will never be widely accepted by the majority of the populatioj because it just isn’t what the vast majority of people want. They want communication methods that compliment their real world lives

I don’t think that’s strictly true, but I do think it would require their real world lives to get shockingly worse to increase the appeal of living in a “better” world.

This is usually how you see these kind of things presented in fiction: everyone uses a “metaverse”, but it requires a full on completely society destroying dystopia to also exist to make it sufficiently appealing.

I’d put money on the next round of VR worlds getting a lot more buy-in since you’ve got a generation of kids growing up that are already living mostly online, and a species that seems hell-bent on diving in to a nice authoritarian dystopia, so uh, the next 20 years will probably be real interesting,

There’s other use cases for that.

The immediate one, and applies to my own living room, is that there’s one switch for the lights and it’s in the far back corner by the front door, and like 15 feet and around behind the couch from where you’d enter the living room from the rest of the house.

The smart switch lets me turn the light on and off from the inside of the house without having to navigate the room and cats in the dark either via a voice command, mobile app, and ESP32 button.

Though, and this is the next use case, I really don’t have to do any of those. The smart switch facilitates lots of fun things, and in this case that room has a mmWave occupancy detector that’ll turn the light on and off based on the time of the day and if there’s a human in the room or not. (mmWave stuff is super accurate compared to the older motion detection crap you’ll find in use in that you don’t have to actually be moving, because it’s good enough to determine if a human is in the room motion or not.)

And, of course, since this is the living room and the TV is in there, it’s also tied into the media playback status of the TV to dim the lights when you turn the TV on, turn them off when you start playing a movie, and then turn them back on dimly after you pause, and then slowly increase the brightness over the next 5 minutes if you don’t resume playing the movie (unless everyone leaves the room, at which point it’ll turn the TV and lights off based on the occupancy sensor.)

Also it’s useful for setting a timer: the backyard and front porch lights go on at sunset and off at sunrise, and the controller is smart enough to grab when this is on the internet so it stays accurate and timely year-round.

So yeah, it’s maybe not life-changing by itself, but it’s seriously the backbone of a lot of automation I’ve got in place that simplifies having to even think about or do anything to adjust light levels based on where I am in the house and what I’m doing in the room.

Disclaimer: this was not trivial to setup, the components required to make it are not off-the-shelf and require electronics and soldering knowledge and you have to understand the ESP32 ecosystem and how to modify code and deploy them to do what you want. It also then requires you to configure all of this in HomeAssistant, and in my case, requires yet another piece of software (NodeRed) and a ton of webhooks to make everything cooperate and work. It’s not trivial, it’s not for everyone, and it’s not a product most people could build on their own, so I don’t entirely disagree that a switch by itself is life-changing, but if there was a proper ecosystem around them where you could do this shit I think more than a few people would hop in.

If only they made smart switches you could use, perhaps?

100% agree that smart bulbs are incredibly stupid and you should go with a switch if you want to smartify shit.

Well no, it’s not enormous, but Amazon is selling a couple million ring doorbells a year, and a couple million more of their cameras.

It’s a sufficiently large market to hop into, especially if you can make a product that’s easier to deal with from an ecosystem perspective than the incumbents, which isn’t something I’d ever bet against Apple managing to pull off.

Hopefully the Mastodon devs are paying attention to the features that bsky has that they don’t, and actually copy them rather than sit there and tell everyone that no, they’re wrong they don’t want that feature.

I want to like Mastodon (or any platforms that are federated with them and trying very hard to be them) but they’re utter and total lack of interest in and development of features the community keeps asking for is going to keep it a niche option for weirdos while people keep hopping into corpo social platform after corpo social platform.

The biggest problem for smart homes for people who aren’t enormous nerds is that nothing works together with each other in a simple, coordinated way.

And, of course, one of Apple’s biggest strengths is that they’ve built a cohesive ecosystem that, usually, works just fine with limited fiddling.

Right now you’ve either got 14 apps for different shit, or you’ve built something like Home Assistant to try to glue together all this garbage into a coherent solution. I’ve gone that route, and it works mostly, usually, typically, fine-ish.

It’s a shit experience, still, because it’s a pile of random plugins and code from random people glued into something that can’t stop fucking with existing and working features and thus is perpetually in need of updates and maintenance and fiddling.

I wouldn’t bet against Apple being able to make a doorbell, security cameras, light switches, and a thermostat and then turning that into something that actually works properly in homekit, is kept updated, and is easy to configure and use and secure.

That’s really the missing piece that nobody seems to have been interested or willing to go after.

ArchiveBox is great.

I’m big into retro computing and general old electronics shit, and I archive everything I come across that’s useful.

I just assume anything and everything on some old dude’s blog about a 30 year old whatever is subject to vanishing at any moment, and if it was useful once, it’ll be useful again later probably so fuck it, make a copy of everything.

