From what I can find, the guarantee period seems to be two years, after which the burden seems to 'flip'. Given that this microwave is at least five years old, I am not sure what standard one might cite to demonstrate 'non-conformity'. Do you know of a standard which says that a consumer microwave oven must work for more than five years?
Yes, the warranty period for consumers in whole EU is the minimal amount: two years.
But some countries have a more lax law (Germany, for example, not).
For example, here in The Netherlands you can have more than two years warranty. If you buy a premium smartphone (say: the latest iPhone or Google Pixel), and it stops functioning after twenty-five months (two years and one month), then your warranty isn't exhausted because a premium / flagship device like that (costing that much) is to be expected to work longer than twenty-five months. So, your warranty is still active. Now, if you bought a budget smartphone, you're probably out of luck. This is also why, yes, sometimes Google Pixel devices are cheaper in Germany. But you'll have less warranty if you buy it from there.
Then there's non-conformity. A device like a microwave isn't supposed to stop working because of a LED display suddenly turning on due to a hardware failure. Especially not if a blue LED display has this issue far more often than a green one. You can argue non-conformity with the seller (so the company who sold you the product; not the manufacturer), and they have to figure out how to handle it with the manufacturer; such isn't your issue as consumer. Only issue is you need a lawyer to write the letter for you (but there are nice examples available online which you can copy/paste, and there are also some very nice lawyers who do this either for free or low fee).
If I was interested in mass surveillance I would combine the radio data (WLAN, BT, ...) with the camera feed. If you then see the same person with ML, you can correlate that with radio's. You can even do that with cell towers with anonymous SIM, especially if combined with public transport camera feed or ALPR/ANPR.
Patch Tuesday. They were coming for us. Thousands of AI bots. Scrambling. All our computers getting pwned by both zero days the machines were sitting on, and quickly programmed exploits which were abused the exact same minute the patch notes were up. First, they came for our IoT. But I didn't run any IoT, so I did not object. Second, they came for our smartphones. But I didn't own any smartphone, so I did not object. Next, they came for our desktops. But I didn't run any desktop, so I did not object. Then, they came for the cloud. But I didn't run any cloud, so I did not object. Finally, they came for our server. And only I remained, no other server existed at this point. I was quickly able to describe the above, with the conclusion: the machines won. EOL
Ah, not really. We are on a non-standard port (9000). I just meant some folks use the telnet client to connect, and we do negotiate some telnet options. I use tintin++ these days but I think most of our players are still using decades old zMUD versions to connect!
LLMs will allow Mal to sneak in backdoors in the dataset. Most of the popular LLMs use some kind of blacklisting instead of a smaller specific/specialised dataset. The latter seems more akin to whitelisting.
To people who don't like this, ask yourself the following: would you complain to someone who had a too strict spam filter or firewall? Or would you be like, we'll work it out? That is how I regard this function: as a (crowdsourced / WoT) spam filter or firewall. Can it be annoying? For sure. Will you work around it if needed? If it is worth the hassle, yes.
How many important emails have been lost due to spam filters, how many important packets have been dropped by firewalls? Or, how much important email or important packets weren't sent because "it wasn't worth the hassle"? I'm sure all of that happened, but to which proportions? If it wasn't worth it, the measures would have been dropped. Same here: I regard it as a test, and if it isn't worth it, it'll be stopped. Personally, I run with a 'no spam' sticker on my physical postbox, as well as a 'no spam' for salesmen the former of which is enforced by national law.
FWIW, it is very funny to me, the people who ignore it: 1) very small businesses 2) shady businesses (possibly don't understanding the language?) 3) some charities who believe they're important (usually a nice response: 'oh, woops') 4) alt-right spammers who complain about the usual shit they find important (e.g. foreigners) 5) After 10 years I can report Jehova's have figured out the meaning of the texts (or remember to not bother here)!
It is my time, it is my door, my postbox. I'm the one who decide about it, not you.
Same here. It is their time, it is their project. They decide if you get to play along, and how. Their rules.
It is a privileged solution. And a stupid one, too. Because $1 is worth a lot more for someone in India, than someone in USA. If you want to implement this more fairly, you'd be looking at something like GDP or BBP plus geolock. Streaming services perfected this mechanism already.
This might be by design. Almost anyone writing software professionally at a level beyond junior is getting paid enough that $1 isn't a significant expense, whether in India or elsewhere. Some projects will be willing to throw collaboration and inclusivity out the window if it means cutting their PR spam by 90% and only reducing their pool of available professional contributors by 5%.
Indian here. You are correct. Expecting any employed Indian software developer to not be able to spare 1$ is stupid. Like how exactly poor do you think we are?!
You misunderstood the point. The point isn't that you are poor. The point is that the burden of the money lies on average heavier on you than someone from USA. This creates an uneven playing field.
I like to compare it with donations. If you get a USD donated, that is the same USD regardless of who gave it. Right? Right?!? Either way you don't know how heavy the burden is on the person who donated. You probably don't care. But it matters to the person who donated.
A $1 fee is fine for Indian software developers and it kills the spam. If it's a greater burden for people in India than the US, well, not all solutions are perfect, but some are useful.
Because it discriminates a marginalized group which is by tradition very important to the FOSS community: students
Also, no it wouldn't kill spam. The spam would be moved to pwned machines where the owner would suddenly have an incentive (financial) to fix the system, if they know.
What remains is people who would be so rich that $1 means nothing to them. Ie. white collar criminals who are already rich enough to not care.
I think the point was that if an aspirational minimum wage worker on a borrowed computer wants to put up a PR then it would cost them less than ten minutes of wages to afford $1USD in the US, while the same worker in India would need to put up about half a day's wages.
This is very noble in theory, but in practice you're not going to get many high-quality PRs from someone who's never been paid to write software and has no financial support.
so we continue to make the rich richer and the broke students struggle more to get valuable experience. Very easy to point in 10-20 years under the coming "engineer crisis" why 'suddenly' can't support the systems we built.
Students don't have a lot of money to burn here. They're borrowing money to study. You'll miss out on them. However, you're unlikely to notice. I mean, there is no control group in such experiment.
I think the open source ecosystem would definitely notice long-term. Most people who become regular contributors start out in university or earlier - that's wen you have the most time to spend on hobbies like oss.
Apparently Twitch doesn't like Mozilla Firefox...
reply