I’m not the smart person you replied to and I don’t know for sure, but given many modern circuits have become very fine and compact, I’m not optimistic about your chances to repair it. It would depend on the nature and extent of the damage, of course, but if you’re an amateur, I think you’re better off replacing (though you might get away with replacing just a part instead of the whole device).

Also a good point. Personally, I’m not willing to extend the charity of Hanlon’s Razor to corporations well known to be malicious. In this event, I’d rather be wrong than off-guard, if that makes sense?

The meta verse and apples AR flop cost them a lot of money as a result.

I think this is more of a case where the mandate to always increase profits compelled them to take calculated financial risks and hope to be the vanguard of a new boom. Well, maybe the calculations were more estimates, but I assumed they figured out they could afford the loss if it flopped, but would make major gains by securing a foothold in a new digital space if it succeeded.

Consider how occasionally niche technologies once mocked later turn out to be hits. I remember once reading somewhere that QR codes were a fad, had died out and were basically useless, for instance, and I bought it because I myself saw decreasing use of them. At the time, I think QR code scanners weren’t built into smartphone camera apps, and smartphones weren’t as ubiquitous either, so unless you downloaded dedicated (and in retrospect sketchy) apps for it, they remained useless.

Now, I see QR codes everywhere. My company has them on meeting rooms to check their occupation and book them right from your phone without needing to remember or manually enter the room number. Our printers have QR codes for email templates to report errors to IT that include technical details for the printer. Restaurants have QR codes for digital ordering, invoices for automatically scanning the payment details from your banking app, the list goes on.

Obviously, the financial scale is far different, but that’s the example that came to mind just now seeing a QR code in my train for digital schedules including current delay. I’m sure there are better examples I could think of, but it’s eight in the morning and my long-term memory won’t come online for another hour or so.

My point is that it’s sometimes hard or impossible to predict whether something will succeed, but the nature of corporate economics in the tech sphere compells taking risks on new innovations because the potential payoff is immense. And if they can afford to take it - they’re not exactly short on money and not particularly worried about their users running away over it - I don’t know if they can afford not to. Who knows what new tech people might surprisingly latch on to?

I do think you’re right, but I don’t think it’s the only reason for doing things we think are stupid. The tech sphere in particular has a lot of survivorship bias, but while small companies might disintegrate over a failure, a giant corporation can take the hit and keep trying for the next gold rush.

To see if the backlash is really that bad, to see if there are specific issues people object to, to see if there are certain demographics more strongly opposed, to desensitise people for when they try it next time (“ugh, again?” instead of the full outrage), to give people the illusion of control (look, online complaints work!)…

There are a lot of possible reasons, but I doubt it’s an entirely ignorant decision coming from a company known to be good at manipulating it’s users.

Oh no, I recently saw someone shitting on it still. They exist!

Most have just wisened up and moved to a systemd-less sphere, I assume, rather than fighting a lost battle on a niche hill.

Right? Let others more willing to suffer than us do the diving, we’ll just skim their gains off the top.

LifeProTip: exploit the hard work of others for your own profit!

(That’s a joke)

They exist! Drowning in a sea of shit, there are nuggets of gold. Have fun digging for them though.

“Could’ve been worse. Not sure how, but it could’ve.”

Ten years later…

There should be an open communication standard that all robots use to communicate with each other.

Yes!

And it will only be used for good and nothing nefarious.

Oh no

Ads is from advertisement, not adds

In fact, just right-to-repair the whole car. In fact, the whole everything!

Boy, that escalated quickly

But yes, please.

I didn’t take your comment as rude, personally. To me, opening with Akshually indicated that joking intent to parody pedantry and I took no offense. I just felt like expressing my opinion on the term with no particular judgement of your joke because I think that the words we use are worth talking about.

I know I have a habit of replying seriously to jokes, which often comes across as me taking issue with them. I keep forgetting to clarify the tone of my message. If only there was a medical term for that communication deficit 😉

I can’t speak for all of us, but I prefer “Autism” as a blanket term (that we hopefully all understand covers a wide spectrum anyway) over “Disorder”. Yes, I get that we deviate from the neurodevelopmental norm, but “Disorder” feels condescending to what I perceive as simply a different way of working.

I also understand that some with higher support needs may differ from that perception. My opinion is not universal.

On the other hand, I’m perfectly fine with calling my ADHD a Disorder. Shit’s chaotic as fuck.