ISP Routers are typically locked such that the end user update the firware. And if they could the process is often extremely difficult for even technically minded people.

In some cases the ISP installs very specific software to do other things.

Example: In Australia Telstra issues routers that create and entire second network on the router. Which allows them to setup roaming wifi connections that the ISP subscriber can use. So a subscriber can walk around town and never lose their wifi. As the simply are hoping between routers stashed in homes/business/public access points.

Other companies put software on the routers to implement tracking networks that constantly scan for wifi and bluetooth broadcast identifiers etc. Then they send this data to the mother ship to create air tag like functionality.

So the problem is now bigger. Not only can't you just simple as a user update to OpenWRT, The ISP is often now stuck with the problem of migrating functionality to a complete new device / OS with little time to implement it.

Note ISP's do not retain the Intelectual property any more for these addon services. They claim they do but generally these things are implemented by contractors or vendors and the knowledge of how to actually put it all together is generally lost. So this makes it even harder to migrate to a "US" made router.

And on top of that internent subscribers do not upgrade their routers often. They are used untill they break or are bricked or the subscriber changes provider. This time line is usually well over 5 year time frames.

So moving to OpenWRT is very unlikely on mass. ( I actually run OpenWRT on multiple devices and I'll likely never go back to a vendor supply router software stack again. )

Apple is like many other companies right now especially tech.

The obvious hits like:
oil (base ingredient in a lot of tech.)
mem and storage chips being reserved for AI buildouts. ( Chip runs years in advance are being purchased already. )
Supplier chains also jacking up prices.
Supplly chains having induced delays. Restricting product volumes.
Tarifs in USA and now around the world.

The problem is that all of these actual hits will be converted into margin once these pressures subside. This is when price godging will really kick in.

Net impact is yet another massive hit to inflation globally. It'll take another decade at least for wages to catch up if they ever do.

The upside is that the price of housing will finally flatline or even retreat across the globe. As people are constantly pushed lower on the property / prosperty ladders.

Moving parts is the curse on durability.

Todays phones have 0 moving parts. If you exclude the external buttons for volume and power etc.

Moving parts are point of failure. Moving parts almost always point to a point of dust/liguid intrusion. Moving parts are extensive to build assemble and maintain.

Rollables as designed currently are a mess of moving parts. And in this LG phone case. Motorised moving parts. Which is even worse.

I don't really think you will see a rollable until almost all moving parts are gone. The only way I see them working is if you get a screen that literally rolls up all by itself. No extra casing, mechanisms etc. Just the screen that rolls up into tube around a solid core body. To do this the durability of the screen needs to improve vastly. The structural regidity needs to be a core attribute of the screen not the thing holding the screen.

And to top it all off it has to be cheap. Lets face if a rollable is going to wear out much faster than a modern gorilla glass phone. So replacement cycles are going to be much quicker. People will not shell out $3000 every 6-12 months for a phone. ( I acknowledge the apple cult does have a subset of people that do this. )

When I first started in IT at the Enterprise level many many years ago I use HPUX for developing telephony software. At the time we used HPUX as a Command and control of our systems. It was also used to develop software for the Motorola 68020 switching systems.

HPUX was not actually a multithreaded OS then. It had fake threads implemented with interrupts. This caused us no end of grief at the time. All of these low level hacks to ensure that things didn't lock up. We needed something that could handle real time systems. HPUX was not it. But we made it work.

( Side bar, We did code reviews on paper from dot matrix printers. The printers were always inside sound proofed boxes they were so loud. )

On top of that we had to make our interface work in the god awful CDE UI environment. Meta-Meta hell.

Solaris/SunOS at the time was light years ahead.

Then in the early 2000's the move to RHEL was on. Finally we could make clustered environments with fault tolerance. RHEL may not have been the most stable at the time. But we finally had the tools to build clusters that would blink an eye when a node went down. In the HPUX days, this was a pipe dream. The OS and the tools just didn't exist.

Now things have moved on to the next level of with containers and very light weight Linux based containers. Which is a good thing.

Rewinding the clock. back to those early days. What we were really trying to implement was what we know as containers today. We wanted systems that we could maintain deploying small updates frequently and having zero interruptions. This contained cloud style environments is what we really wanted back then. Of course we didn't know all what was needed to make that happen.

