It's not being priced according to the long-term cost or capability of supplying the volumes that are being drawn from the stockpile on a sustainable basis, which is what you'd actually do if you were running a business dealing in actual production.
Yes, clearly all the people investing THEIR OWN MONEY are complete idiots, and you, a random guy on the internet, are so much smarter than actual investors and professional geologists. So does this mean you are going to invest all your money in helium futures, that are obviously going to be worth billions when the helium runs out, just like all the arm chair doomsayers are predicting?
Will you take the futures option the other way? That the current prices are going to stay at the level they are for say, the next ~20 years plus or minus 10%?
I don't know who you think is investing in this. People are just buying helium because they need it. The smart people are investing in gas mining because that's always profitable, and the big companies building huge helium liquefaction facilities are absolutely betting the price is going to rise in the near future.
Apparently the free market thinks you're kind of an idiot about this.
Yes I guess that is why a gas we can only mine tiny quantities of from natural gas reserves is currently being sold off for party balloon use.
Helium is being sold off at any bid price on the assumption that the stockpile is unlimited and needs to be liquidated. It's not being priced according to the long-term cost or capability of supplying the volumes that are being drawn from the stockpile on a sustainable basis, which is what you'd actually do if you were running a business dealing in actual production.
A great watch is expensive and made in Switzerland. That's how watches work. Nothing about them makes any sense because the product is fundamentally not about time telling technology, except in an abstract "it's pretty awesome this is just gears and springs" sort of way.
This is not a good smartwatch at $350. It's a bad sportswatch - because it doesn't standalone from the iPhone, doesn't have GPS, and yet is in the same price bracket.
My personal opinion is that on deeper analysis the whole smartwatch thing is a deadend which is being pushed because it's looks achievable, rather then innovative. But there's some fairly obvious problems with what Apple has on display - and they're the same ones as every other smartwatch.
Seriously, the number of people talking about how this isn't a problem, while simultaneously - gleefully - discussing what they'll do if someone tries to take their room, or someone won't let them take their room, pretty much dismisses any counter-argument to the idea that there isn't a problem.
And you have missed all the subtlety of the problem. For one thing, there's no way anyone's fitting an iPad package into a mailbox, or even through a mailslot.
There's no way to distribute or update keys rapidly enough to make them general use for delivery companies and the post.
Which is the entire point: the century of mail was for mail with packages considered the exception. Special case enough to warrant needing to be physically present to receive them, or simply gambling nobody steals them when left on the front porch.
Basically you might want to take your last line there and apply it to yourself.
The drone delivery thing seems like a proxy for the fact that the regular postal system desperately needs a revamp to include more standardization. Basically, we need some system which acknowledges that parcel and package delivery is an increasingly important part of the process, and we want to receive things unattended.
You can only sometimes get this now.
If we had a system where we standardized mailbox sizes to some specification, and then licensed out some NFC/smart card system to let postal workers/delivery companies open them, then we might be getting somewhere. Sure, it's not perfect and it wouldn't be everywhere at once, but if you could simply buy the relevant thing at Home Depot and then delivery companies could be expected to use it, it'd be progress. Then the free-market innovates from there: various multi-tiered security products or the like.
The various flight ceilings on commercial aviation might speak to that, but I seriously doubt any court is going to interpret the law as being about property rights as opposed to public safety / nuisance.
You have all sorts of protections from things that never touch your property, but they're definitely not defined by the property boundaries. For instance you can't demand that soundwaves do not enter your premises at all - instead you can possibly get a neighbours air conditioner moved so it isn't above a certain volume, within the bounds of what's considered reasonable.
So I guess we shouldn't worry about Ebola either coz you don't think you'll ever get it either? Check your hipster-holier-then-thou-attitude at the door mate.
Influenza infects hundreds of millions of people every year, but kills only a tiny fraction of them. To die of influenza you need to have complicating conditions. The type you had are curable with drugs we already have. The type which aren't are the type of lifestyle or age related issues which are a problem no matter who gets them, and regardless of whether you get the flu.
A virus for which we also have a vaccine.
By every measure, influenza is not scary. People who get it do not expect to die of it. But we're also going to be able to bugger-all to stop it being a yearly global epidemic. Which is fortunate, because again, it's very hard to die of it.
So has the genetic code of numerous pathogens. That doesn't make them easily created. For a simple example, we currently have an entire field dedicated to bottom-up synthetic life creation (start with a DNA sequence, and bootstrap a cell). That's a hot field, which has required thousands of man-hours to understand.
Terrorists in field laboratories without proper equipment are not going to be accomplishing it. It is a huge expensive project.
Right: so still, think about those numbers. 30% of India's population is over 100% of the US in terms of sheer number of people. So a low-end phone is exactly the right device to target there.
