Epaper and eink are different. Eink consumes no power when idle, and epaper consumes almost no power.

It reads to me like he’s saying that if you expect 5+ years without maintenance if it’s more than $100, you should look at a different product.
The top comments are someone saying that after five years they needed to repair it due to battery failure, and the founder saying the repair process is the same.

Five years is longer than the average lifespan of a liIon battery. Expecting to be able to skip repairs that long is unreasonable for a $150 product.

It reads like the founder actually giving realistic expectations. A $150 product will likely need repairs to last longer than five years, and you’ll be disappointed if you expect otherwise.

Can you point to a similar product that costs about as much that fits your criteria?

They do need to protect their branding, but only if it’s likely to be viewed as “similar”. there’s no reasonable risk of people thinking that a watch and an old processor are the same.
There’s a lot of products with similar names that haven’t had issues.

No, no one is forgetting they’re built on cryptography. It just doesn’t matter. The underlying technology of a thing doesn’t have much bearing on the properties of the thing as far as practical usage goes.
You don’t care what your car is made of as long as it has good fuel efficiency and crash rating. Steel ceramic and aluminum are just tools to that end.

Research into cryptocurrency started long before 2008. Academics and odd crypto enthusiasts have been working on it since the 80s.
The intent from the beginning has been a mix of curiosity, paranoia, and buying drugs.
Bitcoin was hardly a “for the people” project. It was initially used almost entirely for black market purchases, largely via silk road. “The people” did not give a fuck about perfect anonymous digital cash. It solved a problem that most people didn’t and still don’t have.
The adoption order was: Math nerds > drug lords > finance > small investors. It’s still not actually adopted as currency by people.
When you create a thing for the purpose of making monetary transactions untraceable, and your first major users are all using it to hide where their money came from from the government, it’s really fair to say that you created a money laundering tool.

Bitcoin wasn’t taken over by finance people, they’re the reason it didn’t taper out like previous cryptocurrencies, which either fizzled or were shutdown for being nuggets of financial crime.

He inserted a naturally occuring genetic variation.
Off the top of my head and not an expert: screen a very large number of people for having that variation, and monitor those that do for HIV infection. That phase will take a while.
Identify a collection of people interested in in vitro fertilization, ideally with some coming from your previous sample group. Since the process produces more embryos than can be used, perform your procedure on a random selection of discards. Inspection and sequencing of the modified segment should be indistinguishable from unmodified embryos bearing then variation naturally.
Now that you have confidence that the variation provides protection, and that you can make the change, identify people where the intervention offers a better chance than not having it, even though it’s experimental. This would likely be HIV positive women desiring IVF who would not be able to tolerate standard HIV treatment during the pregnancy. Engineering the embryo to be resistant therefore becomes the best available way to prevent infection.
You can then look back and compare infection rates with children born to untreated parents and parents who underwent treatment.

You also do a better job ensuring the parents know about the risks and what they entail. Informed consent and all that.

If this is really hard to do because you can’t find people that fit the criteria, maybe your research isn’t actually that critical. If HIV medication is essentially universally tolerated in pregnancy and is nearly 100% effective at preventing transmission to the infant without long-term side effects, then it might just be the case that while gene editing would work, it doesn’t provide enough of an advantage to be worth exploring for that disease.

Medical research is still medicine. You’re still obligated to do what’s best for the patient, even if it’s difficult or you’re curious about what would happen.

Eh, usually less than you would expect. We’re really good at math and are quite capable of making synthetic experiments where we find people who either require the procedure, or where it’s been done incidentally and then inferring the results as though deliberate.

We can also develop a framework for showing benefit from the intervention, perform the intervention ethically, and then compare that to people who didn’t get the intervention after the fact. With proper math you can construct the same confidence as a proper study without denying treatment or intentionally inflicting harm.

It’s how we have evidence that tooth brushing is good for you. It would be unethical to do a study where we believe we’re intentionally inflicting permeant dental damage to people by telling them not to brush for an extended period, but we can find people who don’t and look at them.

And we already have a safety valve for when conventional ethics is standing in the way of vital research: the researchers test on themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-experimentation_in_medicine

If it’s that vital, surely you would do it to yourself?

It’s not terribly common because most useful research is perfectly ethical, but we have a good number of cases of researchers deciding that there’s no way for someone to ethically volunteer for what they need to do, so they do it to themselves. Sometimes they die. Sometimes they make very valuable discoveries. Sometimes both.

