FIAT currency is traceable, taxable, and all the other negative words suffixed with 'able you wish to think of. If you trade me invisible bitcoins, and I send you my Sega Megadrive collection, all "they" know is that I just posted a box to someone.
This isn't new. It's called barter. Before buttcoins I might have offered you some of my SNES collection in exchange. Or to help fix your car. Or some of the mangoes from my orchard that I spend time tending to.
Consider: You mine buttcoins and trade buttcoins for a Ferrari, but then you fall on hard times and have to sell your Ferrari to pay your rates, water, and child support. This person reported no income but had a Ferrari to sell. Hello audit.
Hence, bitcoins are treated as non-liquid assets. No different to hoarding gold bricks.
"We" can make a new currency, but eventually you, or somebody, needs to liquidate it.
Airlines are needed so the government will need to bail them out if the STHF. If Apple goes under, a lot of people will be very happy.
If Qantas replaced their planes more frequently, people like you would be complaining that it costs too much to fly, and probably about how it's a rich people conspiracy to keep you from travelling or some stupid shit.
TPG haven't run the transparent proxy in years. Source: Was a TPG customer when the change happened. From what I understand talking to various reps, it was an artefact from dialup days. Not so much due to the technology, but rather the nature of web content at the time.
Don't be fooled into thinking your ISP can't tell that you're torrenting simply because you use VPN. True they can't DPI your traffic, but bandwidth usage pattern heuristics can give a pretty good indication.
Plus these budget ISPs are likely to shape you simply for flogging the connection for extended periods of time, regardless of the actual traffic type.
Secondary (2nd Level) Safety Features The secondary safety features of the bq20z45-R1 can be used to indicate more serious faults via the SAFE (pin7). This pin can be used to blow an in-line fuse to permanently disable the battery pack from charging or discharging.
So the way this particular charge controller "blocks everything" is by popping a fuse elsewhere on the PCB.
"pin7" is wrong though, the pinout diagram shows SAFE is pin 16. Trace it out with your multimeter. In their application schematic, pin 16 goes to the gate on a MOSFET, which creates a low-impedance path through their fuse to blow it.
This means pin 15 (PFIN) is pulled high, and the chip is locked out.
Either replace the fuse if you can find it, or pull pin 15 low through a lowish value resistor (1K or so).
Deducing if it's one or the other might be a chore. If you had a same laptop or one that uses the same battery pack then of course that'd make it way easier. The other avenue is if it's a common issue then there'd be plenty of talk around about it.
I can confirm the laptop itself is fine, since I own a second gigabyte laptop.
And although its battery is significantly bigger, it's the same voltage, and the same connector.
It charges and runs fine (just can't close the case :P)
I agree to the blocking, I disagree with my very soul with the idea of locking a controller permanently.
It just means that the PCB with the controller on it is a throwaway item. The cost to Gigabyte (or the OEM that manufactures the packs) is probably cents per unit.
If they do remanufacture/refurbish the battery packs in house, they'd replace it as a matter of course.
Since they don't intend the item to be user-serviceable, why would they use a controller with reset capability that probably costs a few cents more, and require PCB layout space to break out those pins on the chip (potentially needing a bigger PCB, reducing yield)?