The indian market is 1 billion people, most in some state of poverty. You can "do well" there, by western standards, without touching more then a tiny fraction of it. Apple don't have 100% of the US population as a market, and don't have 100% of the market. In India, if both those things were true, it would only represent about 30% of the total population.
I think the fear people have with binary logs is that, if you get corruption, a human feels like they have a hope of decoding what the text was supposed to mean.
Although I think this is pretty naive - people thinking "dropped characters", as opposed to the more usual "50 consecutive messages disappeared". A binary format with proper message boundaries is exactly as robust as a text file in that capacity.
Run blah every X seconds is just about the dumbest way we can be doing things on a computer. It's a closed system. It can know exactly when a process dies, and handle the event then. The inability to do this is a huge flaw.
Software has bugs and occationally they crash. I'm not an expert GNU/Linux system administrator by any means, and I've lost count of the amount of times when I simply wanted to just find a way to make the init system restart a service automatically when it crashes. This is trivial with Systemd, you just set Restart=on-failure in the service file and it's done. No need to write error-prone shell scripts or fiddle with run levels. It just works and it's well documented.
Straight out of Windows. Write buggy software. It's ok if it crashes once in a while because we can just restart it.
Also straight out of Windows. Make everything into one big integrated binary instead of something that you can see into or hack on.
Write non-buggy software. Hope you have the millions per line of code they paid the space shuttle team.
We've reached monitor parity. We reached it because TV improved and there's no point trying to maintain a difference for difference's sake.
But the vertical height argument is just rubbish. People run 16:9 and 16:10 screens vertical all the time, and no one was ever going to be manufacturing giant squares which physically wouldn't fit on a desktop. 4K and the like is going to sell principally to the computer market first because lord knows there's little need for it in home theatre for most people.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not being priced according to the long-term cost or capability of supplying the volumes that are being drawn from the stockpile on a sustainable basis, which is what you'd actually do if you were running a business dealing in actual production.
Yes, clearly all the people investing THEIR OWN MONEY are complete idiots, and you, a random guy on the internet, are so much smarter than actual investors and professional geologists. So does this mean you are going to invest all your money in helium futures, that are obviously going to be worth billions when the helium runs out, just like all the arm chair doomsayers are predicting?
Will you take the futures option the other way? That the current prices are going to stay at the level they are for say, the next ~20 years plus or minus 10%?
I don't know who you think is investing in this. People are just buying helium because they need it. The smart people are investing in gas mining because that's always profitable, and the big companies building huge helium liquefaction facilities are absolutely betting the price is going to rise in the near future.
Apparently the free market thinks you're kind of an idiot about this.
Zipping a file takes energy to power the CPU. Unzipping does too. In both cases, global entropy has been increased.
Yes I guess that is why a gas we can only mine tiny quantities of from natural gas reserves is currently being sold off for party balloon use.
Helium is being sold off at any bid price on the assumption that the stockpile is unlimited and needs to be liquidated. It's not being priced according to the long-term cost or capability of supplying the volumes that are being drawn from the stockpile on a sustainable basis, which is what you'd actually do if you were running a business dealing in actual production.
A great watch is expensive and made in Switzerland. That's how watches work. Nothing about them makes any sense because the product is fundamentally not about time telling technology, except in an abstract "it's pretty awesome this is just gears and springs" sort of way.
This is not a good smartwatch at $350. It's a bad sportswatch - because it doesn't standalone from the iPhone, doesn't have GPS, and yet is in the same price bracket.
My personal opinion is that on deeper analysis the whole smartwatch thing is a deadend which is being pushed because it's looks achievable, rather then innovative. But there's some fairly obvious problems with what Apple has on display - and they're the same ones as every other smartwatch.
Seriously, the number of people talking about how this isn't a problem, while simultaneously - gleefully - discussing what they'll do if someone tries to take their room, or someone won't let them take their room, pretty much dismisses any counter-argument to the idea that there isn't a problem.
There obviously is.
If the plane has an emergency in any place that's not "on the ground and stationary" your chances of being a survivor are pretty much zero anyway.
But if we went with the Fifth Element approach, you could design planes which could eject their passengers in parachuting buoyant pods or something.
Yes I'm sure this has never happened to a private company or multiple major financial institutions, or academic institutions, or security companies or IT companies.
Oh wait.
Who cares? Do you really think it needs to be ported to Windows?
Do you really not acknowledge the existance of FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, AIX, Solaris, HP-UX, and more?
OpenBSDs entire development philosophy is to develop only for BSD, and let porting take place as patchsets on top of it.
That's why LibreSSL has has support for Windows stripped out, despite it being an important SSL platform.
And you have missed all the subtlety of the problem. For one thing, there's no way anyone's fitting an iPad package into a mailbox, or even through a mailslot.
There's no way to distribute or update keys rapidly enough to make them general use for delivery companies and the post.
