Synthetic fibres such as polyester and acrylic absorb little water, as such they are good insulators but poor at thermal buffering. They have minimal heat of sorption (about 5–7 J/g) [7], and are limited to moisture wicking. There are also more likely to develop odors and are much more flammable.

They can look at Ukraine who bitterly regrets giving up their nuclear weapons, or North Korea, seemingly invulnerable despite being the most pariah of pariah states.

From the perspective of the Iranian state, it would be idiotic and irresponsible not to try to make a nuclear weapon in these conditions.

poking around with MTR (traceroute and ping combined) using various exit nodes and destinations would give you some more information if you're interested.

I was a huge Windows fanboy, now completely Apple but this was single most annoying regression of functionality when switching and one of the only things I miss.

The single biggest complaint I had when I switched it to Mac was lack of this feature. Still miss it. .

I agree with all your points except this. Disk utilities have a long history of magic-themed names: PartitionMagic, Disk Wizard, Magic Partition Resizer, the list goes on. Samsung is doing whatever everybody else does and is naming their tools based on user expectations.

Link saturation would be one of the first things that would come to mind in this situation, and at these speeds QoS would be trivial even for cheap consumer hardware.

Completely agree. In my current role, I work with a lot more "normal" computer users, and it's helped me have a better understanding of many consumer technologies from different perspectives

I have seen the survey results and work studies for our large enterprise of Mac users, most (not all, but most) have zero change in satisfaction or perceived or objective work performance with 8GB vs 16GB MacBooks. Most users are swapping between outlook, teams and chrome, anything more than an M2 8GB MacBook Pro would be a waste for these users. Disk performance is similar, anything in the M line is more than good enough for 75%+ of our users. Mac screens and keyboards have very high customer satisfaction in our org. Just like 16 GB of RAM, it does not translate to a measurable increase in work performance, but subjectively people report higher satisfaction.

As for cost, the MacBook has a lower total cost of ownership in our organization than a Windows PC at a similar purchase price because: 1) longer OS support timeline from apple means they can be used longer and 2) at the end of their lifespan with us, they have much higher resale value than comparable windows hardware.

Just a different perspective as to why 8GB MacBooks make sense for some users.

There are definitely concerning trends with the direction of macOS development, but I still maintain a Windows 11 PC in a closet that just runs steam to play games and holy shit it makes Tacoma feel like the pinnacle of UI design and consistency.

It's a moot point, they are not trying to prevent it. They only need to buy enough time to sell games in the lifespan of the hardware, which they did.

> all the security they can economically justify...

It seems like they did a perfect job, it lasted long enough to protect Microsoft game profits.

It's impossible to overstate the influence of Dragnet (the OG police procedural from the early 50s) alone on the widely held idea that police are mostly heroic and good. Police procedurals are still extremely popular, they overwhelmingly portray law enforcement in an extremely idealized way.

There are exceptions (The Wire, The Shield), but they are noteworty in that police are not heroes.

I think you're misunderstanding, of course they do not exist. People don't get $300 windows laptops for their performance, build quality, or anything similar. Nor do they care about screen brightness, and 256GB is fine for the use case which is running word or some other simple application for as little $$ as possible.

Different strokes I guess.

I recommend you read "Capital in the Twenty-First Century" (Piketty) for the full argument, but tldr version: capitalism naturally tends toward extreme inequality because the rate of return on capital exceeds the rate of economic growth.