67053 stories
·
3 followers

Consumer Confusion Regarding USB Power Adapters

1 Share

Yours truly, yesterday:

The problem I see with the MacBook power adapter situation in Europe is that while power users — like the sort of people who read Daring Fireball and Pixel Envy — will have no problem buying exactly the sort of power adapter they want, or simply re-using a good one they already own, normal users have no idea what makes a “good” power adapter. I suspect there are going to be a lot of Europeans who buy a new M5 MacBook Pro and wind up charging it with inexpensive low-watt power adapters meant for things like phones, and wind up with a shitty, slow charging experience.

Actual email, from actual reader D.B. today:

Anecdotes to support your point about normal customers not knowing which power adapter to pick, I’ve had both my mother and a mid-level IT director at my work complain that their Macs no longer hold a battery. In both cases, they were using a 5 watt USB-A charger.

It’s hard for people to understand that not all USB chargers are the same.

And from actual reader D.K.:

My mother in law called me to ask why her MacBook Air no longer turned on. She had called AppleCare and they told her to bring the computer to a store for repairs. Turns out she was using a very old 5 watt USB-A iPhone charger.

And of course, the real danger isn’t using an underpowered charger. It’s thinking you can save a few bucks by buying a cheap high-watt third-party charger and then burning your house down.

Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
6 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

Pay no attention to the (mad) men behind the curtain [updated]

1 Share

Readers here might remember I got some stick for calling John Key a fucking moron a while back. A fucking moron, specifically, for repeated calls for the Reserve Bank to juice up house prices again, just so home-owning voters will feel better again. Feel better again, and then vote National.

"The guts of what’s wrong," explained the moron, "is that the housing market is going down, not up" — and "then you have a negative wealth effect," and voters feel bad. And when they feel bad, they vote for the other team.

Classic short-termism.  Stuff rocket fuel into the economy, and then all things will be jake for the governing political parties. This, by the way, was Key's "one simple trick" while Prime Minister: ensure massive house-price inflation, no matter the economic and social dislocation, and then sit back and watch home-owners fooled into feeling better off, and borrowing and consuming more, regardless of the economic consequences. (Consequences for which we're all still paying, by the way.)

In the US, the discredited "wealth effect" — "a gussied-up version of Keynesian stimulus, only targeted at the prosperous classes rather than the government’s client classes" — is generally felt in the stock market. Pundits there are starting to get nervous about a soaring stock market with anaemic growth in the economic system itself, with "important implications for the path of America’s stockmarket boom and its economy."
The good times could continue, at least for a bit longer [says 'The Economist']. ... [But] might a wealthier society also take a harder fall? Bears would point to the bursting of the dotcom bubble in 2000, when a brutal stockmarket slump pushed America into recession. ... The stockmarket might be more of the economy. It still is not all of it.
It's not. And nor is the housing market. We can't get rich just by selling each other houses. (And kudos to one National minister at least who understands that.)

Yet David Stockman is concerned that nothing has been learned from the last major crash
Roughly 15 years ago it was reasonably well understood that the Great Financial Crisis of 2008-2009 had been case of speculation run amuck on both Wall Street and main street alike. These credit and housing bubbles, in turn, had been fuelled by the massive money-printing sprees of the Greenspan and Bernanke Fed.

It might have been presumed, therefore, that the mad money-printers [at the US central bank] would have had second thoughts about the underlying cause of these great economic disasters—that is, the dubious Greenspan policy known as the “wealth effects” doctrine. In simple terms the latter held that if people felt richer owing to soaring home prices and their stock market winnings, they would spend more freely and fulsomely, thereby goosing the Keynesian cycle of ever more spending-sales-production-income-and spending, which was to be rinsed and repeated in an endless round of rising prosperity.

At the end of the day, of course, Greenspan and his heirs and assigns at the Fed turned out to be unreconstructed Keynesians and the wealth effects doctrine a monumental economic con job. The latter did not make society richer; it just made the rich richer. Or stated more directly, main street got inflation at the grocery store, gas pump and doctor’s office—even as the asset-holding class experienced unspeakable windfalls in their brokerage accounts.
Let's not repeat the same mistake again here — especially when local interest rates are already below our trading partners, with no noticeable effect on genuine economic progress. Please: pay no attention to the mad men behind the curtain.

