The auto industry does not have a choice. They need batteries and will not get them from European suppliers, as they cannot deliver the same cost and quality AND they need the growing wealthy population there to keep their bottom line up.

Maybe 5-10 years down the line there will be enough forcing of Chinese battery suppliers to open factories in Europe to reverse this, but it is not going to happen soon. Maybe the tarrifs will speed this up, maybe not.

Obviously, more plants are needed to combat the destructive USB industry.

C

The paper itself, which is linked in the BBC article, is quite a read too Original Article

Early adopters will profit the most, it’s a non-issue.

Do you mean who’s in charge of the supreme court? Theoretically it is non-partisan, in reality it is currently Republican stacked.

Everyone rigs elections

Swedes maybe? Or is there a significant population of Czechs with 48 fingers on each hand?

While I understand the sentiment, such action doesn’t match the long term goals of the bloc to unify the continent. Another solution needs to be found to ensure single bad actors cannot hold up actions which severely impact the remaining stakeholders - I have no idea how it could be done though.

Xoxo, Another useless armchair observer

You need an incredibly robust quality management system to even achieve certification (allowing you to place on the market) when creating systems which include life support function, or functions which potentially could kill a user. All potential changes both within and outside of the manufacturers’ control MUST be assessed and constantly monitored so such issues CANNOT arise.

No one should be able to legally place an unsafe app on the market, or legally perform changes to the app without the necessary checks and balances.

Medical device approvals in most countries are definitely not the wild west. Although they are not perfect.

The daily mail is not a reliable news source. Your friend should speak to their healthcare specialist for advice on flying if they haven’t already

Op comes here looking for positivity and you just slam dunk life back in their face. I like it!

And hippopotamus!

Is this not standard AAA title pricing?

The Tories have literally just stolen conservative Australia’s early 2000’s immigration policies. Offshore “processing” which never actually happens, hardline “stop the boats!” which in reality is just “ban journalists talking about the boats” and “break down the smuggling gangs” which ends up just being “throw money at a foreign regime to enable our companies to exploit their resources via shitty contracts”.

If this had anything to do with bringing order to the asylum process, it would involve providing resources to said process.

Laptops are being gradually added to the list of devices within scope of this change. It only counts for any new device being sold on the market after the changes take effect.

The clause only makes sure that chargers do not limit, when connected to competitors devices. The regulation is coming from an e-waste perspective, which the EU has made it clear that it is not interested in entertaining or letting companies push them around.

As I commented above, the regulation clearly states “any additional charging protocol allows for the full functionality of PD… irrespective of the charging device used.”

So they can’t have both unless they split EU & RoW devices.

This is not correct for devices being sold to the EU at least. Part of the amendment to the Radio Equipment Regulation outlines the exact standards for power delivery that must be used, and that interfaces which are capable of being charged @ > 15W must “ensure that any additional charging protocol allows for the full functionality of the USB Power Delivery…”.

For data transfer, I don’t see the point and future improvements to USB will come from industry in future.

The only way around this is with a wireless charging protocol, but manufacturers are moving away from that it appears.

Don’t forget steel. quick stats