What you're missing is that the technology they tricked isn't production-quality yet. It's still mostly a research project. There's no need to improve the image recognition at this point, because that's not where they're focusing. Once the interesting work is done, that's part of commercialization.
No, the amount of content being consumed is actually going down when people cut the cord. A lot of times cable subscribers watch stuff that they otherwise might not care about just because it's available as a part of the subscription and they're bored.
You're right!! Binging on content was something solved by Netflix.
Amazon was given a choice of having "unauthorized refrurbishers" or "first party Apple products". Not a hard choice. They still don't care, but Apple does and can throw it's weight around.
So, over 40 years, 1,177 cases. So, accidents driving to the polls probably causes more errors. Heck, fatal accidents probably cause more errors. Of those, ~1% (13) would have been stopped by voter ID. Out of billions of votes cast. So, we're really at the level of "put lighting rods near polling places" or, quite literally, "I better take out a loan cause I just bought the winning lottery ticket".
Meanwhile, 10% of the illegal votes were for duplicate voting (which voter ID won't catch).
Since we're talking about replacing in person voting, it seems more pertinent to look at absentee ballots. Illegal absentee ballots account for 17% of the issues and vote buying (usually via absentee ballots) another 5%.
Unlike bundling, when you purchase a streaming service, you're not moving up to another tier that requires all the previous tiers. That's the ala carte aspect. It means that each service has to compete with better unique content; I'm not going to get every service; maybe I'll have three of fifteen. But that still means I'm getting 20% of the excellent content (more than I can watch), instead of 100% of the okay content because their is no competition.
Then why are they trying to make it a "crime" in the workplace.
There are tons of things that are inappropriate in a workplace that are appropriate outside a workplace. If you don't understand that, please attend some remedial life skills class.
It's time for people to stand up and say enough is enough....You are thieves who only seek to steal power that you haven't earned.
Did you read the fucking summary? It's the employees who insisted on these corporate policies as a condition for working there. That's what the story is. That is, it's 100% power that that they earned, and 100% the employees saying they've had enough. But, I suppose if you're valuable enough (or can convince enough other valuable enough people), you can counter-walkout to make Google reverse themselves.
Unless, of course, your walkout wouldn't do anything by keep the fryer empty.
What most consumers wanted was the ability to pick specific channels - or even shows - from a single menu that was more nuanced
I don't know why nerdy people want that. It doesn't matter whether you're sold 1 perfect channel or 10,000. Your total consumed content stays the same, and therefore the economic value to you is the same. If they ship all 10,000 channels to everyone, or 1 perfect channel to all people (assuming some people want whatever is on those 10,000 channels), the same amount of content is produced. Information wants to be free/the cost of sending all the other channels is negligible. So, total cost is the same. Total revenue is going to be the same, cause the value to the person is the same. The only difference is that instead of amortizing the costs over all the sports fans, we don't have them subsidizing our shows.
One character has to be deleted, but I don't think it's the 'g'
Since it's high level control, and not day-to-day, it might make more sense to be "reign". That is, wielding executive power, especially in the manner of a monarch. Since most monarchs are high level, not day-to-day, it fits well. For instance, Queen Elizabeth reigns over the UK by appointing the PM, who does the work. Similarly, the Chairman appoints the CEO who does the work.
Your link is about how the US Congress says the US Government isn't supporting a UN resolution to boycott. It doesn't make it illegal for anyone else to do so.
And, whether you think it made sense or not, the reason people had to buy insurance is cause the companies had to offer it regardless of preexisting conditions at the same price. Otherwise people only buy insurance once sick. And they just had to buy some insurance. It can be from any company. So you can boycott Blue Cross Blue Shield.
Unless you know that you're going to have to validate your vote to a third party. Then, it's "guilty until proven innocent". Better keep that slip of paper.
iRobot has been building floor plans for years (it was covered on/. when they announced it). That Google is buying access to it is... well, to be expected. iRobot is publicly traded. That means that someone is going to eventually sell/lease the data to the big data companies.
will just encourage people to fix their phones and keep them longer, which is the last thing Apple wants.
If Apple could guarantee no one would ever buy a new phone, they probably would. They make a ton of money off apps, Apple Music subscriptions, etc. And those have almost no per-unit costs or physical infrastructure requirements. What scares them far more than you not buying another iPhone is buying an Android device.
ell us the risks of sharing your kids' Halloween pics with Aunt Helen?
Well, feeding advertisers pictures of your kids, their favorite characters, and where they live doesn't sound great to me. But then again, I think it's the parent's responsibility to protect their children from assholes in the world. But, whatever, let that be more one more datapoint for the targeted ads that manipulate their little minds.
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes, but not always. Just as there can be inferred subjects from the larger context, verbs can be inferred.
What you're missing is that the technology they tricked isn't production-quality yet. It's still mostly a research project. There's no need to improve the image recognition at this point, because that's not where they're focusing. Once the interesting work is done, that's part of commercialization.