So the next time someone wantz to strap someone to a rocket engine and fire it into a wall, all they have to do is go first and be part of the testing pool.

Depends on what you think it represents.

It’s traditionally a symbol of opportunity, or new start style liberty.

America has, for a long time, been a place of hope or opportunity for immigrants. Not necessarily welcome, kindness, or prosperity, but hope.

With the visibly growing xenophobia this has tragically waned, but even still we have some of the highest immigration rates in the world.

Yup. Violating IP licenses is a great reason to prevent it. According to current law, if they get Alice license for the book they should be able to use it how they want.
I’m not permitted to pirate a book just because I only intend to read it and then give it back. AI shouldn’t be able to either if people can’t.

Beyond that, we need to accept that might need to come up with new rules for new technology. There’s a lot of people, notably artists, who object to art they put on their website being used for training. Under current law if you make it publicly available, people can download it and use it on their computer as long as they don’t distribute it. That current law allows something we don’t want doesn’t mean we need to find a way to interpret current law as not allowing it, it just means we need new laws that say “fair use for people is not the same as fair use for AI training”.

I don’t think they’re that clever. Seriously. I think that all the “distractions” are crazy things their major supporters want (less regulation on putting raw sewage in drinking water), crazy things their policy architects want for stupid or awful reasons (ending birthright citizenship because you think America should be a white Christian nation), naked adoration for dictators because they’re what running a country like a business looks like, or just the most transparent “negotiation” that burns good will because you don’t understand that getting an agreement is good, and getting an agreement where the other side is happy too is better.

Threaten tariffs and wait a while to let the other side offer something to get you to not do it. Threaten to annex Greenland, and then compromise on guaranteed transit rights in their territorial waters and maybe some resource extraction agreements. Same for the Panama canal.

A lot of it you can fake pretty well by putting some water on their face and a touch of whatever makeup makes your cheeks a bit rosy.

A lot of the cries the babies have are the “I asked for food and it’s been three minutes and I haven’t gotten it, so I’ll ask louder”, or “I just woke up and forgot I have hands”

You really don’t need to keep posting screenshots of articles. I’m not even bothering to read them anymore because it takes too long to find the article and figure out how you’re taking the headline out of context.
Consistently posting screenshots of bullshit kinda ruins the assumption of good faith.

Here’s my rebuttal:

The bit you highlighted from the article doesn’t make any indication about the identity of anyone. It’s really only a smoking gun if you already accept your conclusion.

A historical quote about Jewish people being driven to Israel aligning with Zionist goals isn’t really evidence of a conspiracy.
Neither is Israels political allies.

You’re not going to convince me there’s a zionist conspiracy to stage antisemitism. There have certainly been cases where people staged antisemitism. That doesn’t mean there’s some grand conspiracy by the zionists.

Seeing that someone did something antisemitic and concluding “oh, it must have been those tricksy Jews faking it” is antisemitic, just like making assumptions about the race of a criminal is racist. Data points that align with your prejudice don’t validate making assumptions without evidence, and data points don’t provide evidence of an ornate structure linking them.

But lets keep going.

Let’s not.

No, my response to a terroristic hoax that wasn’t a Zionist false flag is that maybe we don’t need antisemitic conspiracy theories to criticize Israel.

Your first screenshot is what this headline is the update to. https://apnews.com/article/australia-terrorism-antisemitism-hoax-546a36d066f651888ae7e460c07f9080

Law enforcement agencies investigating January’s discovery of the trailer on the outskirts of Sydney divulged in a news conference that its placement was concocted by criminals who meant to derive personal gain from tipping off authorities to its presence — a bizarre twist in a saga that followed a monthslong wave of antisemitic crimes in Australia.

Your next screenshot seems to be from the daily mail, which… Is it’s own flavor of untrustworthy.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14123417/Woman-Nazi-salute-protest-owner-kosher-cafe-Jewish-hospital.html

Setting that aside though… It goes on in the article to pretty clearly state that it wasn’t a case of someone pretending. Customers at her cafe were perturbed by her manner of support for Palestine. It turns out that you don’t need to be a Zionist or even Jewish to own a kosher cafe, even in a Jewish hospital. So I don’t think that article makes the case you’re going for.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/feb/14/news-corp-team-confronted-after-alleged-attempt-to-provoke-staff-at-sydney-middle-eastern-restaurant-ntwnfb

Next you have news corp Australia acting very strangely and definitely seeming to hope to catch some antisemitic behavior that doesn’t materialize.
This is not, however, a “Zionist false flag”. First, I’m not sure news corp is what I would call Zionist, secondly nothing actually happened, and thirdly no one was pretending to be antisemitic to blame it on others. While it’s weird to go antisemitism fishing, and racist to assume you’d find it at a middle eastern restaurant, this is a case of someone ordered tea, got it, and then stood around for a bit. Pretty far from false flag terrorism.

