So if you open up the Symfonisk, you'll find that the cables running up to the tiny tweeter and woofer speakers have a nice flat crimp connector on them.
So simply unplug those (carefully, use tweezers to squeeze the connectors and they'll pop off without friction), and connect those on some cables which you'll run to your speakers. The connectors can be found at your local electronics store.
The speakers you'll be connecting need to have a crossover that you can bypass (typically four connectors on the back versus two, with a piece of metal in between to short them). Total upgrade would be to mount all the electronics inside, but I haven't dared to cut mine open yet
Instead of modding it into a new amp like this post does they likely just spliced the speaker wires right into the speakers. The upside is it was easy the downside is you can’t just plug and play after the fact.
Indeed! Nice thing is that two Symfonisk's give you great stereo sound on external speakers. And no soldering inside the Symfonisk, just some connectors to unplug and run the cable out of the bass reflex port, so easy to restore in original condition if you'd want to. So thanks to the magic of these tiny transistor digital amplifiers, in total you'll spend ± 500 euros and have better — and super convenient — sound than quite expensively priced systems.
How much of that is auto-generated and pre-existing C code though? My dusty recollection from a while ago is that most of Tectonic's development is in Rust. It looks like the fork is trying to get rid of all the remaining C code?
That fork is quite curious, it seems like they've really gone out and created quite an active little fork, but haven't spent the time to explain what is different and interesting about their fork in the readme.
As I understand/recall - the intention was always to be a rust rewrite; the starting point was 'let's take all the C and wrap it in `unsafe`'.
The issue linked up-thread introduces this fork (~ a year ago) titling it '[convert to rust] everything' (emphasis mine), and going on to talk about 'pure rust' (again).
I think the main repo's issue at least would've been a clearer submission than the fork; I initially had the same reaction as above.
Figure $50K year in year out for maint and an occasional $100K bad surprise. $25K for insurance and training. $25K for rural hangar and some multiple of that for big city hangar.
Figure $2/mile for fuel on a long trip, $3/mi on a shorter hop. Jet-A ranges from $2.75/gal to $5/gal typically (with some outlier airports being higher). Fuel is heavy and hurts performance, so it’s rare to tanker significant quantities of “cheap” fuel.
Those figures are roughly right for a legacy Citation with JT15s. Bigger jets might be more. Newer jets might be more fuel efficient (and correspondingly more expensive to buy). A legacy Citation is a 50-150 hour/yr airplane. Fly it much more than that and you'd be better off in a newer Citation with the FJ44s (more expensive engines, much better fuel specifics).
One of my buddies transitioned from a turboprop to a lear. He would burn more fuel on the ground than we would would in a piston powered 182 for the entire trip. I think his burn rate was near 75gal/hour in the Cheyenne compared to our 12gal/hour or so. Figure $400/hour in fuel depending on what jet-a cost these days. Mind you, he went much faster/higher than what our bug smasher can do... you pay for that speed in fuel. For us, the next jump up to an old piston that could do 200kts/hour would likely burn 14-18gal/hour with a single engine.
Looking at our FBO here, Jet-A is ~$5.80/gal and 100LL is ~$5.50/gal
I think the point the GP is making is that users who use TV as merely displays and not connected to the internet cannot have access to this data, whereas connected TVs can send whatever fingerprinted data they want back home.
I know you’re trying to help, but I think saying empty, insincere platitudes like “we all enjoy you here” doesn’t really help them or the situation. It certainly didn’t help to hear that from strangers when I was in a similar position.
Exactly, and saying things like "You arent a failure" to someone who has quite obviously failed at their attempts to be a software engineer and business owner is sending the wrong message. If somethings is going wrong with your life, it's not helpful to ignore that and pretend everything is great. The cognitive dissonance involved with that will put a huge strain on you, and possibly make the problem worse.
From what the OP has said, it would seem that in their current state they are not capable of working as a programmer right now. I would recommend getting help for the depression and anxiety first, and then working on software engineering skills until they are more confident and capable. The 50K USD should allow them some leeway to do this without needing to find work immediately, which will help.
Failing at something doesn't make a person a failure or else we would all be failures. Do you really thing extra compassion towards a person contemplating suicide is such a bad thing? Or is being 100% correct in your words more important? I know we're on a message board, but OP is a real person with real feelings in a pretty fragile state right now.
I could have been clearer, I suppose - of course I'm not saying that the OP was a failure, but I was saying that they failed at the things they attempted, i.e. software engineering, and platitudes that gloss over this aren't helpful, since the cognitive dissonance and load will often make the mental issues worse.
I'm sorry you feel that way, and I can understand where you are coming from.
I don't know if you believe me, but I genuinely enjoy this person's presence. Seriously. He is providing interesting information, and he is a talented programmer. We are all in this boat together.
I believe that all humans have the capacity to be awesome to each other. I believe he needed to hear that we want him on this earth, even if we don't know him in person.
I am a bit shocked at the comments people are making in this thread. Someone who is acutely anxious and depressed about their business challenges should never be told that they are a failure and that we don't care about their emotional distress from their business problems.
I care that this guy exists. Even in his darkest hours, I want him to continue living. This trouble he's going through will pass. He is still a healthy human being, whether or not his business fails.
There is so much stuff left for him to experience in his life. Empathetic humans like myself must remind him that even if he loses all his money, he can always rebuild.
Yeah, it's pretty upsetting to see the lack of compassion in here. I think it is just harder for some to imagine real people on the other side of HN comments (or any online comments). If we were all in a room talking to each other, instead of a message-board, then we would see far more empathy and kindness.
I'm glad you're here to be a kind and compassionate voice.
Same to you :) Business doesn't need to be a zero sum game. We can all help each other out if the stars align properly.
I remember back when the banks made loans to businesses, and the business owner was really only responsible for daily operations. It was the bank's money to lose. If the business didn't work out, it was the bank's loss, not really the CEO's.
Now the risk is all on the founder. It is a digital gold rush where the founder must provide their own shovel and pan, and if they don't find gold quickly enough, then they'll starve.
It doesn't need to be like this. You can walk away from the gold mine.
