PeriodicallyPedantic

Blah blah trucks are stupid. You've heard it before, but it's still right over 90% of the time.

I'm also stupid, but instead of trucks I buy performance cars. We can be stupid together.

That's a non-response.

These budgets are still huge, and this performance is still poor.

People want a story to have a conclusion. People who watch these shows want to know what happened.

And "got away on a technicality" stories sound like they'd be lawsuit magnets.

Double check that the problem isn't actually your hearing aid's Bluetooth codec support, rather than the physical driver's supported frequency range.

Bluetooth audio devices need to agree on an audio compression format before they can send audio, and the default lowest common denominator codec that all audio devices support is extremely bad at low frequencies (and is all around terrible). It could be that your hearing aid is good enough but doesn't support whatever high-fidelity codec your coworker's stethoscope supported. Investigate what codecs your hearing aid supports and what the stethoscope supports. You'll probably want something like LDAC, LC3 (aka LE audio), aptx HD, aptx adaptive, or preferably even aptx lossless, to be supported on both devices.

If you're considering investing a lot of money anyways, you may want to consider replacing your hearing aids with ones that support this functionality (the frequency response and the codecs).

As someone else already pointed out, if your current hearing aids don't support below 100hz, then even if you play the sound over a speaker, your existing hearing aids are just going to act as earplugs. You may need to invest in different hearing aids or just live with taking out your hearing aids for the foreseeable future. Or I suppose just blasting the heartbeat over the speaker to bypass your hearing aid (caution wrt audio feedback lol)

Ah, ok then, never mind my answer. I greatly misjudged what you were really looking for

What are you using for your main backup? It probably has a feature for doing remote backup / duplication. You're best off using that.

If you don't, then I think that's probably your first order of business. There are a bunch of good COTS NAS devices that support remote backup to a similar device or to the cloud. Synology generally seems to be the easiest to use based on reviews, but recently they've been getting picky about hard drive support.

If you'd rather DIY then there are some FOSS software options to let you build your own NAS and then back it up to the cloud or to a remote device running the same software. These can get pretty complicated from what I can tell (I'm in the process of doing something similar, been researching). Options include OpenMediaVault, and TrueNAS. TrueNAS seems to be "better" but more complicated and easy to fuck up.

Unraid is also very popular, but it costs money to get a software license. Users swear by it, though.
And on the outside HexOS - a fork (or maybe alternative front end?) of TrueNAS, by some former Unraid devs, with the goal of making TrueNAS as easy to use as Unraid. But it's both paid and beta, so probably not a good choice yet.

These will all allow remote backup to cloud or to a remote device running the same software. They also typically support some kind of virtualization with an app store, so you can use your NAS to host other servers like a media server or immich or home assistant, etc (although app ecosystem abundance will vary).

Wrt hardware, you'll have to look up system requirements for the software you want to use. For example, TrueNAS uses ZFS filesystem, which wants a lot of ram if you need it to perform well.
If your r-pi can run the software you want, then you can get a SATA hat for your pi, to run a couple hard drives. You can also get NAS cases for your pi.
I probably wouldn't recommend leaving a mess of cables and parts at your friend's house across the country, it's better for both of you if the system is fairly well contained - enough for them to move it without risk of parts getting disconnected.

Only if, like I said, you're a hardcore fatalist.

That depends on how hardcore of a fatalist you are.

If you're purely a fatalist, then free will is an illusion, laws and punishment are immoral, consciousness is meaningless, and we nothing more than deterministic pattern matching machines, making us only different from LLMs in the details of our implementation and from the terrible optimization that evolution is known for.

But if you believe in some degree of free will, or you think there is value in consciousness, then we differ because LLMs are just auto-complete. They psudo-randomly choose from a weighted list of statistically likely words (actually token) that would come next given the context (which is the conversation history and prompt). There is no free will, no understanding any more than the man in the Chinese room understands Mandarin.

The whole conversation is so full of charged words because the LLM providers have intentionally anthropomorphized LLMs in their marketing, by using words like "reasoning". The APIs from before LLMs blew up provide a far less emotionally charged description of what LLMs do, with terms like "completions".
You wouldn't compare a human mind to your phone keyboard word prediction, but it's doing the same thing but scaled down. Where do you draw the line?

only we are allowed to steal these peoples content

I guess beware the danger of ToS that grants the platform unilateral rights to use your content they host; just because you don't care what they can do with it now doesn't mean some new tech won't come along that lets them use your content in ways that horrify you

I feel like anyone who considers that normal should be open to mustard on watermelon

What that jello do???

Smurf village deep in the forest.

I'm not even gonna try to put in my prompt, I had to fight with copilot to get even this, which isn't quite what I wanted.