We got my daughter a Yoto and it's a great device. She sticks a card in and it plays music or an audiobook. There's a "screen" but it's a low resolution pixel grid that shows pixel art of the current track.

We use luuni which is similar (except that it also enable choose your own story with audiobooks). Even then, we limit it because otherwise he would want to listen to it every time before sleeping (and it prevents him from sleeping)

O'Brien didn't say this, the article is about Ronny Chieng.

Thanks for the correction, but I'm going to leave my original post alone even if I could still edit it.

I've no more use for Ronny Chieng's ideas as to what I should do with my life than I would Conan O'Brien's or Eric Schmidt's. Let them live their own lives according to their own ideas.

I mean to do the same, as I've done for decades.

My Mom (70s, retired special ed teacher) got the family on Signal and it's a breeze to do video calls or send pictures/messages to people.

They occasionally have a donation popup but it's one of the easiest and least intrusive programs I've ever used, and it just works.

The "normie" market doesn't pay for enterprise features though. They might cost more in inference then they make back from advertising.

But right now we have games that you have purchased for a one-time price, the developer revokes your ability to play it years later, and you have no recourse.

Why would you be entitled to infinite support? For a game with an online component? Why does the game's purchase price extend to infinity instead of "for as long as the developer supports the game"?

You aren't entitled to infinite support. You are entitled to keep using the thing you paid money for. If the publisher can't support the online service, they're obliged to make the game still playable by either releasing server code or offline modes.

If you sell a product for money, you don't then get to later take the product away and keep the money.

You still can sell X months access, if that's what you plainly state is being bought.

I don't think you could sell "for as long as the developer supports the game" specifically, since that'd be an illusory promise (no actual obligation if the product can be revoked immediately), making the contract unenforceable and the customer entitled to restitution (a refund).

"infinite support" is pretty much just "leave the customer with the product they bought working". There doesn't need to be any ongoing costs.

Increasingly it seems like the fact that the game needs support for online components was invented in order to give it an expiry time.

Gamers simply don't have the impression that they're getting value from the "support," rather than getting shafted come end of life.

It's not endless support but more "Don't stop me from playing the game". For example, win xp is no longer supported. You can still use it.

For a lot of games the current situation is essentially the same as "The OS is no longer profitable enough, so the developer prevents you from using it"

I don't think Uber was doing $1 trillion in infrastructure spend.

Are you sleeping in the back while the Tesla drives? Until you feel comfortable doing so, its stuck in the eternal 90%.

It doesn’t have to be completely unsupervised for the driver to realize huge improvements in quality of life. I don’t even notice when people drive slow or cut me off. I’m just relaxing, fiddling with the music or talking to my family. And managing two toddlers is a lot easier when my brain doesn’t have to run a constant background job.

I do hope that unsupervised comes soon though. The tech is there, or at least far enough that I consider it better than my own driving. The hurdle is regulatory now.

If you're distracted and not actively monitoring an SAE Level 2 autonomous system then you're a hazard to yourself and others. Don't do that. You need to be ready to actively intervene with zero advance notice.

You're technically correct of course, but the fact of the matter is every driver gets distracted/tired and having the FSD safety net only makes things safer, assuming you don't go out of your way to get distracted. I've lost count of the times I looked over at a "dumb" car being driven by someone on their phone. Would you rather that person be in a Tesla using FSD or in their Subaru Crosstrek?

I view this question pretty akin to “people are going to get rip-roaring drunk before driving, would you rather they do that in a Tesla or a Subaru?”

It’s not something I’m willing to accept either socially or morally.

Unfortunately, even if we'd prefer to not accept it, we live in a world where those people exist. So I hope that they are being driven by their self-driving car when they inevitably drink and drive or fall asleep at the wheel. And to mitigate the impact of the ones driving a non-self-driving car, I'm going to use my self-driving certified-safest car to drive my family around.

Crosstrek. The Subaru Eyesight system will automatically disengage after a few seconds with no driver input so it's safer.

So far I've been impressed enough with the HW4 Teslas that I haven't had them do anything that I had to intervene to correct or prevent. It's pretty amazing at how well it handles all kinds of things - construction, weird merges, road debris. This morning, there was a tire in the middle of the road, which caused traffic ahead of me to slam to a halt. Mine had to brake hard enough that ABS engaged, and then navigated around the tire. I was impressed.

Seems reasonable to me, it's a rearchitecture to move things up to the systemd level where it makes sense for the majority of distributions but still allow alternative implementations.

I wouldn't recommend reading that comment thread, it immediately jumps into "this is fascism!" which is why it's hard to take people seriously sometimes.

I love Zen but it doesn't support TouchID passkey auth on macOS. I'm someone who needs to Okta with multiple times a day, and this drove me to use Vivaldi instead.

Ah that seems like a use case where Zen falls short. I hope there comes a solution to this someday but the proprietary nature of it seems prohibitive. If Asahi Linux can figure out TouchID then maybe there might be a way.

This has been a lost cause for the past decade or so. Web developers don't target Firefox anymore because a 5% share isn't enough to matter.

Both projects (Chromium and Firefox) are open, so it's like Linux vs FreeBSD, but at least FreeBSD has a clear licensing advantage.

We need some billionaire class people to take their business from a site that won’t support Firefox, and say why. or whatever that’s less pie in sky

No defeatism though please, some of us will advocate till the end (pen & paper)