Another vote for Qidi from me. I have Qidi Plus4, which is amazing. I selected the UK version (where I live), and don't have any issues. I believe the faulty part issue you were referring has been resolved long since as mine doesn't have this, based on the part numbers.
I was against getting a Bambu mainly for the proprietary software.
This is textbook whataboutism. I live in the UK. I'm outraged by how much time/money is spent on Israel and Ukraine issues than our own. Similar to yourself, I have to wonder why UK govt chose to help one side with weapons in these specific conflicts. The difference here is of course, protestors are there on their own free will (for the most part, I guess?), whilst I don't have a say in how my tax money is being used.
It is easy to see why an individual would choose life over death, if one has the means for a comfortable life. A second order question would then be: would the society value your life over their own? Even as we speak, many thousands are dying of preventable causes, including man made starvation. There is no way immortality will be accessible to all, and will only increase inequality.
I'll happily change my mind if we can fix world hunger and homelessness before conquering death.
I'm not sure why you characterise this as political.
I wish the "case" was a modifier like Italic, bold. It would have been easier to _not_ have separate ASCII codes for upper and lower-case letters in the first place. What are your thoughts on MS Word using different characters for opening and closing quotes?
Just like "You are not your code", may be we should also have a "You are not your Process Certificate" mantra. It is not the people that are dismissed, but those who insist on The Process at all costs.
How are you sure it did not happen? I am not suggesting India tried everything first, but neither party here has a proven track record of trustworthiness. If India wants to stop him by any means, the best strategy would be to not ask and be denied; it would be a shame if something happened to him later.
My daily driver has been lily58, which seems to have a good balance. It did take me quite a bit longer than I thought, but now it is quite comfortable - touch typing also feels more intuitive, especially with tenting. Prior to this, I was using Microsoft Sculpt ergonomic, which seems decent. However, after using lily58, even MS ergonomic keyboards feels less comfortable.
Definitely on the hobby side, rather than objectively better :) However, what made a massive difference for me was the tenting. Perhaps this is something that may help?
This is clearly not true. There are term limits on how long the society is disallowed from using an idea. If I take good care of it, my table does not disappear in 5 years, nor can I sell the same table ten times. The bigger issue with IP is how they are used to prevent others in the society from using the idea they see right in front of their eyes.
This is a case of people actively building and deciding to use a tool with plausible deniability built-in. How would you regulate people when they shirk any accountability? It is much more reasonable to require that people use a tool that shows its work.
> How would you regulate people when they shirk any accountability?
This happens with or without AI. It's not too hard to make an algorithm that discriminates against people without doing so explicitly. You can use certain bits of data as proxies for whatever characteristic you want to discriminate against (e.g. ZIP code, household income, marital status, etc).
Due to the myriad of ways to arrive at a discriminatory conclusion, it's easier to regulate results than tools.
One potential solution to your question is to make the laws carry strict liability (I'm assuming the EU has something along those lines). Plausible deniability no longer exists because intent doesn't matter. The company is liable if someone can demonstrate discrimination, regardless of whether it was intentional or accidental.
That ends up pushing towards something similar to what you want. It encourages a tool that can show its work to fend off lawsuits without being directly tied to the tool itself. The other alternative is extensive testing to make sure discrimination doesn't happen, but I think that will still be worrying to companies due to the inability to prove a negative.
Going back to the context of the thread: Not every risk has to be codified into the law, or enforced by the government. Should we make it illegal to prance around with a metal rod in their own backyard, just in case? Making a risk illegal does not magically improve safety, and there is a non-zero probability of the "enforcement" making things worse.
I am with you and, in a sense, you are preaching to the choir. If system setup was up to me, maybe with few notable exceptions, all new laws would require a sunset provision to force bad laws out of existence. I am certainly not arguing that just making things illegal improves safety ( and even when it does, I am not stoked about it ).
I was against getting a Bambu mainly for the proprietary software.