remotelove

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
196
[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 36 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Fuckin' Europeans. Always so quick to be "muricans dum".

I call my wife a hot tea all the time, so of course we know what it is!

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 6 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I find it funny that they are blatantly using honey as a sales point since that is a direct rip from scam homeopathic products.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

If there is a positive, it's the threat of additional competition.

China would have to meet all of our safety guidelines and pass testing. That is fine. A properly motivated Chinese manufacturer can produce quality products, without a doubt.

Many Chinese goods are cheap for a reason though. Much of their manufacturing is unregulated and doing unapproved design modifications to save cost is just part of doing business. Parts are recycled as new, materials are substituted, QA is reduced or non-existent, etc.

When good QA is in effect, Chinese goods are just as expensive as other brands. It costs a lot of money to make and test quality things.

I wouldn't imagine that their cars are going to be any cheaper. If they are, costs are going to be cut where you least expect and in the most annoying places. The Chinese are masters of "streamlining", so pucker up for that. If they aren't breaking a law by doing so, a part is going to be highly "optimized" for mass manufacturing. Using counterfeit parts is also a thing because product longevity doesn't matter to the consumer any more.

Really, I am not hating on them. They just have a different way of doing business. Any buyer had better know the risks and benefits of any product they choose to buy, is what I am saying. Just take a trip to Harbor Freight if you need a tool to work once. Buy a quality tool if you need it to last.

Here is an example. I bought a light dimmer off of Amazon knowing it was going to have issues, and it did. After replacing the counterfeit MOSFETs, the box, potentiometer and board was still cheaper than a domestic product. (I should add that a MOSFET is the primary thing that you are buying in a DC dimmer. It's like buying a car and immediately having to replace the engine.)

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Your first mistake is believing anything Phil said as even slightly remorseful. Executives are full of shit and emotions for them is an act. These layoffs were probably planned months in advance and it's not like he can publicly applaud them, anyway.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It wasn't that difficult of a call. Layoffs are common after buyouts like these. I am surprised they didn't just blame it on "redundant roles". (It was overused during the pandemic, I suppose.)

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Another +1. Brother does make garbage printers in some cases, but their laser printers have been great.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago

I am curious about this myself am interested in bypassing their region and cartridge locks. It's not that I want to use their printers, I just want to cause mischief.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago

Yep. Super simple stuff. All you really need to do is disable one propeller and it's game over. No lasers, no explosives. All you need is something that functions as a bit of string, TBH. The drones that use more than 4 propellers may need a little more work, but it's the same concept.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago

As in, radio interference from helicopters?

Well, the intention is a last-resort defense. There have been hundreds of videos where soldiers on the ground see drones way in advance. (Not kamikaze drones, but recon/grenade droppers.) You open box, point mini-drone in the general direction of the bad drone that is tracking you and press a button. The time window would be very short.

In theory, only a small antenna pair on the mini-drone is needed to approximate the position of a Mavic if it's already pointed in that direction. I think even an ESP32 might be able to do the math fast enough, but I dunno.

If you mean to use a swarm of drones to attack a helicopter, I haven't thought about that.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

They wouldn't need any kind of radio themselves.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

If not speed, just having something to entangle a prop would work too. It's not that I have anything against explosives, it's just that they are heavy and it's just another mechanical bit that can malfunction. (However, a device that is functionally equivalent to a shotgun shell isn't that heavy and doesn't need complex triggering.)

Also, what I was thinking of would only really work against drones that drop munitions or against drones that are used for recon. You did get me thinking about suicide drones again though... Once a suicide drone starts their kill run, its too late and it's hard to hit.

Since the war in Ukraine started, I have been thinking a ton about small anti-drone systems for grunts. They would need to be compact enough to carry in a pocket and be durable enough to survive trench warfare life and at least be functional 99% of the time. Manufacturing at scale would solve some cost issues, but not completely. These conditions also hamper the capabilities of such a drone, a lot.

Side thought- If a shotgun-type concept is used, there is also a novel shell design that would be perfect:

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago (11 children)

I think something cooler would be a fleet of micro-drones that seek out and destroy other drones. Since it doesn't need to have a transceiver itself, seeking out anything broadcasting from above it at ~2.4ghz would be a challenge, but not impossible.

They don't even need to have explosives. Just speed and a good collision path. If it tracks someone's cell phone that could be awkward, but not deadly.

view more: ‹ prev next ›