Were people actually doing that?

I feel like their messages are designed to derail people's train of thought.

People start to realize that technology isn't fulfilling and they need to re-access their lives? Nah... introspection is a modern invention and that act of reflection is actually the source of your discontent. Stop thinking about it and just go with the flow, you'll be much happier when you stop concerning yourselves with the state of the environment, other people's well being, if your work is fulfilling, or the fact that you have no retirement.

In many US municipalities the cost of infrastructure is rolled into the per unit fee meaning high consumers pay more. This works fine until folks adopt solar and their consumption goes negative.

The right answer is a connection fee based on the cost to maintain your hookup to the grid.

That's a common line by conservatives who are actively sabotaging government with policies and laws which they then point to as evidence of such inefficiencies.

At that time AMD wasn't in the custom CPU business, AMD64 was a new unproven ISA, and x86 based CPUs of that time were notoriously hot for a console. These were also some of the reasons why Microsoft moved away from the Pentium III it had used in the original Xbox.

The PS3 was launched in 2006 but the hardware design was decided years earlier to provide a reference platform for the software.

IBM's Power was the only logical option at the time.

These consoles were being designed around 2000. Intel and AMD weren't partnering on bespoke CPUs at that time. I don't even think AMD would have been considered a viable partner. Neither had viable 64 bit options and part of console marketing at the time was the ever increasing bit depths.

Prior console generations had use MIPS which wasn't keeping up with ever increasing performance expectations and players like Toshiba and Sony were looking for a higher performance CPU architecture. IBM's Power architecture was really the only option. Sony, Toshiba, and IBM partnered to develop their a new 64 bit microarchitecture called Cell.

Microsoft's first console was basically a PC and that's how everyone saw it. The 360 was an opportunity for Microsoft to show that it could compete with the big boys. It was also an opportunity to keep a toe dipped in RISC, because it had dropped support for RISC CPUs with Windows 2000.

I would argue that the hardest part is correctly recognizing that it's being addressed. 98% of my frustration with voice assistants is them not responding when spoken to. The other 2% is realizing I want them to stop talking.

It happens to us all of the time.

My partner is on a conference call, I hop in the car to go run an errand. Suddenly I'm on a conference call.

My partner is in the kitchen listening to a podcast, I hop in our other car and suddenly I'm listening to a podcast.

My partner is sitting in the car having a driveway moment, I arrive home with the other car and now I'm having her driveway moment.

My partner is on a conference call at her desk and picks up her phone to respond to a message and then you hear "shit shit shit, hold on a moment!" and then frantic typing and clicking.

Banias was hyper optimized for power, the mantra was to get done quickly and go to sleep to save power. Somewhere along the line someone said "hey what happens if we don't go to sleep?" and Core was born.

What happens when a kid's laptop is broken, regardless of the reason, and the family is unable to afford to repair it? Are we going to run into a similar situation that we had when kids couldn't pay for school lunch? Do teachers write "pay for a new laptop" in sharpie on the kid's arm for the parent?

A child's educational environment is a lot more chaotic, violent, and uncontrolled compared to an office environment. If you're issuing my child a $600 laptop and making me responsible for any damages, guess what's going to be kept at home in a secure location?

Making a child responsible for securing a laptop in an insecure environment isn't accountability, it's just a form of imprisonment.

For a lot of companies, a lawsuit would be the end of them even if it's not financial ruin. Often times the decision to purchase insurance isn't made by the CEO but rather by the board of directors.

Board directives are often why you see companies adopting or trending towards certain activities that don't necessarily make sense. They might be at the benefit of a member of the board or one of the other companies they chair.

So it sort of makes sense that companies would go on the attack because there's a risk that their insurance company will catch wind and they'll be on the hook.