Presumably you'd want human habitable atmosphere on the inside of the sphere, which would radically change the equation against the use of wood unfortunately.
I disagree. Traditional underwater human habitats are overengineered and expensive.
By using plywood in conjunction with other off-the-shelf parts and materials, we can change this equation to deliver more value while dramatically reducing costs.
If, due to unforeseen circumstances the habitat occupant can no longer sustain life, they're automatically entombed inside a makeshift plywood coffin—no costly recovery operations required. Logitech wireless game controller sold separately.
Could we involve robotics, LLMs and maybe some camera based vision models to this process? Surely with AI we could make building those very fast. Especially with humanoid robots...
After the initial trial of humanoid robots resulted in too many fatalities owing to falls, it was decided to instead acquire industrial 6-DoF robotic armatures and place them atop treaded, omnidirectional-pivot cargo transport systems intended for warehouse use.
The LiDAR option on the armature was eschewed due to cost in favor of an in-house, camera-based vision model that has thus far reduced the number of safety incidents that later result in amputation (knock on plywood) while increasing manufacturing output.
Pressure vessel construction still remains a point of concern on account of recent trends which indicate a rise in errant armature misfires when gripping tools that facilitate the application of nails and staples to the plywood superstructure.
The very first sentence of the article:
"Will Apple turn to Intel for production of its M-series chips in 2027? "
So it is not returning to Intel architecture.
Interesting perspective. As an OSM contributor, I've never had this thought. You presumably spend up to 8 hours a day mapping, all week long (depending on the week perhaps), which I can totally imagine gets old. I only map when I feel like it and not when I'm bored
And on OSM we don't have boss fights in the shape of reviewers. That does sound like a fun challenge :P
Not involved with this particular matter. What I would want to see is logs of the behavior of the failing subsystem and details of the failing environment. This may be able to to be reproduced in an environmental testing lab, a systems rig lab, or possibly even in a completely virtual avionics test environment. If stimulating the subsystem with the same environmental input results in the error as experienced on the plane, then a fix can be worked from there. And likewise, a rollback to a previous version could be tested against the same environment.
I love a solo dev building from scratch is going up against an entire team and company who have years of head start, alot more money and a product that the solo dev originally wrote for them.
And the solo dev has a better product already and might actually win haha.
The biggest factor in your count, and I think it is the one with the highest ceiling, is smart devices. Trouble is, even by sources like https://www.consumeraffairs.com/homeowners/average-number-of..., around half of all households still have zero, and the average household has only 2.6 people.
In this thread (from its root), we have various users defending the reasonableness of the numbers, some providing numbers in their own houses: 10, 11, 14, 17, 19, 23, 28, 34, over 50, 60+. Averaging, I’ll say, about 27, and that’s with two pretty big outliers—if you excluded them (maybe reasonable, maybe not), you’d be down to 19.5. And these sorts of users are already likely to be above-average, it’s the nature of HN, compounded by them being the ones commenting (confirmation bias). Yet already (with the fiddling of removing what I’m calling outliers) they’re under the claimed average. And for each one of them, there’s another household with zero smart home devices; and the 20% of the population with no broadband are, I imagine, effectively using zero wifi devices, though discounting in this way is a little too simplistic. However you look at it, the average will drop quite a bit. In fact, if you return to the original 27 and simplify the portion of the population without smart home devices to a 30% zero rate (mildly arbitrary, but I think reasonable enough as a starting point) and let the other 70% be average… your 27 has dropped to about 19. In order to reach the 21 across the population, you’d need to establish these HN users, defenders of high wifi device counts, to be below average users of wifi devices, which is implausible.
If the number was 10, I’d consider it plausible, though honestly I’d still expect the number to be lower. But I think my reasoning backs up my initial feeling that 21 is pretty outlandish for your national average. I’d like to see Deloitte Insights’ methodology; I reckon it’s a furphy. I bet it’s come from some grossly misleading survey data, or from sales figures of devices that are wifi-capable even though half of them never get used that way, or from terrible sampling bias (surveys are notorious for that), or something like that. Wouldn’t be the first wildly wrong or grossly misleading result one of those sorts of companies have published.
I live alone, and just counted, I have 10 in regular use. A few more that can connect to WiFi but aren’t (why would I want my tower fans on the internet, anyway?)
I had probably 20 prior to swapping out some smart light bulbs and switches for Zigbee.
34 devices connected to my router at the moment, 8 wired and 26 wifi. About 8 of the wifi devices are phones, tablets, and laptops; the rest are various iot things: locks, plugs, alarm, thermostat, water heater, doorbell, etc.
Doesn't seem unreasonable. Look at your router. I have 17 and I would say we're a totally normal household - the kids don't even have phones yet.
We have 2 phones, a tablet for the kids, a couple of Google homes, a Chromecast, 2 yoto players, a printer, a smart TV, 2 laptops, a raspberry pi, a solar power Inverter, an Oculus Quest, and a couple of things that have random hostnames.
I got 28 online right now according to my Eero. 3 people, with smartphones and laptops. Several game consoles, a few Apple TVs and music streaming devices, Ring camera, Zwave Hub, printer, washing machine, garage opener, Ring doorbell and an assortment of Echo dots.
It is pretty easy to get there when everyone has a phone, a laptop, and there are a few shared tablets around. Add work + personal machines and it goes up a bit more.
Add a few wifi security cameras and other IoT devices and 30+ is probably pretty common.
Wireless temperature monitor
Sync module for some Blink cameras
2 smart plugs
Roomba
5 smart lights
RPi 3
3 of the smart lights I currently don't need and and so aren't actually connected. That leaves 8 connected 2.4 GHz devices.
On 5 GHz I've got 16 devices:
Amazon Fire Stick
iPad
Printer
Echo Show
Apple Watch
Surface Pro 4
iMac
Nintendo Switch
EV charger
Mac Studio
A smart plug
Google Home Mini
Echo Dot
RPi 4
Kindle
iPhone
The iMac and the Surface Pro 4 are almost never turned on, and the printer is also most of the time. That leaves 13 regularly connected 5 GHz devices.
That's a total of 21 devices usually connected on my WiFi, right what the article says is average. :-)
Smartphone, laptop, tablet, watch - that's 4 already. And this isn't just counting personal devices. Include TV, streaming stick, game console, printers, bulbs, plugs, speakers, doorbell, security cameras, thermostat and you'll hit that number pretty quick.
There are 16 devices on my WiFi right now and I would've though I was above average. I have a bunch of weird stuff like 3 Raspberry Pis that most households would not have, but I don't have most of the stuff you listed.
I guess I am less "connected" than the average American. Can't say I feel like I am missing out, though.
Most of your mobile devices are doing background tasks. It’s not typically high bandwidth stuff, but they are connected even when you aren’t using them.
I don't know why I was downvoted.
I was just expressing awe at how many wi-fi devices an average US household has.
I was not implying the information was wrong.
reply