Agreed, and centralized coordination is a HUGE simplifying assumption to the task at hand.

The beauty of growing the chemistry with bugs is the limit to your production is really just the size of your bioreactor, and thats a very much known and solved problem

Chernobyl hit criticality. Fukushima did not. There is a *vast* difference.

GTA 5 PC added anti-cheat at some point and those usually do end up breaking Linux compatibility. I don't see GTA 6 launching on PC without anti-cheat also, because the public lobbies in GTA 5 were an absolute mess of people doing crazy things like turning your character into a toilet. I doubt Rockstar would want a repeat of that.

Also, the other thing they hate even more than cheaters is people using hacks to get free shit. The new game will probably be even more heavily monetized than GTA 5, and those Shark Cards ain't gonna just sell themselves.
 

For a game where a big part of the appeal is the driving simulator aspect (screwy cartoon video game physics aside), 30 FPS feels like a slideshow. There are certainly genres of games where it doesn't matter as much, but high-speed action is kind of the whole point of GTA.

The thing is, for consoles 30fps is entirely playable as long as its *stable* for all except the turbo-gamers who are unhappy with anything less than 120fps ultra 4k. 60fps is observably better. Beyond that... eh..... Not a lot of point outside of competitive PVP. Most gamers dont have reflexes fast enough to really make great use of it. But 30fps feels comfortable, just not perfect. But considering how shitty most loungeroom TVs are , your not gaining much.

People who really want high performance play on PCs anyway. Then higher FPSs start to matter, but you also have the high end of Nvidia cards for the speed fiends, and if it runs happily 30fps on a console, it'll run 60fps happily, and probably better on a 5070 or whatever.

Someone needs to hack them and have their AI guru tell them all to wear orange and pointy tin-foil hats.

Or just take the phone you already have out of your pocket and use that instead? The main advantage of using smart hub/speaker devices is that you can program them to know what room they're in, so you can say things like "lights on" and just have it activate the lights within that room. But at three hundred doll hairs per room to do that with Apple hardware, that'd be a nope from me, dawg.

I'm honestly still pretty happy with the Echo Dots that I got from some Black Friday sale an eternity ago. They were cheap enough to put one everywhere I wanted smart lighting control and besides setting kitchen timers, is really the only practical use I've ever found for such devices. For anything else, it really is just less hassle to use my phone.

I'm assuming you forgot about the time their cars were wearing out their flash storage modules.

Presently, nope. Apple is yet again insisting that one of their new devices does not actually need 3rd party developer support to succeed. If your smart devices are from an unsupported ecosystem, you'll have to do the usual sort of workarounds to get them to play nice with this thing.

I don't trust commodity-manufacturers who need to keep rapidly iterating their products to maintain profits to supply me with something intended to be affixed for the long term.

Even though Apple might do a better job than many vendors, they still release products that stop receiving updates and other maintenance long before the physical hardware is worn out. Something that's going to be with me for a very long time, like something permanently installed in my house, or something integrated into my car, is not something that I want from a commodities-supplying tech firm.

Reading his wiki entry he reminds me of Bergholt Stuttley Johnson.

Probably via activating the defrost elements on equipment that is stupidly designed without hardware failsafes in place. Yeah, in the old days you'd expect there to be one of those bimetallic limit switches that physically cuts power to the defrost element, but now you've got software monitoring a sensor instead. Add a little malicious code to ignore the output of the sensor and suddenly Oh lord Jesus, it's a fire!

Its a freaking fridge. A thermostat controller standard on those commercial fridges is $20 (I know, I installed one on a regular refrigerator I modified to use as a homebrew beeer keg fridge so I could keep the beer at a precise 6c . It doesnt need to be some insane IoT thing.

Chernobyl (actually in ukraine but whatever) was really the clusterfuck confluence of a very old design capable of a proper meltdown (modern designs literally can not) , incompetence, and a metric tonne of rotten luck. For modern designs the worst case scenario is Fukushima. An inconvenience not much worse than, say, blowing up an oil refinery, not an environmental omnicatastrophe.

Fukushima on the other hand, only led to MAYBE one death as a result of the accident, and a few handfuls of injuries. with 40 dead as a result of the evacuation, but keep in mind, it was a frigging earthquake, that did most of the damage, not the actual nuclear accident. If anything it showed in the very worst case scenario, destruction of the reactor, the design was safe. You'd have had more deaths if it was an oil refactory, because when THOSE things explode, there are significant deaths just because thats what happens when you blow up explosive fuels.

The real problem with modern nuclear is its just expensive and extremely complicated to get running compared with the cheaper energy from solar, wind, etc. But. the Environmental dangers? We solved that issue decades ago.