Based on what? What makes something wrong or right in production providing the toolkit works and exists to allow it to be widely adopted and mass produced, and the end goal of the device is achieved?

Exactly. About the only thing that matters for "in production" is "meets requirements", whatever those may be. It's pretty rare that one of those is "squeeze the maximum possible performance out of a single-cycle multi-hundred MHz MCU". Sure for mass, low cost consumer products, it's worth pending a lot to save 10 cents on the MCU but it isn't for most of us.

I've seen similar complaints before: "Arduino has no place in production,

I've seen that too. I now point them to Finder PLC. It' an industrial unit that is basically an arduino with relays etc in a nice box.

Dude.

Back in the 80s I was running basic on a machine with a tenth of the RAM and less than a thousandth of the computing power. It did not "confound the learning process". These days I also often use the Arduino environment because the performance is adequate for me needs and so it's a waste of time to slog through the datasheet and do it all by hand.

Who cares if they are a bit different from python? I don't write C++ on an MCU in the same way I'm writing it on the server because I'm writing very different things.

This really sounds like nerd snobbery to me. Modern microcontrollers are so ludicrously powerful now many people dipping into them won't need to scratch the surface of the performance on offer. And that's ok.

Does it matter of it's true or not? Other countries will take it as licence to deploy their own weapons, or to paint the US as the bad guy.

It's possible: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Flickering might work just as well, or better. Less energy and heat needed, and might screw up exposure or auto levelling. I have not tried it.

The problem is that if you walk around in public with a high brightness IR LED on your head, sooner or later some minimum wage security goon is going to notice their camera is blinded and get upset.

And besides we already solved the baseline problem. A bit of demand shaping, some short term storage, some interconnects.

The old model of the grid is going away rapidly.

I've seen plenty of Python used in production... My question though is that I've found Python can be quite heavy on memory bandwidth, doing a lot of copying and transforming data so it can be processed. I guess that is less of an issue with embedded, but is it still an issue?

The costs of nuclear are addressed all the time.

The problem is the nuke fanbois either ignore the costs or hand-wave them away: "Nuclear is only expensive because of protests and regulations. Next time will be different. Blah, blah, blah."

Even without considering the costs of waste and accidents, nuclear costs four times as much as wind or solar and has a 20-year lead time.

Tens of thousands of barrels of toxic waste were dumped near Catalina Island, but the vast majority are non-radioactive chemical waste.

DDT leaking from the barrels is a much bigger problem than nuclear waste and shows up in the local sea lion population.

Anyway, there's nothing realistic that we can do about it since any attempt to retrieve the barrels will likely make things worse.

However, it's because I believe many great consumer technology leaps were driven by porn: photography, home video, the internet, the smart phone, etc.

The smartphone??

I mean it was convincingly invented, if not widely used by IBM in 1993. It was made to look very impressive (albeit wired) in the late 90s by Olivetti. And of course PDAs approaching from the other end being more computer and less data. J2ME phones came out which were a pile of shit. Maybe you could get a shit game on them. I don't really know if Blackberries count: they were messaging first but did they have any generality beyond that? There was of course the legendary N900, and some impressive (for the time) yet deeply wonky Symbian devices.Then in 2007, Apple came out with a rather good dumbphone which was turned into a smartphone by Cydia, which Apple then got in on the game a year later (which is a bit weird if you think about it).

None of those were porn. It was all about connectivity and messaging and nerdy shit especially businessnerd shit (except the N900 which was real nerd shit). Then fashion, then just plain old usefulness.

I mean that's not to say people don't watch porn on a phone on a plane (shit head in 23A knows what I'm talking about you utter wanker, but not in that case literally thank god), but I don't there's a convincing case that porn had a significant role. Pocket computers were obviously useful, even more so with a data connection, and people had been trying to get them working for years before it finally took off.

Is this true for animated films too?

Yes.

What about hybrid live action and animated?

Yes.

Animated films that are CGI based rather than hand drawn/painted?

Yes.

Hand drawn that are computer "painted"?

Yes.

20%, but it's only when loading very large images that are scaled down for display. And when you zoom in on them, it has to decode them again.

The PDF viewer isn't really a gain, it just pre-loads it like the bad old days of Internet Explore pre-loading itself on every boot.

Punches very obviously not connecting suggests it's been trained on Hollywood fight scenes. The other giveaway is rapid hard cuts and shaky camera so you can't see how badly the punches are not connecting. Everything feels weightless and fake.

There is a lot of AI slop, but I wouldn't discount it being able to do something decent with the right person at the helm.

Most entertainment has always been slop, this is nothing new at all. A decade ago it was reality TV, before that it was gameshows and daytime soap operas.

The interesting story here is how this demonstrates the basic different in attitude between the US and China when it comes to new technology. In the US the established players are very concerned that new tech will affect their business model, so they try to hold it back as much as possible. In China it gets embraced and there is a rush to adopt it.

In the hard sciences, one usually is happy about advancements, not about keeping it secret until one publishes oneself.

Haha, no.

If you don't publish papers, you don't get a job and so you won't be doing hard science anymore due to an imperative to eat and find shelter. So no, no one is happy if someone takes their mostly complete results and scoops them to publication. It's also why that's widely regarded as what's technically known as a "dick move".

Seeing some very negative prices in the mid west (I think that's the right term) states too. Not even free electricity, people are being paid to use it.

Can you get a tariff that pays you to use energy in the US? Here in Europe we have some, and if you play the game right with a home battery your energy can be pretty much free.