Which is the entire point: the century of mail was for mail with packages considered the exception. Special case enough to warrant needing to be physically present to receive them, or simply gambling nobody steals them when left on the front porch.
Basically you might want to take your last line there and apply it to yourself.
The drone delivery thing seems like a proxy for the fact that the regular postal system desperately needs a revamp to include more standardization. Basically, we need some system which acknowledges that parcel and package delivery is an increasingly important part of the process, and we want to receive things unattended.
You can only sometimes get this now.
If we had a system where we standardized mailbox sizes to some specification, and then licensed out some NFC/smart card system to let postal workers/delivery companies open them, then we might be getting somewhere. Sure, it's not perfect and it wouldn't be everywhere at once, but if you could simply buy the relevant thing at Home Depot and then delivery companies could be expected to use it, it'd be progress. Then the free-market innovates from there: various multi-tiered security products or the like.
The various flight ceilings on commercial aviation might speak to that, but I seriously doubt any court is going to interpret the law as being about property rights as opposed to public safety / nuisance.
You have all sorts of protections from things that never touch your property, but they're definitely not defined by the property boundaries. For instance you can't demand that soundwaves do not enter your premises at all - instead you can possibly get a neighbours air conditioner moved so it isn't above a certain volume, within the bounds of what's considered reasonable.
So I guess we shouldn't worry about Ebola either coz you don't think you'll ever get it either? Check your hipster-holier-then-thou-attitude at the door mate.
Influenza infects hundreds of millions of people every year, but kills only a tiny fraction of them. To die of influenza you need to have complicating conditions. The type you had are curable with drugs we already have. The type which aren't are the type of lifestyle or age related issues which are a problem no matter who gets them, and regardless of whether you get the flu.
A virus for which we also have a vaccine.
By every measure, influenza is not scary. People who get it do not expect to die of it. But we're also going to be able to bugger-all to stop it being a yearly global epidemic. Which is fortunate, because again, it's very hard to die of it.
despite the fact flu is a much more common (and less "scary") disease.
Flu is killing 200.000 to 500.000 people globally every year.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre...
Dying the flu generally requires complicating conditions. Most people survive it just fine. Ebola is scary because most people don't survive it.
So has the genetic code of numerous pathogens. That doesn't make them easily created. For a simple example, we currently have an entire field dedicated to bottom-up synthetic life creation (start with a DNA sequence, and bootstrap a cell). That's a hot field, which has required thousands of man-hours to understand.
Terrorists in field laboratories without proper equipment are not going to be accomplishing it. It is a huge expensive project.
Smallpox is not "easily created".
Right: so still, think about those numbers. 30% of India's population is over 100% of the US in terms of sheer number of people. So a low-end phone is exactly the right device to target there.
The indian market is 1 billion people, most in some state of poverty. You can "do well" there, by western standards, without touching more then a tiny fraction of it. Apple don't have 100% of the US population as a market, and don't have 100% of the market. In India, if both those things were true, it would only represent about 30% of the total population.
I'd be un-surprised when it leads a half-dozen "gotcha" worded follow ups from someone who clearly has no interest in Googling their own ideas first.
Desynchronized pumping action would be a problem I imagine. Our heart valves aren't really designed to cope with more then the one.
I think the fear people have with binary logs is that, if you get corruption, a human feels like they have a hope of decoding what the text was supposed to mean.
Although I think this is pretty naive - people thinking "dropped characters", as opposed to the more usual "50 consecutive messages disappeared". A binary format with proper message boundaries is exactly as robust as a text file in that capacity.
Upstart was in no way complicated, and writing upstart scripts was a breeze.
Run blah every X seconds is just about the dumbest way we can be doing things on a computer. It's a closed system. It can know exactly when a process dies, and handle the event then. The inability to do this is a huge flaw.
What's broken exactly?
Software has bugs and occationally they crash. I'm not an expert GNU/Linux system administrator by any means, and I've lost count of the amount of times when I simply wanted to just find a way to make the init system restart a service automatically when it crashes. This is trivial with Systemd, you just set Restart=on-failure in the service file and it's done. No need to write error-prone shell scripts or fiddle with run levels. It just works and it's well documented.
Straight out of Windows. Write buggy software. It's ok if it crashes once in a while because we can just restart it.
Also straight out of Windows. Make everything into one big integrated binary instead of something that you can see into or hack on.
Write non-buggy software. Hope you have the millions per line of code they paid the space shuttle team.
And you know, of conspiring to commit murder. People seem to forget that part.
Again: so?
We've reached monitor parity. We reached it because TV improved and there's no point trying to maintain a difference for difference's sake.
But the vertical height argument is just rubbish. People run 16:9 and 16:10 screens vertical all the time, and no one was ever going to be manufacturing giant squares which physically wouldn't fit on a desktop. 4K and the like is going to sell principally to the computer market first because lord knows there's little need for it in home theatre for most people.