zik

Recycled plastic is also inferior quality with worse structural properties so it's not really suitable for many applications.

That's absolutely not true. Bluetooth has many "profiles" which define different capabilities. Here's a list of them. These are all defined in the official bluetooth standards.

Maybe you were thinking of the "core specification" which defines the underlying protocol but doesn't define the profiles? But that's just the way they broke up the spec documents. The profiles are still official parts of bluetooth.

Apple's proprietary extensions for audio are not part of any official specification though.

Can we just have a bridge that detects MAGA trucks and ditches them then?

You just know a lot of those "Research Institute" sets ended up on scientists' desks at research institutes.

Not in reliability...

But they're probably still selling more CPUs to your average buyer who always buys Intel, doesn't read tech news and never even heard about the controversy.

Intel didn’t actually manufacture the chips.

The chips with the oxidisation issue were manufactured by Intel at their Arizona fab plant.

I saw another study which said vaccines reduced long covid by up to 50% depending on which strain it was.

Expected work hours seem to be increasing everywhere over the last twenty years or so. It's gotten pretty nuts.

Remember the time - two days ago - when Trump said he was going to ban all electric cars? I wonder how Elon feels about that.

Celebrities get wide latitude to protect themselves from imitators. Impressionists can do "satire" etc. but this isn't that. It's explicitly a reference to her voice in the movie, and as such she's protected by law from them going around her and hiring someone else to imitate her.

It was explicitly represented as her voice when he tweeted "Her" in relation to the product, referencing a movie which she voiced. It's not a legal grey area in the US. He sank his own ship here.

He tweeted "Her", which explicitly tells us it's a deliberate imitation of Scarlett's voice in that movie. And he tried to negotiate licencing her famous voice, which she rejected.

So it's more than just a coincidence, it's deliberate bad faith behaviour. Legally you can't misrepresent a product as being from a famous person when it wasn't, and he very much did that. I guess he was hoping she'd give in and accept the licensing agreement post-facto. But instead it looks he's in legal deep water now.