UPDATE:
"The advocates of annual increases in the quantity of money never mention the fact that for all those who do not get a share of the newly created additional quantity of money, the government's action means a drop in their purchasing power which forces them to restrict their consumption. It is ignorance of this fundamental fact that induces various authors of economic books and articles to suggest a yearly increase of money without realising that such a measure necessarily brings about an undesirable impoverishment of a great part, even the majority, of the population."
~ Ludwig von Mises from an interview 'On Current Monetary Problems'
Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
6 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

German Court Gives Thumbs Up to LinkedIn Deletion of True COVID Info

1 Share


Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
6 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

Too Fun to Check: Will Bari Take Over CNN Too?

1 Share


Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
6 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

Gaza is Divided and Could Remain That Way Unless Hamas Disarms

1 Share


Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
6 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

And the Star with Worst Trump Derangement Syndrome Is …

1 Share

There is a cure for Trump Derangement Syndrome, or TDS. Just ask Michael Rapaport.

The actor/comedian slammed President Donald Trump for years via his podcast and social media posts. Few were as loud, or as harsh, as the “Beautiful Girls” alum.

Then, slowly, Rapaport had a change of heart. He began listening to different points of view. He questioned the media accounts flooding his smartphone screen.

One example? He apologized for believing the “very fine people” hoax. The Legacy Media, along with a certain former President, continue to promote that bald-faced lie.

YouTube Video

Now, he’s not MAGA by any stretch, and he likely has reservations about the Trump agenda. He simply has a realistic, nuanced view of the complicated leader.

That hasn’t happened to the following celebrities yet. 

They still rage against President Trump as if every absurd charge against him were 100 percent true. Their anger remains white hot, and it’s driven them to sad emotional states.

But who has the most severe case of TDS?

RELATED: SAD – VARIETY GOES FULL TDS

Could it be Kathy Griffin? She’s the OG TDS sufferer, courtesy of her infamous Trump decapitation photo. The “D-List” alum apologized for the video before she un-apologized. Her career capsized at the time, a cultural moment when fantasizing about a dead president led to societal shunning.

She wouldn’t suffer as much professional blowback had she shared that photo today. Yes, the cultural decline is real.

Her career has yet to fully recover. Most recently, Griffin claimed that President Trump didn’t actually win the 2024 election. He stole it. She admits saying so aloud is crazy, but she went there all the same.

She’s a strong contender, but not the winner of this dubious contest.

What about Robert De Niro? He has spent a full decade shrieking about President Trump from every platform possible … even the Tony Awards.

YouTube Video

He’s still profanely attacking the president, most recently on MSNBC.

“Trump does not understand anything about humanity, people,” De Niro said on MSNBC’s “The Weekend.” “He has no empathy. I don’t know where — what he is, but he’s an alien, and he wants to hurt this country.”

The Oscar winner is a strong contender, but he’s reading from the same tired playbook. He also continues to work at a steady clip.

What about Rosie O’Donnell? The former “View” host hates Trump so much she literally left the country. She now calls Ireland home, but her new address hasn’t dimmed her TDS.

Instead, it may have gotten worse.

YouTube Video

She’s a possible winner, but her career hasn’t been impacted by her TDS. She isn’t the cultural force she once was.

Which leaves … Jimmy Kimmel.

The “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” host has cried on-air over President Trump’s re-election. That a former “Man Show” host would weep like that is beyond embarrassing.

Kimmel has turned his show into a one-stop TDS forum. Night after night. Monologue after monologue. Kimmel rages against all things Trump-related.

He’s more obsessed than even Stephen Colbert, and that’s saying something.

YouTube Video

Most importantly, Kimmel nearly lost his career because of TDS. Last month, he tried to pin Charlie Kirk’s assassination on Trump’s MAGA movement, a claim so foul it sparked a week-long ABC suspension. He could have apologized the following night for his comments, and the matter would have been settled.

His TDS wouldn’t let him set the record straight like any responsible broadcaster would. He reportedly planned to double down on the misdirection before ABC briefly pulled the plug on his show.

And, when he came back on the air, Kimmel refused to take the lie back. Later, he claimed the Right miscontrued his comments to twist their meaning.

That was another lie.

He’s doubled down on his far-Left partisanship since returning to ABC. That has helped him shed all the new listeners he collected following his high-profile suspension.

Kimmel currently stands as the celebrity with the most severe case of TDS. We still have three-plus years of Trump’s second term ahead of us, so anything can change moving forward.

Agree? Disagree? Share your comments below.

The post And the Star with Worst Trump Derangement Syndrome Is … appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Read the whole story
gangsterofboats
12 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories