Cool.
So, anyway.
I mean, plug-in hybrids are what they are, and in Europe in particular there's way less charging infrastructure, way more people living in apartments without the ability to set up a home charge station and way more anxiety about charging full electric EVs as a consequence, depending on the region. Hybrids are whatever, plug-in hybrids seem like a reasonable way to bridge that gap.
But I'm already entertaining this conversation way more than I want, because it's going to lead off on a tangent and I don't want to go on that tangent and we're going to end up in how public transport is the real answer and there are millions of threads here to go rehash that conversation.
So anyway.
I hate when people post hyperpartisan reporting because it makes me do homework. In this case, you made me listen to almost an hour of a three hour podcast with three techbros chatting about techbro crap in techbro ways. You owe me years of life.
Anyway, so the conspicuously missing context here is he's asked if they will let go of the subscription model and go after an ad business model instead and he responds "hopefully not" and clarifies that he thinks the AI differentiator from Google search is that it doesn't feed people ads.
He then transitions into saying that you'd need a super hyperspecialized profile for it to make sense and then maybe it could work but they haven't figured out long term memory well enough for that, which is when he talks about why they'd want to have a browser to build that hyperspecialized profile.
This is my least favorite type of misinfo, too, because he's actually kinda saying what they say he's saying, just out of context. But more importantly, because he says some other shit that is more outrageous, too. For example, when explaining why he thinks the subscription business will grow more than the ad business the way he puts it is that "people see it as hiring someone", so they're more willing to spend, and he ponders "how much do people pay for personal assistants and assistant managers and nannies?" and suggests that they'll provide similar services for cheaper to people who can't afford human help.
Which may not be as clickbaity and I get he finds it positive-on-the-aggregate, but is certainly some cyberpunk dystopia stuff that didn't need the out of context quoting to be a thing.
Fair. That's the problem of reporting about Europe or even just the EU as a unit. Big place, lots of cultural differences, lots of size differences in economies and populations across those cultures.
Tesla was the top EV seller in Europe? I'm surprised.
I'm guessing the top electric-only vehicle excluding hybrids and plug-in hybrids? In the two or three European countries I visit often you definitely see more of those, at least anecdotally. But maybe London City techbros and finance bros outweight everybody else? That seems plausible.
I have to say, I find all of these reports and investor analyses on Tesla's PR woes way too optimistic about how well they'll recover if and when Musk "steps away from the government". I really don't think that genie is going back in the bottle, guys.
I'd say nationalize it, but considering the "nation" in question, maybe extremely not that?
Well, the relationship between Chrome and Chromium in this situation is... interesting and a big question mark.
Presumably whoever owns Chrome will by default have a remarkable amount of influence on the ongoing direction of Chromium, just by way of having a massive dominant position over the market overnight. Chrome is not just plain Chromium as it is.
Given that the sale of Chrome would be fundamentally a regulatory constraint it's also a given that Google would not immediately attempt to re-enter that market (or if they did that they would get a swift spanking all over again).
So yeah, Chrome is probably valuable. How well you can monetize it decoupled from Google's advertising business proably depends heavily on who you are. Meta or Microsoft could do that very well, but then they'd be in the same regulatory danger zone Google is. DDG, Brave, Opera or Mozilla would definitely benefit but probably wouldn't be able to afford it.
Because we're on this timeline the more likely outcome is Elon Musk buys it and we go into another round of seeing the shambling, zombified corpse of a thing stumble forward for years while shedding fascist propaganda. I'm trying to decide if Bezos buying it puts us in the regulation danger zone scenario or the shambling fascist zombie scenario. Both?
That's a terrible headline. The prosthesis isn't "controlled by thoughts", it's controlled the same way as the older ones, tapping to the muscles in the arm. The novelty they're talking about is the hand being wireless.
This is so cool by itself, why the need to fluff it up with misinformation? The interview (that this article is just rehashing) does the same thing, with the daytime TV hosts insisting on the "controlled by thoughts" line even as both of the interviewees keep trying to correct the statement with accurate information.
I mean, it may be higher than I think, because the amount I think is pretty low.
But I don't think it's the default. I am not THAT detached from younger people. iPads and Chromebooks are very region-specific options.
If you have numbers to any of that feel free to share them, because this is very far from a binary thing. There are literal billions of Windows PCs out there and that split isn't going to be 90/10 (which would still leave you with hundreds of millions in the small bit anyway).
Citation gonna be extremely needed there. I have no idea what the penetration of the MS store is these days, but I'd be surprised to find most people punch in "VLC" in their app store before doing it in Chrome. Never mind that growing up with Windows 7 puts you in your mid 20s, who in their right mind bought into the Windows 8-era iteration of UWP? If you had said Windows 10 I would have rolled with it, but... yeah, gonna need so much citation.
But in any case, as I said above, the MS Store app is not the same as the multiple Linux package managers. You're not going to write VLC and find three different identical-looking results with only fine print revealing which is which type of installer (none of which you can tell apart if you come from Windows anyway).
Hey, no, no malice read into it and I'm all for having a conversation about the subject. But it's also true that if we have to litigate the basic facts we're talking about (specifically, that Windows 10 WILL in fact have purchaseable security upgrades for several more years) over multiple posts it's just not a very productive conversation, you know? Ideally the chat starts from the actual information being shared in the link, or at the very least in the headline.
In any case, yes, businesses will need to keep getting security updates and they will get security updates for the foreseeable, be it by moving to Win11 where they can or by moving to the long term support tracks for Win10 where the hardware doesn't support it or it's cheaper.
Yes, indeed it is anecdotal.
Did the sentence "In the two or three European countries I visit often you definitely see more of those, at least anecdotally" tip you off? I find that very observant.