It's not just the TV, it's the weird take that tuners are bad, apparently. I helped my mother-in-laws friend, a lady in her 60s, getting her TV working after a move. The local cable providers don't care to offer their coax solution anymore, you need their box. To be fair, the box is nice enough, but it's way more complicated than simply hooking up the tuner.
Modern Samsung TV are also awful, there's no longer a source button on the remote, so you have to use their terrible UI to navigate to the bottom of the screen, guess which input you want, which takes 10 - 15 seconds. If you can find it in their horribly busy UI.
From what I've read on some modern Samsung TVs if they have a settings button on the remote long pressing that is a shortcut directly to the input selection.
Another option is if the remote has a mic button you can use that. This works pretty well on my several year old Samsung (most of the time [1]). I just press the button and say e.g., "HDMI 2". If I want to watch an OTA channel, say channel 4, I say "channel 4".
I don't know how well this works on the newest models because I believe they know have they own Alexa-like thing called Bixby handling this instead of something built specifically for TV voice control.
If you don't watch OTA TV another possibility is to enable HDMI-CEC for your devices. Then when you turn on or wake a device it can switch the TV input to that device (and turn the TV on if it is not on).
[1] Around a year ago they had a glitch that affected the voice commands on older TVs around the world. Most reports were for 2017 TV models. These TVs started only recognizing voice commands in Russian (and the feedback showing what you said was in Russian too).
For switching between HDMI 1 and HDMI 2 I was able to learn how to say those well enough in Russian for it to work by listening to Google Translate speak them in Russian. But no matter how many times I tried I was not able to learn how to say "channel 4" well enough in Russian. It worked if I let the TV listen to Google Translate speaking it, so the problem was my pronunciation rather than Google Translate not translating correctly.
This is because every channel on the cable is encrypted now, lest someone try to pirate service, and given that the cable companies all but killed "CableCard" that box is required because it is the "decryptor" of the streams.
It's not just Apple though. Something is wrong in the software industry. Desktop/PC operating systems aren't going away, but the industry have decided that it's no longer a relevant product category.
Windows is going down a strange path, where it's productivity is suffering because Microsoft is measuring success in terms of CoPilot adoption. Apple is stuck trying to invent the next iPhone, but in the meantime they are trying to make the iPhone sexy by slapping on a new skin. Then they forgot about macOS and quickly moves over some stuff from iPhone. Neither of the products apparent have UX designers anymore and QA is meeeh.
I don't understand either company. Both use to have talented UI/UX teams and actually listened to them. Is it really just short term stock price thinking that make them both forget that their operating systems should be about productivity and user ergonomics?
Software and technology went from being a productivity tool to an ad delivery vehicle (or delivery vehicle for whatever bullshit is en-vogue like media subscriptions, AI, etc - that ultimately sooner or later comes back to ads).
Turns out you don't actually need much UX or design when the product's productivity capabilities no longer affect your bottom line.
My question is what those people think will happen when the transition completes and everything fully became an ad delivery machine with no productivity features? Ads only work as long as people have disposable income to spend on the advertised products/media, and they won't be having any money if you break the productivity tools they used to make said money. Ads can't work if the entire economy becomes ads.
>Something is wrong in the software industry. Desktop/PC operating systems aren't going away, but the industry have decided that it's no longer a relevant product category.
Half of humanity is not very smart. Once you've sold computers and software to everyone who is smart, you have to sell to the not smart half. And that not smart half isn't going to like or even be able to use complex software. Since there are far more people out there simply consuming things and few people creating things, the bias is going to be for the simpletons.
In my experience it's a little hit and miss with macOS. You need a monitor that is specifically listed as being supported by macOS. If not you get rather strange results. I had a Dell monitor that, under macOS only, would sometimes freak out and flicker if you had to many electron apps open.
In some sense it's reasonable that you need a supported monitor, it's just strange that Linux can support all these monitors, but macOS can't?
Someone pointed out that a lot of US builders will drive pickups truck, and that it's kinda doesn't make sense, why don't they drive a van? Depending on the trade and location builders and contractors here will drive something like a VW Transporter, Mercedes Sprinter, Toyota HiAce or a Peugeot Partner. The Sprinter will fit e.g. your plywood, others will have mounts on the side or roof to transport material.
They won't act as a large wheelbarrow though, not well at least.
The whole security of both Android and iOS is a joke at this point. We know now that plenty of apps/games have proxy services built in, allowing the publisher to monetize their users, by selling proxy services to AI companies. If that can happen, with all the "security" those platforms and store supposedly offer, then I fail to see the point.
We're being prevented from installing and updating software on the devices we own, but Google and Apple will happily approve and sign malware in their stores?
That would probably warrant a followup article. I did find myself wondering where the tipping point is between using a slightly less efficient storage method vs. computational overhead.
For example, you technically don't need to track castling availability. If you're storing the entire match as a set of positions, you can deduct that by replaying the previous positions. A quick search seems to indicate that an average chess match runs for about 40 moves, so replaying all previous positions isn't that bad, on average.
If you need to store millions of chess matches, being able to store them in ~1kb each might be more important, compared the overhead of unpacking each state. If you need to query for certain positions across all those matches, maybe less "compression" is desired.
I always enjoy articles about how people store data and how they think of capturing states, but I also like to know the context and how that data is use or queried.
I'm absolutely baffled by colleague who somehow manage to be five minutes late to an online meeting while working from home. Because you're right, you get a reminder 10 - 15 minutes in advance, you just need to click the join meeting button, you're already at the computer. We have, for remote meetings, a five minute buffer at the start of every meeting, for people to "settle in" makes no sense, just start the meeting.
In general a lot of people just aren't being serious about meetings, which I guess is also why many hate them. So key indicators of a bad meeting is: runs more than 60 minutes, no meeting plan, documents or talking points provided in advance, more than five people (unless the meeting is more of a briefing).
TBH unless the meeting has a clear agenda and not just a vague title, I only join it when someone mention me. This allows me to be able to actually work and/or take breaks.
> So key indicators of a bad meeting is: runs more than 60 minutes, no meeting plan, documents or talking points provided in advance, more than five people (unless the meeting is more of a briefing).
Seems about right, but wouldn't you agree that the majority of those meetings either could have been an email, or could have been handled in 20% of the time, if they had been planed?
Maybe, I think most people just don't give shit about any of this and for them wasting an hour feels "productive", like they've achieved something. After all, nobody can hear your beautiful voice over email.
That still won't do contactless payments, at least I don't think so.
It's a neat idea, to just move the chip. The final result isn't pretty, it would have been way cooler if the whole thing had fitted inside the watch, but there's not a lot of room in an F-91W.
Maybe someone with more experience with antenna designs could find a way to use the backplate as part of the antenna.
ChatGPT is, to my knowledge, trained on Reddit and at least certain sub-reddits are basically people (or bots) telling others that they probably have ADHD/ADD. These are the "AskReddit" type of sub-reddit. There's a Danish subreddit for everyday questions (advise column style posts), and like 80% of people there are apparently either autistic or have ADHD.
So I'm not entirely surprised that an LLM would start assuming that the user have ADD, because that's what part of it's training data suggests it should.
Modern Samsung TV are also awful, there's no longer a source button on the remote, so you have to use their terrible UI to navigate to the bottom of the screen, guess which input you want, which takes 10 - 15 seconds. If you can find it in their horribly busy UI.
reply