I'm glad to see somebody is getting some data on this, I feel bad memory is one of the most underrated issues in computing generally. I'd like to see a more detailed writeup on this, like a short whitepaper.
I was recently searching for NiMH charging ICs, turns out they basically don't exist. Most devices which charge their NiMH batteries implement low CC charging, which is slow. It's a shame, because NiMH batteries do have their advantages (safety, ease of finding replacements, etc.) and can be recharged fairly quickly if the charger is smart enough.
I'm not sure what IC they use, but it uses a two-line text display and can switch between Lipo, LiFE, NiMH, NiCD, Pb, and a few other modes, and some of them allow adjustable cutoff voltage, max charge time, etc. That's just a cheap 80W model but there are 200W+ chargers that use the same interface.
I have done similar searches before. They do exist, but most dedicated ICs are targeted towards tightly-integrated cells or battery packs. The variety available is much smaller than for Li-ion batteries, and the ICs are more expensive.
It seems like commercial multi-cell battery chargers mostly use custom microcontrollers to achieve this, instead of multiple charging ASICs.
But I will, because in this day and age, I should be perfectly able to do so.
Non-use of UTF-8 should be simply considered a bug and not treating text as UTF-8 should frankly be a you problem. At least for anything reasonably modern, by which I mean made in the last 15 years at least.
It's not wrong though. Besides North America, there are major carriers in India, France who use IPv6-only networks (with 464XLAT), and I know several South American and Asian countries have them as well. In fact, India is a world leader in IPv6 adoption.
Nowadays it's a very common for mobile networks to be IPv6-only because these providers haven't been able to secure large Ipv4 subnets in the early days. Ironically, they have the most devices. However, this is also the reason why phones work much better with XLAT than Windows or Linux.
You are correct, Czechia is a parliamentary democracy. Usually, the government is formed by the parties that together have a legislative majority in the lesser chamber.
I should clarify that this is not a law, rather a "government decision" (a la "executive order") on how to act on it's law. Forgive me, I'm not well versed in legal English, and the systems are quite different.
I don't disagree, but few non-techies will be able to download an image off of an FTP server or mount an NFS share. Thats where such a service adds value.
I know my perspective is really skewed, but don't filezilla and the like make ~FTP easy enough? Or failing that, even Windows must have the hooks to (implement an add-on to) mount SFTP and treat it like a thumb drive? Why is it harder to use FTP/SFTP than a fancy web frontend?
Because a lot of people nowadays just use a browser. That’s 99% of what a computer is to them.
“What’s a filezilla?”
“go here, drop files there” instead of “download this, put this here, connect, drop your files here” makes the difference between people using your service and not using your service.
> Because a lot of people nowadays just use a browser. That’s 99% of what a computer is to them.
Doesn't mean they could not learn that it is not. I think that developers underestimating users is a problem. "They are too dumb to run a desktop app, so let's put everything in the browser" is a weak argument to me.
This is less true of software like the one mentioned in the article that are intended to be self-hosted, though: I have to walk my users through using it anyways and so I can show them FileZilla or install a SFTP filesystem on their computer or setup syncthing/dropbox for them to handle uploads. There’s lots of ways to avoid exposing a custom file upload service for this sort of thing.
reply