Throwing another vote out there for Supernote. Very responsive, particularly around handwriting - which feels flawless. Been a perfect device for me, but more limited than a Boox. That’s fine for my use-case, but still worth calling out.
The camera is one of the most important features for me. I had (and returned) a pair of INMO Air2's primarily because of the poor camera quality. Waiting to see how the TCL RayNeo X2 performs (was supposed to ship in December, still waiting) but may just cancel those and wait for the next generation to release, which was just announced at CES.
I love the notifications and the other stuff as well (mapping, translations... Even streaming YouTube through them while I exercise) but my primary driver for these was to have a rapidly accessible camera. I found great success with the Humane AI Pin primarily for this feature.
FYI there are some other options available today for glasses without cameras (Vuzix has some, as well as some announced at CES) and/or with simpler screens... As well as some with screens in the frame (like Halliday) if the rainbow effect gets to you.
Huh? Last I checked you can still order them off AliExpress without an issue. And I highly doubt that Nintendo would go after the thousands of people who bought one after the big MIG Switch announcements.
they're not "going after" MIG Dumper customers, I didn't say that. Remember what people actually say vs. what you imagine them saying when you want to argue with them.
Nintendo seek customer information in order to inform those customers that they are in possession of illegally obtained copyrighted material.
> Last I checked you can still order them off AliExpress without an issue.
Copyright is barely a thing in China, and is almost never enforced. And certainly the tech culture there is very much pro-copying.
That's an absurd statement, it's the same with most program, you make a copy of the data from a CD/Flash to the host machine storage, then make another copy to the RAM for execution.
Are you arguing that installing a software is akin to making an illegal copy ?
A proprietary cart has a license that doesn’t include any provisions for installation. Thus, it is only authorized to be executed directly from the cart. So in the specific case I’m talking about, as opposed to your premature extrapolation, yes. Copying the data from a cart to another system that isn’t directly executing the data from that cart is an illegal act.
> A proprietary cart has a license that doesn’t include any provisions for installation. Thus, it is only authorized to be executed directly from the cart. So in the specific case I’m talking about, as opposed to your premature extrapolation, yes.
No, the wishes of Nintendo are not law.
> Copying the data from a cart to another system that isn’t directly executing the data from that cart is an illegal act.
Not it isn't, it's explicitly stated that making a copy to run the program is not a infringement[1]
117. Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs
(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.— Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.
That’s all well and good if you’re the owner. But you’re not the owner of a computer program that is merely licensed to you for your use. Every game comes with an End User License Agreement that explicitly unambiguously says you don’t own it. [1][2]
Also, executing a copy of a program is violating the “for archival purposes only” provision. Once it’s being executed it’s no longer archival, it’s executive.
> But you’re not the owner of a computer program that is merely licensed to you for your use.
For copyright purpose, you're still the owner of the _copy_, independently of what Nintendo say, you bought the cartridge, you're the owner of it (but not the licence right on the distribution of the game).
> Also, executing a copy of a program is violating the “for archival purposes only” provision. Once it’s being executed it’s no longer archival, it’s executive.
It is not, it's covered by the section I'm quoting.
Where did purchasers of physical copies have a chance to read that license and did the store clerk require their signature to prove that they agreed to such an EULA?
Because? I subscribe to WSJ - so I can read this just fine. I don’t see why you can’t as well if you find the content interesting. It’s the same with academic journals, people are just sharing what’s interesting and that just so happens to be behind a paywall.
If you remove all paid content you would just have blogs left eventually… And all they’re doing is just paying for the content and regurgitating it.
Sharing with everyone else that has a subscription, or is enticed enough to snag one. I’m not sure why you feel it needs to be free in order for you to consume it? But OK - the rest will just subscribe or move on.
Are you looking for more DIY on the hardware side or more of a commercial offering? Wicked Lasers has a pretty neat "laser cube" that has APIs available for it.
reply