Perhaps more modern ones, but the ones in my last and current laptops are both 18650s. 6 cells, 9 cells, you stack in series to increase voltage, parallel to get more capacity, so a 3s2p would have ~14V which is more than the required 12V for internal components, no boost converters needed. That said, now they do a lot of pouch batteries which are actually multiple internal pouches run in series to get the same sort of voltage but made with the chassis fitting them perfectly, no wasted space.

18650 is awesome, a good balance of weight to capacity. They are the standard cells used in laptops, vapes, small powerbanks, power tool batteries, and so on. They can also go into a fairly standard charger for AA and AAA batteries and give a lovely nominal 3.7V.

That said, pouches are better for inside a device like a controller. The weight of a battery is significantly influenced by the casing. A pouch is almost entirely capacity, a cell like an 18650 or AA is largely the metal of the casing. If you have the pouch inside the plastic of the device you can save that weight.

Honestly, more than a year ago nVidia drivers were absolutely nightmarish. It used to be such a frequent issue that I stopped updates for nVidia drivers until I could take a full system backup. Btrfs has been a game changer, allowing backups to automatically happen on updates and allowing you to boot into a previous state. And given the level of Linux growth through Steam/Valve pushing it nVidia seems to have been trying harder. Only one update issue this year so far and it was a simple roll back, make a change, apply updates again.

For your next hop consider EndeavourOS. It is Arch based and so has pacman and the AUR but it also has sane defaults and good configuration tools. Also, the default is quite pretty. Much less work to get a system going but all the flexibility of a pure Arch install.

To be clear though, the two defined states are separated by a voltage gap, so either it is on or off regardless of how on or how off. For example, if the off is 0V and the on is 5V then 4V is neither of those but will be either considered as on. So if it is above thecriticam threshold it is on and therefore represents a 1, otherwise it is a 0.

An analogue computer would be able to use all of the variable voltage range. This means that instead of having a whole bunch of gates working together to represent a number the voltage could be higher or lower. Something that takes 64 bits could be a single voltage. That would mean more processing in the same space and much less actual computation required.

That is essentially what gluetun does. It is a little simpler to set up given that it is all preinstalled and you just select your provider and details and it is done. And again, you just specify the network for other containers to use the gluetun service and it is done. Very simple, easy for using many services through one VPN connection, and available on things like CasaOS with simple setup.

As a fellow Aussie I share your conclusion, though the Made in Australia plan from the Albanese government seems like it could change the game. Producing solar panels here would make purchasing them cheaper even if just from the shipping costs. Add the federal investment and the creation of demand and it should get cheaper again.

Now I do worry about things going the way of the NBN, starting with a goal of future proof fibre to the home being chipped away by the LNP until it was a small upgrade on internet service funded by the government but not anything like the goal. I want good green tech, not just barely solar sometimes.

Coal is dying as an investment but existing coal plants will likely run for a long while. Overall demand for energy is rising, the new demand is being met mostly with renewables, but there is a small amount of that increase that is being met by a small increase in coal usage. As renewable manufacture gets faster and more efficient I expect the coal growth will reverse, but it is all about when. If it happens quickly we have less apocalyptic damage. If it happens slowly then we will be more fucked.

Solar is far and say the cheapest form of new energy to roll out. Wind is a not so close second. Coal is getting more expensive by the day. The only reason to roll out coal is insufficient production of solar and wind. It takes time to increase manufacturing capacity but we are getting there and we can do this.

Yep, it started going bad when Google took over it fully and started making changes that didn’t go through to the Chromium browser project. And killing ad blockers. And the telemetry.

I would recommend trying a few of the Gecko engine based browsers. Zen is pretty cool and has become my desktop default recently but other people prefer different ones. In my opinion if you can’t read the code you can’t know what they are doing, so shouldn’t trust it. Not personally read the code, I mean I principle.

Yep, you can emulate, it does work, but there is a better option. Clone Hero works better, has lower performance requirements, supports all of the songs from all of the games, has great peripheral support, and has a whole community of people making modern songs available.

I would also recommend looking into a RetroCult controller mod if you really get into it. Quite a fun electronics project and suitable for someone with limited experience as it has been made very easy and only includes a little bit of soldering and cutting away a little bit of the case.

Yeah, I’ve seen some applications of hollow waveguides before, but yeah, visible spectrum has potential applications and honestly, anything they can do to reduce the number of boosting stages the better.

I love the idea of hollow core fibres, basically a long hollow tube with air inside so the laser can be carried through air not glass. It is really cool and a novel approach and we are only seeing the start. What happens if we change the internal gas to something else like argon? Maybe there will be a specific fluid for different laser bands, further reducing transmission loss.

They also say that the current result of 0.2dB per km of travel is a good starting point, but they think they will likely reach 0.01dB per km with this tech and a little more time. That means a massively increased distance before having to read out the signal with a sensor and then send it again with another laser. That means much less cost and lower latency at the physical level. Very cool, a good number of years before application but good news anyway.

Good choice, the DOI is usually a better link to use, my bad.

I think I have reasonable grounds to disagree, but I don’t want to cause offense or upset, so to be clear I am not attacking you or your thought process, just the conclusions.

There has been a long history of these religious approaches to diet influencing scientific research. If we discount all science done by ideologically biased institutions such as those in this study the actual field looks very different. If we further discount known bad methodologies, for example food frequency questionnaires (FFQs) which are shown to be absolutely inaccurate in most cases, then we again find less support for the conclusion that plant based diets are better for humans than meat based diets. In fact, we will find that there are almost no interventional studies of any length that even potentially could tell us that a meat based diet is worse than a plant based diet.

