), the bot-brained drivel we're getting out of the machine is nowhere near production ready. The best we can do now is let the bot distract the bored manager who is vibe-coding the project while stuck in yet another useless meeting.

"stakeholder" in this case means "contributors" and "people who benefit from those contributions" so maintainers and distro developers.

Quite a bit, actually. The RATGDO specifically can notify HomeAssistant every time the door opens, something trips the laser tripwire, the light goes on, the door goes up, stops, goes down, etc. And who said anything about "the cloud"? A RATGDO can report to an on-site HomeAssistant instance and literally nothing hits "the cloud".

So for your limited requirements, an RF control is fine. For those of us who have wider requirements, something like this gives us more visibility into the operations of the garage door, and lets us do automations based on the data it sends. And that's without even trying to control the thing from the RATGDO. And an RF is only control, no response.

With that data in my HomeAssistant instance, I can tell anyone in the house that the garage door just opened, which is most useful when it's dark out. I can also have it tell me if there's movement in the garage, or if the garage door has been open "too long".

No, they didn't. What they did was allow side-loaded apps in Android 12 to not pop-up the stupid install confirmation constantly. Fdroid and the like were able to download and install apps without all the user confirmation.

This looks like a response to the Keep Android Open campaign, which itself is a response to Google's regressive announcement a couple of months ago that they're going to block side-loading in that same version of Android.

When most people talk about this, their "ideal world" scenario for self-driving cars, they envision no one owning a car (How is beyond the scope of the comment) and the only "empty vehicles" are driving to get someone. Their scenarios are: the autonomous vehicle is driving someone somewhere, driving to get someone, or recharging/repairing somewhere. They always skip over everything else.

Why on this forum would I want to do that?

Most consumers can't be bothered to even pick the movie they want. What I initially responded to is not even reasonable for "most consumers" anymore: maintaining a physical media collection.

True, it is, but if just "having the streaming license" was enough, this entire article would never have been written, let alone discussed on Slashdot, so your assertion here, while factually true, is a red herring. Thanks though.

The first time, sure. If one is dedicated to maintaining their own library, then one would be very well served to look into ways to make "ripping and transcoding" trivial. There are several out there, from automated scripts to full-on GUI programs. Yeah, sure, using a program is 'non-trivial', but hardly a barrier.

As for the media server, again there are tons of options. Lots of people use Plex, but for those who want a "private" or "selfhosted" one, Jellyfin has been doing quite well. Set it up once and go. Or if one is extra lazy, just a shared volume and capable player hardware.

Being limited to one working disc drive or physical format seems less convenient to me, but okay.

How in the blue hell is putting a ripped copy on a media server "less convenient" than a disc drive? Pick decent codecs in a non-ancient format and it will run on any modern system.

Ah yes, the halcyon days of early Netflix, when you could logon to one service and see basically everything that's available. I remember those days too, but they are long gone, my friend. Now it's "logon to a service and hope they have whatever it is you're looking for", at $13+ per month, each.

You're going to wait a long time on some things, friend. That is, assuming you're into something that only exists on some obscure also-ran "network", something other than Netflix, Prime, or Disney+.

I remember it as "Animal Farm" though "1984" was probably in there too (My memory is a little fuzzy on the matter, It was like 16 years ago). Amazon went as far as ripping it out of people's Kindles.

It didn't even affect me, but it did put a period on the idea of "buying" anything digital like that. The only digital content I buy is something I can download without "DRM" and keep on my own storage. My kids and some family members think I'm weird and a data hoarder, but I've never lost a purchase.

I tend to agree, e-mail security is actually pretty easy, just not on Microsoft stuff like Windows. If I can look at the headers for any e-mail sent to me, I can tell within about 10 seconds if it's legit or not. However, for some goddamn reason, Outlook makes it impossible to look at e-mail headers. On every other e-mail program I use (Linux, Android, and self-hosted webmail), I can see the entire header block of the e-mail with two clicks or less. On Outlook on Mac, there is no option to view headers that I can find. I can view the entire source of the message, after faffing around for minutes and doing several searches to find the option. And I have to use that option every time I need to see the source of any given message.

In my other e-mail applications, I can inspect links before clicking (Either hover or view info), but in Outlook, not only does it not show me the link at the bottom of the window (A word-wrapped tool-tip popup, brilliant!!), the whole 'safelinks' bullshit that O365 runs everything through (Often twice) makes it nearly impossible to tell what the original URL was. This might help users not step in every single bear trap that lands in their inbox, but from what we've seen here, it doesn't, it also prevents power users like us from protecting ourselves using tools we have everywhere else.

Oh man! Oh man! This is the Pebble Time 2 I wanted, even kickstarted back in 2016. And they're projecting 30-days on a charge! Even my PTS only did 9 days at most! Even though this isn't expected to release till Christmas, I think I've found my next smartwatch!

It's behind a show-you-nothing paywall, so no thanks.

I was curious if it was actually every step of the software lifecycle, or if it was only conception through release, like so many developers think as "lifecycle". Is maintenance (aka the Gen X of software lifecycles) handled? Alas nothing to read without giving up either money or data.

Oh man this is pitiful. I just searched Printables for "philips fixables" and they posted exactly one comb attachment. There are more 3rd-party Philips-compatible attachments than there are official ones.

No wonder they didn't post a link. But for anyone who wants to see, here you go.

Fine, great, some people don't serve files. Others do, and this will break that. Collateral damage and overly-broad blocking are stupid too. In some ways even more stupid, because they won't know what they're doing unless/until someone manages to find a way to complain in a way they'll see.

That is a garbage solution, honestly. It's overly broad and punitive to anyone not using a mainstream browser (e.g. using wget to download a file). And all the bot owners will have to do is pick a non-blocked UA string and they'll be right past your door guard (I've seen this already on some of mine).