The OP mentions he switched to a Google FitBit Air which seems like an elastic cloth band which is all I want too, except I want it to operate like an Apple Watch in terms of integration with Apple Health. Anyone know if the FitBit Air and Apple Watch are similar in features?
> if anything Apple is catching up
That's been Apple MO for a long time. They may not be the first to market on a new tech, but when they do deliver, it's more advanced and higher quality than the competitors. It's a good strategy IMO.
You only need electricity if you want heated water, I’d guess that a bidet comes with a tee fitting with a valve on the T side that goes in between the supply valve and toilet supply line, allowing the supply valve to provide water to both the toilet and bidet.
Which is more important for AI/LLM stuff, the number of GPU cores or the amount of unified memory? I can choose from a Mini with the M5 Pro 18CPU/30GPU and 64GB RAM or a Studio with a M5 Max 18CPU/40GPU and 48GB RAM for roughly the same price
Memory bandwidth is one of the most important factors. The Max machines typically have higher bandwidth than Pro (you should look up these exact models to verify though). Having said that, you could run bigger models with 64GB.
I went with a 64GB M2 Max a few years back even though it stretched my budget and I'm glad I did. I'm not sure what I'd pick in this case. Tough call.
M5 Pro in a Mac Mini with 64GB RAM and 10Gbit Ethernet seems like the perfect Jellyfin server and Ollama test server. All for just over $3K (I specced with only 1TB local nvme).
This may depend on the size of your library. I tried installing Jellyfin on a Synology NAS, which runs Plex just fine, and it ran so poorly it was basically unusable. It “worked”, but it was painful.
not sure which cpu that Synology has, but I run jellyfin on ugreen nasync dxp8800 plus which has intel with QSV and it breaks no sweat in both transcoding (if needed) and serving over 10GBE.
It's a Synology DS720+ with a Celeron J4125, 2GHz, 4 cores, 2GB of RAM.
I thought it would be fine, because Plex has no issues, but it was painful. Every client I tried on the AppleTV was equally painful, and I didn't even try using a client until making sure all the metadata was downloaded and setup via the web UI. I was very deliberate and did one thing at a time, spending a whole day on it (mostly waiting and browsing to different screens to force metadata to get downloaded and cached).
A Pi isn't a NAS with an old CPU and minimal RAM which is running a bunch of other things as well. I have run Plex on my Synology, and it's fine, but I also have 8gb ram and honestly always have a better experience running Jellyfin on a small PC. Easier that way, and you can run other services. Before the rampocalypse you could find mini-PCs with 32gb ram and 1tb SSD for like $350, and have great transcoding ability when you are on the go or have multiple streams going.
I really wish someone would come out with a $25 "box" that sits on top of my bookshelf speaker that allows me to Airplay to it and power said speaker with a ~50w class-D amp. Then if I have multiple ones, it would allow them to pair and setup stereo or surround sound. I might even pay $50 for it. Kinda like a Sonos Amp but not at that price point.
Everything Sonos is already expensive. It's got the lifestyle-product tax built in.
Anything involving Sonos with wires increases support cost. Simply involving wires produces new ways for people to screw things up (as if supporting their wireless-only customers wasn't expensive enough).
And those who are using wires but not screwing things up gain the ability to expand and improve their audio systems in their own ways, without paying the Sonos tax to do so. They can buy/upgrade whatever speakers they want from any manufacturer in the world, while keeping the same Sonos Amp. That represents lost opportunity, so the amp gets taxed harder.
(The tech inside the Sonos Amp isn't particularly novel. It's just a small Linux box with a trick proprietary software stack and some audio hardware.)
I do like my Sonos setup (have a pair of Era300s, an Arc Ultra, Sub4, and Sub Mini) and now that they've fixed the app issues, it works really well. And the sound quality is good enough for me. I just wish the Amp product was about half the price. It doesn't do all that much more.
It means clocks tick at different rates depending on where they are.
Imagine spacetime as a field of local clocks. Far from the Sun, clocks tick faster. Near the Sun, clocks tick slower. A freely moving object tries to follow the straightest possible path through spacetime. But because the “time axis” changes from place to place, what counts as “straight ahead into the future” tilts slightly inward near the Sun. So the Earth’s path through spacetime curves toward the Sun.
Earth’s spatial speed around the Sun is about 30 km/s. But through spacetime, its “timeward” motion is basically c, 300,000 km/s. So even a tiny tilt in the time direction creates a significant spatial acceleration. That is why the time-warping term dominates for slow massive bodies.
That's right -- the atmosphere stays attached to the Earth mostly thanks to gravity, and the Earth's gravity in GR is almost entirely the gradient in clock rate near the Earth.
Near Earth’s surface, clocks lower down tick very slightly slower than clocks higher up. The change in tick rate is on the order of 10^(-16) per meter. While extremely small, that's enough to generate the familiar 9.8 m/s^2 spatial acceleration we experience. Such a small gradient in clock rates generates macrosopically noticeable spatial accelerations because the "translation" factor is c^2, a tremendously large number.
Now, if I wanted to cover all my bases here, I'd need to point out that gravity does also bend space -- that is just not a relevant factor for "ordinary" gravity acting on relatively slow moving matter (like the Earth itself, or the Earth's atmosphere). For instance, for light itself, spatial bending is just as important (in fact, the gravitational deflection of light by a weak static gravitational field is controlled by a near 50/50 split between spatial and temporal effects). Near a massive black hole, it's not that simple and can't meaningfully be understood in terms of "time" and "space" effects being independently separated.
I’ve seen this described before in terms of how GPS is able to do what it does, so not surprising. But still haven’t explained why time would so dominate the space dimension.
Edit: The response below is dead for some reason, please vouch.
Everything we experience is far larger in time than space, so of course time effects dominate on scales we perceive.
But this just raises the question of what it means to be larger in time than space. You can look at it in terms of multiples of Planck distance or time, but I think there's a more enlightening way to look at it. If you express the speed of light in those Planck units, it's 1. But the speed of light is also the maximum speed of causality. Any causally-bound system must run long enough for chains of causation to propagate, usually far below the speed of light in practice. This means that basically anything that exists within the bounds of our manipulation must be happening at scales where there is far more time involved than space.
We all exist below the diagonal because the diagonal is the bound at which the ways chemistry and biology work no longer even are theoretically possible.
You contribute to the stress-energy tensor by having mass or energy. That directly influences spacetime curvature. The Einstein field equations tell you how precisely.
reply