Finally you post three screenshots from a perfectly reasonable article: https://forward.com/opinion/608230/jews-have-to-stop-believing-conspiracy-theories-yale-columbia-antisemitism/

Absolutely nothing in it even comes close to “zionist false flag attacks”. The only flag of note isn’t zionist, isn’t false, and isn’t an attack. At best a slight eyesore. (🥁)

You’re deadset on convincing me there’s a zionist conspiracy behind antisemitism reports, and I’m not sure why. I just said you shouldn’t succumb to antisemitic conspiracy theories while talking about actual injustices.

You might try actually reading that last article. I think you’ll find there’s a lot more cases of mislabeled or exaggerated antisemitism than false flag conspiracy nonsense. Although, you’re most likely too far down the hole to actually be able to get back out. Say hi to the elders for me, and let me know how their protocols are going.

So your response to “don’t do an antisemitic conspiracy theory” is… “But there actually is an orchestrated Zionist cabal doing these things”?

You’re comparing information warfare by Israel trying to drive support for their actions to a nebulous Zionist conspiracy performing false flag attacks in order to provide a pretext for cracking down on protestors.

Your evidence is a man who is clearly unwell, who tried and failed to convert to Judaism, was kicked out of a synagogue for behavioral problems and vandalized his own house. In 2017.

A mentally unwell man behaving erratically and defacing his home isn’t much of a conspiracy, and certainly not one to discredit a protest movement that would start six years later. Or are you just arguing that “the Jewish people are notorious for making up antisemitism”?

You’re part of the reason it’s so easy to paint legitimate criticism of Israel as antisemitic. Anytime anyone criticizes them there’re people like you who chime in to add notes about how the zionists secretly control all the governments and media, how insidious they are or about how they’re one of the biggest threats.
Or to just weakly echo some false flag lines while ignoring that the article has the police giving an entirely different motivation based on who they caught.
Eventually people start to believe that you actually can’t criticize Israel without succumbing to antisemitism.

I can’t wait for your next link that’s the top result for “Zionist false flag” or some such that share without actually reading it.

That article doesn’t say at all what you’re implying? Someone being reprimanded for saying a synagogue attack could have been a false flag is far, far from an example of a false flag.

There’s opposing Israels actions in Gaza, opposing their treatment of Palestinians in general, disagreeing with the concept of an apartheid ethnostate or the actions taken to create Israel in the first place, and then there’s unfounded claims that specific events are secret Zionist false flags to create the appearance of antisemitism and create an excuse to crack down on protestors.
What government needs an excuse to crack down on protestors? Why leave explosives somewhere when you can just say it’s antisemitism and do your crackdown that way?
Why not read the referenced article where they discuss the, honestly interesting, case where people are building plots to then have information to trade for favorable sentencing if they get caught later?

Believing Israel to be commiting atrocities, or disagreeing with Zionism does not obligate one to start entertaining tropes and conspiracies about Jewish people pulling the strings of the world and manipulating events to get their way.

I’m not sure taking unhappiness with Israel into a conspiratorial mindset towards Jewish people is the way to go. This is actually antisemitic fear mongering.

Weird.

I used the search function to find it, since it’s kinda tucked away oddly.

I can’t address most of it, but under gesture navigation there’s an option to swipe from the corner to invoke the assistant. I entirely agree that the power button is for “power”, and I don’t know why you would try to change that.

So, the size of the key doesn’t directly relate to the size of the cipher, which also doesn’t directly relate to security. AES is 128 bit , can have 128, 192, or 256 but keys and is currently not known to have any workable weaknesses.

Largely a cipher isn’t weak if guessing the key is the only weakness, since every cipher is vulnerable to brute force. It’s weak if you can figure out the message without needing the key.

That’s no longer a one time pad. That’s closer to a homebrew stream cipher with the weakness of having a key that you just hope no one notices.