Unfortunately it’s very hard to buy a decent dumb TV these days.

That’s absolutely not true. Bluetooth has many “profiles” which define different capabilities. Here’s a list of them. These are all defined in the official bluetooth standards.

Maybe you were thinking of the “core specification” which defines the underlying protocol but doesn’t define the profiles? But that’s just the way they broke up the spec documents. The profiles are still official parts of bluetooth.

Apple’s proprietary extensions for audio are not part of any official specification though.

It’s certainly the one most likely to shank you if you step on it. Beyond that I’d rank it as the least space efficient plug. I honestly think it’s the worst design I’ve seen.

“But it has built in fuses”, I hear all the Brits say. This isn’t the advantage you think it is. Why not put the fuses in the actual appliance with all the other components where it makes more sense to put them?

They still create microplastics.

When you scratch it you’re making microplastics though, and they’re going right into your food.

Not in reliability…

But they’re probably still selling more CPUs to your average buyer who always buys Intel, doesn’t read tech news and never even heard about the controversy.

Intel didn’t actually manufacture the chips.

The chips with the oxidisation issue were manufactured by Intel at their Arizona fab plant.

Celebrities get wide latitude to protect themselves from imitators. Impressionists can do “satire” etc. but this isn’t that. It’s explicitly a reference to her voice in the movie, and as such she’s protected by law from them going around her and hiring someone else to imitate her.

It was explicitly represented as her voice when he tweeted “Her” in relation to the product, referencing a movie which she voiced. It’s not a legal grey area in the US. He sank his own ship here.

He tweeted “Her”, which explicitly tells us it’s a deliberate imitation of Scarlett’s voice in that movie. And he tried to negotiate licencing her famous voice, which she rejected.

So it’s more than just a coincidence, it’s deliberate bad faith behaviour. Legally you can’t misrepresent a product as being from a famous person when it wasn’t, and he very much did that. I guess he was hoping she’d give in and accept the licensing agreement post-facto. But instead it looks he’s in legal deep water now.

All this tells me is that they have a great PR department.

Meanwhile Mercedes has already reached level 3.

I once worked for a company which did exactly that - they put the marketing people in charge. It may surprise you to hear that they went from being a large organisation to going bust within a few years.