Long story short. I hated HPUX. It was horrible to code for. And the code was simply not portable unless we put in 5x the work.

When using AI to quickly mock up small chunks of code I find it an accelerator. And I do mean small.

But when code scales up simple systems or API's it falls apart pretty quickly. As the scale of the system grows the requirements grow even faster. GDPR, PII, FIRB, NIST, all start to pile up on as code bases grow. AI lacks the understand of the "business" need. So you get this blob of code out and then you have to spend large amounts of time understanding it so you can re-factor it because the AI engine missed the mark by even a small amount.

In addition I find AI code generation lacks the ability to plan for the future. What potential use cases will come up next week, month, year. And this in flexibility means the code base has to be essentially tossed in the bin. It's even worse when you think about the impacts on you dataset. You effectively can't adapt over time. The code effectively is locked because your data set is your business.

Then there is the problem with conforming to standards. AI code simple sucks at this. You'll have 95% conformance and basic testing often comes out totally successful but those 5% edge cases fall apart.

So I find AI useful for doing the drudge work. Even some of the simple logic work. But I rarely let AI work outside of the context of a single function/method. It can be a decent time saver when I keep it simple.

Unfortunately the very platforms that kids use to "chat" are the ones with the most protection tools in place. They may not be very good but most of the platforms have some tools. Kids will simply find a means around the block or migrate on mass to other chat tools as they sprint up. Leaving kids even more exposed than before. And with even less oversight for protection.

Kids move fast. Far faster than their parents.

All this law will do is push kids into more and more unregulated spacex with more and bigger dangers.

This was not the solution. This was a knee jerk reaction to gain votes.

More must be done on the platforms the kids like to use not drive them into the dark alleys of the internet.

SaaS
- For at least the big tech bro companies SaaS is all about them owning your data. Almost impossible to pull it out. The cost of doing so exceeds the ever rising cost of maintaining the service. Over time you ability to even govern your data is eroded as well.

AI
- Well huge risks here. You data isn't even remotely stored in formats that you are used to. The AI model is effectively hardwired to your data over time. If the AI model is replaced or enhanced or what have you and poof. You data can easily be corrupted, changed or lost. Numerous cases of this already.
- Also there is AI delusions. Fake data, bad interpretations, errors, etc.
- Letting AI make decisions for you with out vetting is basically asking for trouble.
- There is no security model for AI as of yet. This is completely uncharted waters here. We haven't even begun to explore the security, privacy, integrity aspects associated with AI systems. You will get burned at somepoint on a security front.

SaaS can be very bad. It takes a strong IT oversite to make sure you don't lose access to your data over time. But there is maturity enough in the industry that this is still possible with effort.

AI is very bad at the moment. It's a very risky proposition with the likelihood of being burned very high. But with risk the payoffs can be huge. I think the prediction of 18 months before this space solidifies is ignores the greater issues surrounding AI.

I don't think we have found the sweet spot for AI tools yet. The whole AI revolution is very young.

1. Cable used to be easy to consume.
2. Then Came pay per view services. Then it became complicated and expensive
3. Response was easy to consumer pirate disks.
4. Streaming service mature and become easy to use. Lots of content It was a good time.
5. New services start up and take control of content that was once centralised. Now we have Lots of marginal but expensive streaming services.
6. Response is to pirate using download or pirate digital streams. It's easy and less expensive again.

The pattern is pretty obvious. Once the greed kicks in and fractures what is a decent experience the response is for people to migrate to something that is a decent experience again. Often it's pirating. Right now all of the content providers are battling it out for your eyeball time. With quality content scattered in turf wars. Pirating just brings those fragmented piles of content back to a single place again.

The studios can flip out all they want. People clearly want a smooth easy experience, with price being part of that equation.

We are already seeing content being rolled into bundles and packaged together. Prime is half way there. One UI to access multiple studios content. How ever they charge a fortune for bundle content so i can't see that working overly well. Netflix is a fraction of what it used to be with content constantly being removed due to rights negotiations.

It's all about the path of least Annoyance.

You ever watch something and the first thing you say when it over is this.

I can't believe I watched the whole thing.

I think this is the first movie where someone was working from home during the shoot. Ice looks like he phoned in literally the whole thing in an afternoon from his bedroom.

And honestly thinking about it now. I don't remember a damn thing about this movie other than seeing Ice's face in a chat window.