In most cases the researchers fail the very first step of defining plant based, meat based, high carb, low carb, ketogenic, Mediterranean, and so on. The studies are all way too short, most being done over less than 12 weeks, and very few have any sort of cross over or similar control. Most of the studies are purely observational and have no intervention, so no change can seen as causally linked to an outcome. Most studies are funded in such a way as to bias the outcomes. Most studies are not preregistered. Many suffer from p hacking. Many have no clear outcome measure but instead target a proxy, for example blood cholesterol, but they do not actually look at the true target outcome, heart disease and death.

The whole field of nutritional science is unfortunately very unreliable at this time due to ideological and financial conflicts of interest. This study is a great example. Given that it is well known that FFQs are unreliable why was this study approved at the outset? Why was a further clarification of the actual diets of participants not taken at some point in the study, even from a subset? Why is this type of study funded, executed, and then passed through peer review? If this arrived on my desk I would not approve it for publication simple for methodological reasons. Why does the journal allow a title which is so provocative and clearly useful for pushing an agenda when their supposed scientific credibility are riding on their reputation as gatekeepers of truth?

If we had real science I would be keen to see it. This does not meet that level of quality and the continued publication of this type of unfit paper is dragging down the whole scientific endeavour. If we continue to allow people to claim to know what they cannot show we will end up believing anything and making grave mistakes in our choices about how to live.

Yeah, so this study basically tells us nothing but can be used for propagandistic purposes. If I were a journal editor I would not publish a study that tells us nothing while being ripe for political and ideological use. It is unethical to act as if this is a purely scientific study when it obviously is not, and the editors of the journal are supposed to be experts in the field, they should be very aware of this issue and be taking appropriate steps.

Yeah, here is the link to the original study BTW

https://ajcn.nutrition.org/article/S0002-9165(25)00328-4/fulltext

Results

1. Yes, data was derived from food frequency questionnaires, a known bad method for understanding real consumption.
2. Definitely not controlling for health focus of participants
3. Yep, only diagnosed cases were listed, so not checking everyone to see if they had cancer. This leaves room for someone to not have had it checked and it will simply not show up
4. In this case they made several groups based on how much meat, but the vegetation was all grouped together.

This was also a religiously motivated study. The cohort was recruited from Seventh Day Adventists and that church has been involved in pushing unscientific propaganda about vegetarianism for decades. The influence goes much further, given that the bulk of the authors work for the Loma Linda University Medical Centre, a Seventh Day Adventist institution.

This is not a scientific study, this is religious lropaaganda.

About to go read the study, but my guesses are;

1. Probably using a food diary or similar recall based method to figure out food frequency
2. Likely not controlling for whether people are health focussed or not
3. The cancer link will be measured by risk of death by cancer, obfuscating whether the individual seeks treatment
4. The plant heavy nature will be vague, grouping all plants together rather than any specificity, eg sugar beets and kale both count the same

Back shortly to update.

As with all other scientific things someone knows more than me, but I will give my opinion.

The last step is the greatest weakness. The result has to somehow be sent to the website and verified. If you have physical access to the device doing the verification then it will eventually be spoofed. A man in the middle attack would be easy enough given that the device absolutely has to go via a network the user controls.

Beyond the transmission issues, biologically there are not any markers that are a clear and simple age measure. Most biomarkers are more of a range with ages that correlate to some degree. You could say for example testosterone, but that goes up through puberty from a baseline in kids to an adult level, but the adult levels are really varied. Some people are higher than others and some XX people have higher testosterone levels than some XY people, and visa versa for oestrogen. So with the sex hormones out, you would want something that accumulates over time. Unfortunately that is going to vary by where a person lives and what they are exposed to. Honestly it is not at all workable.

That said, a simple solution which would make much more sense than any of this crap is to just have something on the internet account end. If the ISP can offer a check box for “Block adult sites and services” and people can opt in to that then kids will only get access to the full internet when their parents allow it or they are old enough to have their own device on their own internet plan.

If the government want to make a system to protect kids from adult stuff on the internet that is great. If they make it opt in that is all fine with me. But if they make it something you have to verify your age for, using things like state issued ID or facial inspection by an algorithm, then I think it is disastrous. It will be circumvented rapidly by people who are old enough to verify but simply do not want to. That technique will be shared with kids. Kids will be able to bypass it. This nanny state approach is not actually about protecting kids in my opinion. I think the companies involved will use the data, the face images for during verification, as training data for AI models, use the licence data for various profit driven business activities, and in the process make us all less secure. They will eventually have a leak or hack that exposes your data including what site you were on and your licence. The only question is when.

Choosing a distro is both very easy and very hard. The easy answer is go with the flow, look for what the most popular distros are and see what appeals from those. A common distro will have lots of other people with the possibility of having the same issues you have finding solutions. It makes troubleshooting way easier and is worth the distro not being perfect if you can get more support.

The hard answer is don’t choose a distro. Try distros. Maybe before killing your Windows install get VirtualBox and install various distros in VMs and try them out. Performance is fairly good in a VM so you can get a realistic idea if how it will work for you in terms of how intuitive it is to find things, how the workflow is, and whether it is too opinionated about how things are done.

For example, Ubuntu has a little less ability to control things at a deep level, but it is more supportable because everyone using it either does or does not have a given problem.

At the other end is something like Arch which is more of a base than a distro. You choose your desktop environment, what services you want, all the back ends, and you have to configure it yourself.

I would recommend EndeavourOS as a great Arch based distro.