Did exactly that a while ago to salvage the nano texture panel from my 5k iMac. It takes a bit of research to figure out the correct driver board for the specific panel / peripheral combo, but the build process itself was pretty straightforward and it works like a charm.
Can you share any experiences with the driver boards? From what I've seen it looks a bit janky with wires sticking out of the old iMacs chassis and a very old school on screen display. Is the driver board stable? No overheating or signal issues?
I went with the T18 board since it’s passively cooled. IIRC it could also do PD through USB-c, but that would require additional cooling and I just don’t trust noname Chinese manufacturers to do that correctly anyway, so I typically have it hooked up via HDMI. So far it’s been perfectly stable, without any issues. I think there might have been a small addon board to be able to use full brightness as well. There’s a built-in retro display monitoring menu, but I haven’t had a need to use it really, most configurations work from Mac OS, including color profiles and brightness control.
For cables, my iMac had an opening in the back for RAM sticks, which I popped out and wired all cables through. I mounted the driver board on a piece of plexiglass so that most of the ports are accessible directly to the RAM opening. For power, I use a regular third party power brick I had laying around, though some people have reused the iMac’s original power cable with an internal power supply.
Honestly, the hardest parts were identifying the correct driver board and gluing the front glass back on after assembly.
I miss Rails so much when working with any of the top JS frameworks.
Every time I run into an issue that Rails had a standardized solution for a decade ago just proves that most of the JS world spends their days metaphorically digging holes with sharp sticks, rather than using the appropriate tool.
But the industry values overpaying stick-diggers over results, therefore I gotta play along…
Shilling a bit but maybe check out wasp.sh, we are conceptually very similar to "Rails for JS"! Just don't tell Claude to completely copy us hehe (pls)
Nothing personal and I wish you the best of luck with wasp.sh, but the constant churn of new libraries that will revolutionize JS development, but are never quite finished and are eventually abandoned in a semi functional state is exhausting and exactly the main issue I have with the JS ecosystem in general.
At this point, I'm convinced there's a secret global conspiracy to prank JS developers. For example 1 person maintaining 3 similar-but-distinct decimal libraries for Javascript, or the top 3 PDF processing libraries silently producing blank outputs.
I'd say the numbers listed here prove the GPs point of poor enforcement. The largest fine is roughly 0.97% of Meta's 2023 revenue, the equivalent of a $600 fine for somebody making 60k / year. It's a tiny-tiny cost of doing business at best, definitely not a deterrent, given Meta's blatant disregard for GDPR since then.
> the equivalent of a $600 fine for somebody making 60k / year
I don't know about you, but on that income I would certainly not brush off such a fine as a "cost of doing business". Would it cause me financial trouble, or would it force me to sacrifice other expenses? Absolutely not. But would I feel frustrated at having to pay it, feel stupid for my mistake, and do my best to avoid it in the future? Absolutely yes.
My bad, a better analogy would be a dealer making 60k / year selling drugs, gets caught by police and is fined $600. I wouldn’t expect them to change much.
1% of Meta's global revenue is a tiny-tiny cost of doing business? At that point, I think I can stop even trying to argue here. It's a massive fine any way you put it. Especially when you consider the ceiling hasn't been reached and non compliance is more and more costly by design.
Their net profit was $60billion in 2024. This is peanuts. It can fluctuate by multiples of this fine in a month, depending on whether or not they've had a bad or good month, nevermind year. This pretty much is just a cost of doing business.
The interesting part is that it keeps going up. You seem to believe we have somehow reached a cap where Meta can just expense it as a cost of doing business. That's not how European law works. The fine maximum is far higher and repeated non compliance keeps making the fines higher and higher. It's a ladder not a sizing precedent.
Unfortunately it doesn't in practice. Meta's total revenue since 2018 when GDPR came into force is just shy of $1T. Even with all the smaller fines combined, the total amount of GDPR related fines is in the range of $3B. It's a rounding error.
There isn't a trend of increasing fines, nor has any fine even reached the cap, let alone applied multiple times for the recurring violations. Even more with the current US administration's foreign policy towards the EU.
While GDPR as a law is fine, with the exception of enforcement limitations, enforcement so far has been a complete joke.
Maximum GDPR fine is 4% of global revenue in the previous year. If a company has 30% profit margin then they can, in theory, treat is as a cost of doing business, indefinitely.
It's 4% per fine. Each violation is a fine and Meta owns multiple companies that can be fined. But 4% of global revenue already can't be treated as just a cost of doing business. Their shareholders would murder them.
Though the article mentions the distinction between ORMs and query builders, it doesn't really make a case against query builders being bad. After all, it wraps up by building a kinda crappy one-off query builder.
I doubt they coordinate it, but my guess it’s an attempt to undercut their competition. When a competitor announces a new model, immediately announcing your own new and improved model reduces the length of time your competitor can claim theirs is the latest and greatest.
Great idea! A few weeks ago a non-technical client of mine decided to optimize his AWS infra bill with the help of AI. The costs went down significantly along with the application.
reply