Not like storage is expensive, anyway.

It is mostly professional/office use where this make sense. I’ve implemented this (well, a similar thing that does the same thing) for clients that want versioning and compliance.

I’ve worked with/for a lot of places that keep everything because disks are cheap enough that they’ve decided it’s better to have a copy of every git version than not have one and need it some day.

Or places that have compliance reasons to have to keep copies of every email, document, spreadsheet, picture and so on. You’ll almost never touch “old” data, but you have to hold on to it for a decade somewhere.

It’s basically cold storage that can immediately pull the data into a fast cache if/when someone needs the older data, but otherwise it just sits there forever on a slow drive.

Nobody thought it was possible, says man who led project because he thought he could make it possible.

Also, this looks like quantum entanglement which is a thing that’s hardly a new concept and/or considered impossible, so uh, dude needs to get out of clickbait mode and ship a working example instead.

Well, I fully expect him to step on his dick, but I did not expect him to also kick himself in the balls while doing so.

Congrats Matt, rarely are my expectations of dumb behavior exceeded so spectacularly!

Here’s a crazy idea: make the CAPTCHAs so complicated humans can’t complete them.

That way if someone does, you know they’re a bot.

I should probably patent that or something. (Is joke, etc.)

…depends what your use pattern is, but I doubt you’d enjoy it.

The problem is the cached data will be fast, but the uncached will, well, be on a hard drive.

If you have enough cached space to keep your OS and your used data on it, it’s great, but if you have enough disk space to keep your OS and used data on it, why are you doing this in the first place?

If you don’t have enough cache drive to keep your commonly used data on it, then it’s going to absolutely perform worse than just buying another SSD.

So I guess if this is ‘I keep my whole steam library installed, but only play 3 games at a time’ kinda usecase, it’ll probably work fine.

For everything else, eh, I probably wouldn’t.

Edit: a good usecase for this is more the ‘I have 800TB of data, but 99% of it is historical and the daily working set of it is just a couple hundred gigs’ on a NAS type thing.

I’ll admit to having no opinion on windowing systems.

If the distro ships with X, I use X, and if it ships with Wayland, I use Wayland.

I’d honestly probably not be able tell you which systems I’ve been using use one or the other, and that’s a good thing: if you can’t tell, then it probably doesn’t matter anymore.

One thing you probably need to figure out first: how are the dgpu and igpu connected to each other, and then which ports are connected to which gpu.

Everyone does funky shit with this, and you’ll sometimes have dgpus that require the igpu to do anything, or cases where the internal panel is only hooked up to the igpu (or only the dgpu), and the hdmi and display port and so on can be any damn thing.

So uh, before you get too deep in planning what gets which gpu, you probably need to see if the outputs you need support what you want to do.

I’m sure an AI babysitter won’t be immediately and utterly broken and bypassed by every single kid in these “classes”.

(Seriously: we’re talking about 8-12 year olds here and the absolutely are smart enough and incentivized to break the ever-loving crap out of this stupid idea.)

I’d seriously consider unifi gear, like the other comments seem to have also suggested.

The only thing you don’t get is ethernet drops out of the APs or anything like that, but the UAPs in a mesh configuraiton could proabbly do everything you want, unless you have a shockingly large piece of property.

underestimate how much work Mozilla does in standards and low-level shared API’s via w3c

Oh, I didn’t mean to disparage the work they do: I know it’s important and extensive. I’ve been a Firefox user since, well, it was called Netscape. It’s a critical piece of software.

I was mostly just rolling my eyes at the sheer panic they’re having with the only funding source they’ve bothered to cultivate going away, along with the fact that a good portion of that money is spent on things that aren’t the browser, and frankly, don’t bring a lot of value to the table or matter in the slightest.

Dumping the Corporation baggage and making the Foundation strongly independent makes a lot more sense than begging to let Google keep paying them, which seems to be their approach, at least based on that open letter.

These drives aren’t for people who care how much they cost, they’re for people who have a server with 16 drive bays and need to double the amount of storage they had in them.

(Enterprise gear is neat: it doesn’t matter what it costs, someone will pay whatever you ask because someone somewhere desperately needs to replace 16tb drives with 32tb ones.)

But the article says they used Yahoo once! (When, I assume, Yahoo outbid Google.)

I agree we need an independent browser, but right now Firefox is about as independent as my cat, and they’re both a bit deluded into thinking that’s not the case.

The first thing that I have to ask: do we need Firefox-the-business providing Firefox-the-browser, or are they just dragging around a lot of Google-induced baggage that’s otherwise worthless.

I have a strong feeling on that one, but hey.

What’s your budget?

A $200 budget is going to get you VERY different options than a $1000 budget, especially since you’re wanting to connect multiple buildings.