It took the mass public a long time (15 years?) to realize search engines had shifted from the former to the latter, and that allowed Google to leverage that misplaced trust into huge profits.
Expect commercial AI to be the same, unless it's explicitly set up otherwise (read: Kagi assistant).
This reminds me of an old video about a guy that got invited to stay in the penthouse suites of casinos. In the video, he has a 'friend' who organises these trips for him (the friend works for the casinos).
This guy couldn't recognise the conflict of interest, and neither will 80%+ of AI users.
I just rolled out CE in our small org, it is a nice step up from Free GitHub, there are Wikis, and no uncertainty about the runners. Founders like it better because their IP is on their own servers now.
I find it a bit concerning that this piece focusses so much on customers and shareholders... I know I don't pay, but perhaps sometime I will, and I am learning GitLab and applying at large orgs as GitLab consultant. All because of CE... So I hope it will stay. It is a nice and very complete on-ramp to EE.
Hmm, website owners can apparently mess with my settings and make their site "smooth scrolling". Ugh. It's like having a nightmare where I'm trying to scroll as hard as I can but I feel like I'm scrolling through mud.
It actually feels like they have a speed limit to scrolling, I'm used to giving my MX Master 3S a big spin and being at the bottom of a page near instantly, here it takes time.
I was once on the bus (in my own home town) with someone from Dublin (which I was visiting in a week back then), he recommended I not go to Temple Bar: "It's just for tourists". So where should I go? "There are some nice bars in ${some District}".
Well I passed though said district and saw some pretty drab houses and some bars with TVs (not my thing). Went to Temple Bar: It was vivid, with live music and many cheerful people on the street.
They are free to charge you extra for taking the charger out of the box. So I'd grant them a bit of civil disobedience on this one and just take that nice GaN charger.
I can see the EU's take on this, and maybe overall this will even be good. I have some nice Anker chargers and can charge everything we have at home with them (added some USB-C to ligthning/micro-USB thingies here and there), but I'd be a bit annoyed if the EU would force my company operating with small margins to have 2 versions of my packaging workflow.
Maybe they should just "encourage" good behaviour? With a law that is less forcing, ie just say: "If you offer a version without charger, the price must be the same as with charger. " That would (slightly) encourage leaving it out, while not forcing companies' hands.
The laptop is being shipped anyway, so I assume the charger in there may be a "sweet deal" if you need one. 65W GaN chargers are a nice sweet-spot at the moment (size/power/price-wise), ie Ikea has one at 14 eur), wouldn't mine having one or two extra.
The easiest option to implement would be to have separate SKUs for the charger and the laptop. And not three SKUs: laptop with charger, laptop without charger, separate charger.
If you ship to multiple countries you can reduce the SKUs even more as the laptop SKU isn’t country specific anymore.
Offering a version without the charger for the same price would not reduce ewaste which is the point.
Sure. And support is paying for people that are buying chargers that are too weak. Or otherwise crappy.
This is a Dutch source, but BTO charged 25 eur to remove the charger [0], because they prefer not to deal with people trying their own wonky chargers. Ok, so this was a 100 W+ laptop, arguably different (BTO only does this with 100 W+ models).
BTO does that because their laptops use more than what USB-PD can deliver (240 watt). That is an understandable use case for supplying a power adapter.
reply