Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

halobolola t1_iu04ttd wrote

Reply to comment by Lachimanus in The horror has a face - NVIDIA’s hot 12VHPWR adapter for the GeForce RTX 4090 with a built-in breaking point | igor'sLAB by COMPUTER1313

It’s like when people buy a monster tv, reject the delivery costs, and come up with some stupid janky way to attach it to their car for the journey home.

Stupid.

19

COMPUTER1313 OP t1_iu0h3z5 wrote

Flatscreen TV warning label: "Do not transport lying flat down."

Customer: "That sign warning can't stop me because I can't read!"

TV predictably breaks

13

subrosians t1_iu1e2bm wrote

Back when I worked in retail in the mid 2000s, if someone wanted to take home a TV without delivery, we opened the box in front of the customer, turned on the TV and confirmed it wasn't broken, boxed it back up, and had a form that they had to sign saying that there would be no returns on the TV, and recommendations on how to transport it and carry them. This was back during the early days of plasmas and laying them down had a significant chance of them breaking.

15

Lachimanus t1_iu0myuk wrote

Or people buying a $5 case for their $1500 phone.

I paid 1400€ for my bicycle and carry two 100€ locks with it to bring it into the opposite extreme of perspective. But I never fear to get my bike stolen.

6

HaileStorm42 t1_iu29lm2 wrote

I used to work with Cell phones. Back when the iPhone 4 (or maybe the 4s?) came out, with both the glass front, and glass back, we had a lady who refused to buy anything for it.

No Case.

No Screen Protector.

No Insurance.

We emphasized many times that because the phone is glass on both the front and back, it was very fragile, easily cracked, and must be protected/taken care of. She wasn't having any of that.

She walked out with her shiny new phone... and immediately dropped it on the concrete sidewalk outside the shop.

And somehow had the absolute balls to come back in and demand we "Do the right thing" and replace her now smashed phone.

We didn't.

8

Corundrom t1_iu2tfye wrote

I mean, that's not really the best analogy, as I can guarantee those 100€ locks are completely useless at actually stopping someone seriously trying to steal the bike, and a cheaper lock would be exactly as effective (excepting some seriously bad locks that can be opened by tapping them on something metal)

2

Lachimanus t1_iu322hc wrote

These locks are some the lock picking lawyer took almost a minute at in perfect condition with specialized tools, not a terrible position crouched in with cheap tools.

Standard tools to break them apart completely fail while a cheaper lock can just be cut open with a $5 saw. You need at least an angle grinder to cut through them, which is rather easily I admit. But at the spots I usually lock them the chance is high that they could rather cut themselves while working on the lock.

And last but not least, 100% of the time there are much easier targets and often more expensive than my bike right next to mine.

3

danielsaid t1_iu38ke7 wrote

Alright what locks are they. I don't even own a bike but I need to buy

1

Lachimanus t1_iu3cq1s wrote

It is the sturdiest Abus foldable and Kryptonite Evolution. Hiplok would also be on my list of possible locks, but I do not like U-locks so much.

And as you said: if the attacker is dedicated enough, they will break it for sure.

But as I am working on implementing cryptography algorithms: every system can be broken, but the question is the trade-off between cost/time and gain. And my bike has definitely a really bad ratio compared to the bike with a thin string as lock, not connected to some solid object, right next to mine.

2