It gets a 0 from me simply because I don't have the faintest clue what it was about other than from the title.

If it's to be believed that productivity has sky rocketed because of AI. Then the problem lies with business/government being able to take advantage of that massive boost.

Every advancement in productivity since fire and the wheel has ultimately resulted in jobs expansion with people being able to do more.

The problem here as I see it is that the business have stayed the same. It's just that the effort required to achieve those business goals has plummeted. What hasn't happened yet is businesses capitalising on this and expanding or diversifying. Business are doing the same old thing with just less people doing it. Companies that operate like this will be smothered by younger organisation that maximise the labour pool rather than slashing it.

And with AI really advancing rather rapidly this gap is widening FAST. There is a real opportunity for business to grow at insane speeds.

It's that business still don't know how to efficiently use AI.

NFT is anything.

NFT's remind me of smoke. Try and grab smoke. Nothing there. Your just waving your hand in the air hoping that you grab onto something.

So how can a copy cat NFT be sued when the source NFT is just further smoke? NFT's are just pretending to be something.

You copied my nothing, I'm suing. I'm so angry.

Clear was very promising for awhile. I liked it's numbers and it looked pretty solid.

For me it never actually got to a production environment. Oracle unbreakable managed a few showings in production, ( not my choice ) RHEL in those days smashed everything. CentOS be a close second.

I farted around with clear a lot in my home lab.

However in recent years it's been debian flavours that take the lead. RHEL is completely dead to me. I trust debian flavors more than others won't burn me in the future with a cash grab. It's a matter of time however. The standard Oracle and IBM cash grabs that happen a few years.

( Note I don't speak of container flavours here. )

Two factors come into play.

1. Casual engagement.
2. Overloaded human inputs.

Casual engagement is simple. Illustrated with a phone perfectly. We often stop pull out our phone and egage with it for seconds then put it away. We get what we want then disengage. This is down physically. Glasses to date do not have this, AR VR are all fairly persistent. An acceptable physical queue has not yet been found. TV and Movies claim it a tap to the side of the head.

Overloading our sensor inputs with overlays etc. simply do not work. When we layer on more inputs out attention drifts and it causes issues. This is the precise reason why laws around the world have been put in place around distracted driving. It's why people are making billions with cameras that detect drivers who use their phones.

Additionally VR requires dedicated space and time isolated from other to operate. So it's not going to be a simple glasses interface. It's going to be a immersive visional device. So not glasses.

AR is overloading, it's also still laggy. It's a nightmare of distraction. AR might see some adoption. But not for some time yet. The tech is still probably 2 decades away. It will likely also be limited to dedicated spaces or functions where it can add value.

Also both AR and VR have a limited number of people that can actually use it. A sizeable portion of the population can not adjust to the "lag" and it causes illness. So this limits it's ubiqutiousness something phones do not suffer from.

So no glasses are not going to suddenly be the thing to have. They will fail yet again.

What will finally make it happen. Well actually it's probably real holograms. And we are decades if not centuries away from that tech. As a hologram will take the place of real world objects. something that will not overload our brain inputs. Something that will not induce latency induced nausea.

The thing is a lot of the use case for AR / VR around human productivity etc. are mute. robotics and AI will assume those functions far faster than AR / VR will. AR / VR will be limited to experience roles rather than productivity roles.

Not to mention the abuses of business smashing interfaces with opportunities to advertise. This will almost complete obliterate any value from the interface making it more annoyance than assistance/entertainment.

So no I don't think AR/ VR glasses will be a thing.

You have to start wondering if Trump even knows what the purpose of government is for?

Trump's administration promises reduced energy costs yet tries to kill a program that directly reduces energy costs. You have to wonder what behind closed doors was discussed that prompted this line of action. Who got in his ear and what agenda was behind it.

OR

Was it that he just didn't like the stickers on appliances?

EU is acting fast and smartly on this one.

With Trump openly trying to dictate educational content and regulate what is taught in schools including university it's the perfect time capture top talent.

Add to this Trump's gov is actively deporting students, cancelling funding ( See Harvard funding clash ) and business holding off growth and hiring until this all settles down. You have a talent pool that is willing and in some cases has to migrate to other countries.

I wish Australia would do exactly the same. Put out some talent bait for the uni's.