you can switch between using keyboard input and word banks (at least on desktop)

and you only need level 1 of something to move on to the next lesson.

Yes, that's true. But level 1 doesn't force you to write in the target language - the real value is in the last level. You can go through the level 1 of all lessons relatively quickly, but you won't be actually learning.

Thanks. I wasn't aware of the distinction between the levels as I'm running them all up to five since Japanese is so completely foreign to me.

The Japanese course seems to be hated by the reddit crowd for learning the language, but it's been very beneficial to me. At least one reason is that if I stuck to writing the language in a workbook my progress on the language would be glacial. I would physically be able to write the characters better but would know a lot less of the language.

It could very well be that people simply don't know they are dealing with a problem that can be solved.

These are my favorite problems - the ones people hate but seem resigned to living with; almost as if it's a simple fact of life. When you come in with a solution, they'll be skeptical at first, but you'll know quickly whether or not you're on a great solution for them.

Do you suggest asking people directly what are there most pressing problems helps? Or do you think it is better to observe people struggling with something and then propose a solution and have them evaluate it.

I personally employ a balance of both.

Regarding your comment on wood fired plants: To me it seems that you imply that that is not renewable, which I do not understand. If you regrow the trees that you've burned (cleanly) down then your net impact will be zero, right?

maybe because they can be used for many nefarious purposes?

So can wheels.

You shouldn't ban general purpose technology because of particular bad uses.

“Regulate” != “Ban”

And in this case, the proposed regulation is:

“””[R]adio equipment [shall support] certain features in order to ensure that software can only be loaded into the radio equipment where the compliance of the combination of the radio equipment and software has been demonstrated.”””

Now I don’t think that’s a well written rule, but my problem is the specifics rather than the general idea. I think that either all broadcasts should be digitally signed, or it should not be possible for hackers to remotely modify many other people’s radios to broadcast false signals. (One-on-one modifications I don’t care about so much, but how do you write/pass such rules, given the difficulty getting people to care about or believe the scale difference between automated and manual hacking?)

The problem is that we already have regulations to avoid broadcasting on restricted/licensed bands.

In general, current regulation makes the owner of the equipment responsible for the broadcast.

This new regulation will just stifle development on SDR technologies

And the current regulations are impossible to enforce. If they would work we wouldn’t be in this situation.

> If they would work we wouldn’t be in this situation.

What situation? What crisis is happening I'm completely missing?

> “Regulate” != “Ban”

Imagine how ridiculous it would be to have a regulation on wheels that they must try to prevent being installed on non-approved devices.

I agree with you, but for anyone following EU rules and regulations, this ship has sailed a long time ago. Drugs, guns, radio are just part of a huge long list of "general purpose technology" that have been regulated out of existence.

That sounds like a hot take. I'm pretty sure most EU residents are very satisfied that they don't have to fea for their safety for gun violence when they walk home late at night or just in general.

>don't have to fea for their safety for gun violence when they walk home late at night or just in general.

Neither do "most US residents".

More to the point, your focus on guns is missing the larger point. There is very real and immediate dissatisfaction with the EU regulatory landscape. See: Brexit.

A lot of general purpose technologies are restricted to safe use.

Restricting it to safe use is what the preexisting law does.

Like what? I'm not being flippant here, I'm really in the dark. What harm can one do with an SDR, and how does the potential for abuse compare to e.g. a cell phone?

input and output channels are not always physically different pins, sometimes it's just a software configuration. see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13014435

Re 1: I would also rather have an easily replaceable battery, however for your use case I would think that a powerbank is more sensible than a second battery: no swapping/downtime and you can recharge both at the same time.

Sounds like fun taking photos with a powerbank connected to your phone ;-) In the past, I didn't have a problem with the one-minute downtime. Instead, I enjoyed having a fully charged phone within seconds.

Phone case with removable battery. I had a cobattery (now discontinued) case with my iPhone 6 - added a ton of bulk, but was useful to just swap batteries instead of charging.