Probably a proof of concept, to be rolled oit at 10k a pop afterward
This is not true. Most HFT is based on being a few meters closer to the exchange.
You're right!! Binging on content was something solved by Netflix.
Amazon was given a choice of having "unauthorized refrurbishers" or "first party Apple products". Not a hard choice. They still don't care, but Apple does and can throw it's weight around.
So, over 40 years, 1,177 cases. So, accidents driving to the polls probably causes more errors. Heck, fatal accidents probably cause more errors. Of those, ~1% (13) would have been stopped by voter ID. Out of billions of votes cast. So, we're really at the level of "put lighting rods near polling places" or, quite literally, "I better take out a loan cause I just bought the winning lottery ticket".
Meanwhile, 10% of the illegal votes were for duplicate voting (which voter ID won't catch).
Since we're talking about replacing in person voting, it seems more pertinent to look at absentee ballots. Illegal absentee ballots account for 17% of the issues and vote buying (usually via absentee ballots) another 5%.
Unlike bundling, when you purchase a streaming service, you're not moving up to another tier that requires all the previous tiers. That's the ala carte aspect. It means that each service has to compete with better unique content; I'm not going to get every service; maybe I'll have three of fifteen. But that still means I'm getting 20% of the excellent content (more than I can watch), instead of 100% of the okay content because their is no competition.
There are tons of things that are inappropriate in a workplace that are appropriate outside a workplace. If you don't understand that, please attend some remedial life skills class.
Did you read the fucking summary? It's the employees who insisted on these corporate policies as a condition for working there. That's what the story is. That is, it's 100% power that that they earned, and 100% the employees saying they've had enough. But, I suppose if you're valuable enough (or can convince enough other valuable enough people), you can counter-walkout to make Google reverse themselves.
Unless, of course, your walkout wouldn't do anything by keep the fryer empty.
I don't know why nerdy people want that. It doesn't matter whether you're sold 1 perfect channel or 10,000. Your total consumed content stays the same, and therefore the economic value to you is the same. If they ship all 10,000 channels to everyone, or 1 perfect channel to all people (assuming some people want whatever is on those 10,000 channels), the same amount of content is produced. Information wants to be free/the cost of sending all the other channels is negligible. So, total cost is the same. Total revenue is going to be the same, cause the value to the person is the same. The only difference is that instead of amortizing the costs over all the sports fans, we don't have them subsidizing our shows.
One character has to be deleted, but I don't think it's the 'g'
Since it's high level control, and not day-to-day, it might make more sense to be "reign". That is, wielding executive power, especially in the manner of a monarch. Since most monarchs are high level, not day-to-day, it fits well. For instance, Queen Elizabeth reigns over the UK by appointing the PM, who does the work. Similarly, the Chairman appoints the CEO who does the work.
Chrome has been doing that on my laptop for a long time.
iOS and Safari are alternatives. At least they recognize the the login screen and handle it well.
Your link is about how the US Congress says the US Government isn't supporting a UN resolution to boycott. It doesn't make it illegal for anyone else to do so.
And, whether you think it made sense or not, the reason people had to buy insurance is cause the companies had to offer it regardless of preexisting conditions at the same price. Otherwise people only buy insurance once sick. And they just had to buy some insurance. It can be from any company. So you can boycott Blue Cross Blue Shield.
Unless you know that you're going to have to validate your vote to a third party. Then, it's "guilty until proven innocent". Better keep that slip of paper.
The NSA doesn't steal my IP and compete with me.
iRobot has been building floor plans for years (it was covered on /. when they announced it). That Google is buying access to it is... well, to be expected. iRobot is publicly traded. That means that someone is going to eventually sell/lease the data to the big data companies.
I'm not employed by Amazon, but if one of their buildings drops a wall on me, you better believe I'm suing.
The summary makes a big point that they were contractors (working for a 3rd party) and not Amazon employees. Why does that matter?
If Apple could guarantee no one would ever buy a new phone, they probably would. They make a ton of money off apps, Apple Music subscriptions, etc. And those have almost no per-unit costs or physical infrastructure requirements. What scares them far more than you not buying another iPhone is buying an Android device.
Well, feeding advertisers pictures of your kids, their favorite characters, and where they live doesn't sound great to me. But then again, I think it's the parent's responsibility to protect their children from assholes in the world. But, whatever, let that be more one more datapoint for the targeted ads that manipulate their little minds.
Should small boys? Oh, wait, wrestling has weight classes. What about boys who cannot put on muscle I guess.
Law and Biz schools have more money, more donations, etc. Hence, better toys.
What's wrong with a company being forced to do something other than being a psychopathic profit driven machine?
Title IX requires equality of sports spending at a college level, and has nothing to do with an individual.
You linked to the policies of the US DOL for internal use. Yes, if you work for the DOL, and your boss agrees it is harassment, yada yada.
Legally, you're going to be more in the clear if you never ask for someone's gender.
As a blank line. Or, even better, not at all. I'm not sure why "gender" should ever be on a form, except in online dating.