Note that devices falling under the Ecodesign Regulation are exempt from this Battery Regulation, in particular smartphones and tablets, if they fulfill certain durability and repairability requirements (which are roughly already met today, at least by Apple).
So we won’t be seeing more easily replaceable batteries in smartphones and tablets.
It makes a difference whether an AI or a human wrote it. AIs make more random, inconsistent errors or omissions that a human wouldn’t make. AIs also don’t dog-feed their code the way human developers of tools usually do, catching more errors or unfit/missing logic that way.
For goods for which no domestic equivalent alternatives exist, why would the foreign suppliers lower their prices to compensate for the tariffs (which are paid by the importers to the government)? More generally, the cost of the tariffs will be split between foreign suppliers and local importers/consumers according to the competitiveness and availability of domestic suppliers, and according to market elasticity for the respective goods.
Well, they would likely have to lower their profit margin because the demand is reduced by the higher prices. Fewer purchasers will want to/be able to buy the item at the higher price. The supply and demand curve will find a new equilibrium, but it isn’t like the sellers are going to sell the exact same quantity of items with the price exactly increased by the tariff amount.
That assumes that demand is meaningfully elastic, that suppliers have room in their margins to absorb it, and that they're willing to. That is obviously not the case for a lot of things.
Products with inelastic or less elastic demand we can skip over because it's pretty self explanatory.
Products like the random cheap widgets a lot of us would buy from random Chinese sellers are often high volume low margin products with a lot of competition. Think about stuff like a USB->TTL serial board that's basically two connectors, one cloned chip, and a few supporting components on a single layer PCB. Hypothetically this is an ideal case for free market economics and these things should have already been basically as cheap as they can be at every step in the chain.
For less competitive items, particularly lower volume specialty items, a vendor may also decide that it's just not worth sacrificing profits in other markets by letting them know there's room to come down. A lot of the independent hardware designers I've been wanting to buy things from sell out every batch one way or another so they just don't care, demand exceeds supply even if demand from the US is reduced. Others have decided the volatility of the situation just isn't worth it with the risk of products getting delayed or additional charges added resulting in chargebacks and lost products and have simply stopped selling to the US altogether.
While not automated, you can make use of function-try-blocks, e.g.:
struct Example {
Example() = default;
~Example()
try {
// elease resources for this instance
} catch (...) {
// take care of what went wrong in the whole destructor call chain
}
};
What I’m thinking of is that the C++ exception runtime would attach exceptions from destructors to any in-flight exception, forming an exception tree, instead of calling std::terminate. (And also provide an API to access that tree.) C++ already has to handle a potentially unlimited amount of simultaneous in-flight exceptions (nested destructor calls), so from a resource perspective having such a tree isn’t a completely new quality. In case of resource exhaustion, the latest exception to be attached can be replaced by a statically allocated resources_exhausted exception. Callbacks like the old std::unexpected could be added to customize the behavior.
The mechanism in Java I was alluding to is really the Throwable::addSuppressed method; it isn’t tied to the use of a try-block. Since Java doesn’t have destructors, it’s just that the try-with-resources statement is the canonical example of taking advantage of that mechanism.
I bought a stockpile of Microsoft Ergonomic Keyboard for Business (LXM-00001) when they were still available, after Microsoft announced discontinuing their peripherals. I hope they’ll last me for a long time. I don’t know if the curved geometry still counts as a traditional layout for you, though. Incase, who acquired Microsoft’s peripherals IP, has re-released them, but apparently can’t keep up with the orders: https://www.incase.com/products/ergonomic-keyboard
Check out the Feker Alice series of keyboards. The Alice 98 has a full set of function keys & numpad. High quality build, too, I've been very happy with it. The one & only thing I don't like about it is it's missing the Home and End keys, but I can live without them.
It has some good aspects, but it doesn’t go upwards in the middle (so that you can tilt your hands outwards), can’t be tilted backwards, and has no palm rest. Regarding the key layout, I’m addicted to the 3x2 navigation block unfortunately, as well as to the context menu key, and have no use for a Fn modifier key. I appreciate wide modifier keys; a single-width Ctrl key like on the right side or the Alt key on the left side won’t do. And I’d really prefer having Alt on both sides. Lastly, I don’t want the arrow keys to be lower than normal (if anything, I’d rather have them a little higher up).
No the single slab of keyboard is not quite what I want. Being able to fully separate my arms feels so much better than scrunching my shoulders all day.
So we won’t be seeing more easily replaceable batteries in smartphones and tablets.
reply