None bulbs are kind of fascinating— in part due to their ability to act as relaxation oscillators [1]. I found an old electronics hobbyist magazine going into details [2] (Man, I love the linked site, BTW, so many awesome old electronic projects to pore over.)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxation_oscillator

[2] (Starts page 21—as printed in the corners of the pages) https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Elementary-Electro...

Not necessarily a PDF attachment?

Someone who made some progress on one Base64 attachment got some XMP metadata that suggested a photo from an iPhone. Now I don't know if that photo was itself embedded in a PDF, but perhaps getting at least the first few hundred bytes decoded (even if it had to be done manually) would hint at the file-type of the attachment. Then you could run your tests for file fidelity.

I'd say 99% of the time, the first 10 bytes would be enough to know the file type.

There are plenty of other PDF's with Base64 encoded attachments.

I'll take Hanlon’s Razor for 500, Alex.

I ignore Apple News these days. I had high hopes when Apple bought the company that eventually became their News app. Alas…

Of course I hate that I can't block ads, but at the same time, I wonder if the unblockable ads are not, in fact, a help for that "struggling industry".

90% of the content in the News+ app is itself an ad.

You can definitely block ads- try NextDNS.

I identified three in my neighborhood—added them to the map.

Watch out, I'm a mad man!

;-)

(Aside: I saw those "PCBite" doo-hickeys in your photos and said to myself, "What are these magical scepters?" Picked up a small set just now.)

You will not be disappointed! Well worth the investment.

There I go, hoarding data again.

Thanks, stranger.

I guess your sarcasm is not popular in this thread. Perhaps Musk-fatigue.

Most sarcasm worsens discussion. The comment guidelines say Don't be snarky.[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Its not snarky. Grok if an awesome alternative view if you accept that you should use your brain to make your own opinion and not just accept wikipedia (which can be wrong) as truth.

Its not sarcasm. Grok if an awesome alternative view if you accept that you should use your brain to make your own opinion and not just accept wikipedia (which can be wrong) as truth.

And in those days you had affordances which no longer exist, such as AA Call Boxes on the side of the road. If you get into an accident today, you are expected to have a phone to call for help. That can literally be the difference between life or death, jamming communications can cause people to die.

If you had a device that indiscriminately shut down cars around you, because people used to do fine with their horse and buggy, would that be okay?

He's imposing upon a common in a way that is taking that from everyone else - and, as noted, in a way that's potentially dangerous.

Given the popularity of r/fuckcars (as an example) it might be your straw-man argument is not such a reach, ha ha.

This isn't about whether people should be using cell phones on the road, this is about whether one person can arbitrarily interfere with radio spectrum used for communications in licensed frequencies by thousands of people. Obviously, by federal law, they cannot.

There are many other important or essential services that get disrupted by the jammer, like emergency services/911, police, private business communications, general internet data for everyone, etc. There's a very good reason this is illegal and it has nothing to do with keeping people off their phones in their cars.