What stenographers capture is phonetic. These days a computer program translates that back into written language in real time. It uses knowledge of the language to pull this off. So it's a bit like autocorrect on you phone.
It's a capital city. In the end, there were options. Their directory had 200 providers, so even with that dismal accuracy, I bet could even find another provider if I didn't like my current one. I'm just providing supporting anecdata about how provider directories are vastly inflated with unusable results.
The public version of Google's build tool is Bazel (it's Blaze internally). It has some really impressive caching while maintaining correctness. The first build is slow, but subsequent builds are very fast. When you have a team working on similar code, everyone gets the benefit.
As with all things Google, it's a pain to get up to speed on, but then very fast.
Partial check outs are standard because the entire code base is enormous. People only check out the parts they might be changing and the rest magically appears during the build as needed.
There are sections of the code that are High Intellectual Property. Stuff that deals with spam fighting, for example. I once worked on tooling to help make that code less likely to be accidentally exposed.
Disclaimer: I used to work there, but that was a while back. They probably changed everything a few times since. The need to protect certain code will never go way, however.
Bose sells line array speakers that will happily work if placed behind a standard mic. They are using anti-feedback DSPs to cancel the audio loop this creates. They can be used in a speaker per performer setup.
What is weird is that they don't talk about this. There is a graphic on products that can do this that show the speaker behind the mic. That's it, no text at all. I think the moral of this story is that marketing is weirder than engineering...
And the saw frame has to be much stronger to handle the force of stopping that blade. Throwing $50 of new parts on an existing frame just means you throw the whole saw away after it triggers.
Every time this triggers, you need a new cartridge and blade ($40+) and time to swap them in. If I was sure this was saving a finger (as the dramatic stories in the press state), then I wouldn't think twice. But it probably just wet wood or something else conductive causing a false trigger. Show me the false rate data please.
I'm pretty sure saw stop will send you a new cartridge in the case of any false triggers. you just need to send them the old cartridge so they can analyze it and try to avoid similar false trips.
The BOM on this cartridge is not $99 or even close :)
Sawstop has said this themselves.
"And the saw frame has to be much stronger to handle the force of stopping that blade. Throwing $50 of new parts on an existing frame just means you throw the whole saw away after it triggers."
None of them required significant saw frame changes, and none of them require blade replacement. All have been tested repeatedly to respond and prevent injuries in the saem time (or even faster) than sawsotop.
The saw frames can already handle stopping the blade, even in job site saws (and definitely in any cast iron trunnion table saw). Please give any data that suggests it can't?
Again, i'm also telling you what the manufacturers said. Go read the discovery yourself, don't argue with me about what their own data said.
"But it probably just wet wood or something else conductive causing a false trigger."
This is wrong.
"Show me the false rate data please."
I cited it in another post, and honestly, i'm not going to spend my time trying to convince you your particular set of opinions is wrong. There are lots of people with lots of them
Why don't you do the opposite - this data is easy to find and there is a ton of it - discovery in table saw design defect lawsuits, tons of submissions and hearings in the CPSC, etc. Why don't you read a bunch of it, preferrably prior to forming and asserting strong opinions.
That's a good way to become better informed.
This thread already has plenty of misinfo in it (job site saws are a small fraction of the market, for example, despite people thinking it's the majority), it doesn't need more.
> what the manufacturers said
You expect me to believe that? Really now. And the BOM is not the only cost, but +$50 on the BOM is probably +$100 retail.
What will the manufactures try to extract is the better question? Answer: As much as they can.
The only other saw with similar technology (Bosch) to hit the US market cost 50% more than the similar SawStop product. They had to pull it due to patent issues (despite attempting a different approach), so we don't have good market data on how well it sold.
This just reeks of regulation forcing everything to be more expensive. I'd rather just see the patent go away and see what the market really does. I really can't image this technology being added to low end saws for less than $150 retail and then you have the per activation costs. It really kills the low end market, when a minimal saw is $500.
So, basically, your opinion is both more right and more valuable than the manufacturers own emails, R&D costs, BOM's, and retail costs produced in discovery.
Why? Because otherwise you might have to admit that you actually have zero data to back the opinion you offer in the last sentence.
As for Bosch, they have admitted they priced the Reaxx very high on purpose hoping to capture a premium user and avoid regulation. They knew they were going to get sued off the market. In fact, they were later granted patent rights for free and once that happened, suddenly, well, you know, we don't wanna. Because it was (as discovered later) literally intended to stave off regulation through game playing, not do something real.
Of course, you would know this if you would bother to read any of the actual data i pointed you at
I'm remarkably aware of what happened here - i attended the CPSC hearings and also have read all the lawsuit data.
But please, continue to just not produce any real data to back up your view because then you might actually have to change it.
I'm not going to respond further unless we are going to have a real conversation here that doesn't consist of me producing data and facts and you just saying "yeah well i like my view better".
Product market fit is a real thing. I'm a typical low end table saw user. You can ignore me at your peril, but many people will have similar values.
I just finished a flooring project that made use of the table saw. My low end $350 saw was perfect for the rip cuts. There isn't another tool that would do it as well, but I might be tempted to try if a low end table saw starts at $500 (which is already way lower than the cheapest SawStop sold today). Do you have data on safety of alternate ways to solve a problem when the obvious solution has been priced out of reach?
As far as what manufacturers promise, I want to see the contract. We been promised "it will be so cheap you won't even notice" so many times that I just assume is marketing bluster from the get go. They will charge what the market will bear and they will exit if there isn't enough profit. Things they said in a committee room are meaningless. The only thing we know for sure is that what has worked so far is about to get banned.
Obviously I don't have time to do all the research you have done. I'm just a typical low end user who is looking at what it will cost me and what options are likely to disappear.
That may depend on what you're trying to do. If you are figuring out something tricky, then lots of quiet head down time is what you need. Every interruption hurts when you are concentrating.
However, a lot of the time is just figuring out how to glue together multiple systems. Being able to pull in various people to interface little bits is priceless. There is no flow here, only collaboration.
A surprising number of calories are spent repairing skin damage. Increased uv exposure at altitude probably makes a difference, but probably doesn't help skin cancer rates.
My local ham group was doeing a "ragchew" on 2m as the eclipse was just starting (over us). It was the scratchiest net I've ever heard. That's only roughly 30mi at 147Mhz, but it made a big difference.
