As much as I think the cybertruck is a stupid vehicle and agree that teslas are built like shit, from what I understand this isn't an atypical amount of recalls for a new vehicle platform.

Without even paying much attention the two I know of, the gas pedal and the finger slicer are unacceptable however.

Assuming it is Translink busses, with the compass system you can simply tap your debit or credit card to pay. Hold it on the reader and look for the green checkmark and then move in.

Terrible news, private equity firms ruin everything they touch.

Shit like this is why we need strong regulations for anything that is a medical device that is depended on by people. I don't give a shit if it isn't profitable anymore, these companies need to support their customers that may be significantly impacted if their devices don't work.

Pretty much all my sleep/suspend issues with Linux went away when I switched to Manjaro from Fedora on my 11th gen Framework 13. Sometimes it doesn't work, but the majority of the time I can open my laptop after a couple days and still have most of my battery.

Nah, 3D printing as a hobby actually involves printing things. What you are describing is 3D Printers being the hobby. That is fine too, but too many people can't seem to make the distinction that they never actually make anything.

This is a topic that could be a novel for how much there is to consider, but in the end it comes down to resources and companies trying to choose what it best for the company overall. For a company to do anything, they are giving up many other things they could be doing instead. Whether it is limited budgets, limited personnel, or company priorities every decision made is always a tradeoff that means you aren't doing something else.

Most companies prioritize releasing new product so they can start getting revenue from it as soon as possible. A new product has the largest potential market, and thus makes shareholders happy to see revenue coming in. The sales from a new product are the easiest ones in most product's lifecycle. Additionally. releasing new products helps keep you ahead of competitors. So ongoing maintenance work is de-prioritized over working on new things.

The goal of testing is to simulate potential use cases of a product and ensure that it will work as expected when the customer has the product in their hands. It is impossible to fully test a product in a finite amount of time, so tests are created that expose flaws within a reasonable search space of the expected uses. If an issue is found then it needs to be evaluated about whether it is worth fixing and when. There are many factors that affect this, for example:

• How much would it cost to fix?
• How much time would it take to fix?
• Does it need to be fixed for launch or can it be a running change?
• How many customers are actually going to see the issue? Is it just a small annoyance for them or will it cause returns/RMAs?
• Is it within the expected use case of the product?
• Can we mitigate it in software/firmware instead of changing hardware?
• Is it a compliance/regulatory issue?
• Would this bring in new customers for the product?
• Was this done a specific way for a reason?

Unfortunately, after considering all this the result is often that it isn't worth the effort to fix something, but it is considered.

I desperately want to know what you were thinking might happen when you asked this question.

One major downside of hybrid working really is that if you are having a meeting where even a single person is not there, then the entire meeting may as well be a video call. If you are on a video call, then why do you need to be in the office for it?

At my job we work with physical objects, so being in office is a requirement at least part of the time, but if I'm just going to be in meetings for most of the day, there is no way I'm going into the office just to sit on video calls all day.

Note that this is a "contributor" post, which is essentially their sneaky wording for editorial. It isn't a real Forbes article and anyone that knows the Forbes website won't pay any attention to the article.

This seems to be a case of start with a horrible plan that they know will make everyone angry only to roll it back to a plan that still sucks but isn't quite as bad to try to reduce the sting. The thing is, I don't think their customers are that stupid.

Why wouldn't you prefer a headphone jack in your phone? It is yet another option for headphones that worst case you don't use. The only reason it has been removed is because it saves companies a few cents on the cost to build the product.