I'm sticking by what I said about this yesterday: It's UNENFORCEABLE and TOOTHLESS.
It's selectively enforceable, same as MP3 uploads. There will be more Joel Tenenbaums, more Jammie Thomas-Rassets, more Mark Shumakers. This time in Europe. Random meming kids will get sued and lose and get saddled with gigantic judgements they'll never pay off, and will never work again because of it.
You forgot non-GMO. But I can't figure out how "vegetarian" can possibly be combined with "free-range, cruelty free".
Listen up brothers and sisters, come hear my desperate tale. I speak of our friends of nature trapped in the dirt like a jail. Vegetables live in oppression, served on our tables each night. This killing of veggies is madness—I say we take up the fight! Salads are only for murderers; coleslaw's a facist regime. Don't think that they don't have feelings, just cause a radish can't scream.
I've heard the screams of the vegetables (scream, scream, scream), watching their skins being peeled (having their insides revealed), grated and steamed with no mercy (burning off calories), how do you think that feels? (Bet it hurts really bad.) Carrot juice constitutes murder. (And that's a real crime.) Greenhouses prisons for slaves. (Let my vegetables go!) It's time to stop all this gardening. (It's dirty as hell.) Let's call a spade a spade (is a spade is a spade is a spade).
That's not a random from-my-ass number, that's the level of CO2 that was in the atmosphere before the industrial revolution. The -correct- global average temperature is one that fits well with our established civilization and gives good crop yields, which is one that results from pre-industrial CO2 levels or slightly above.
Bullshit. No it isn't. In pre-industrial times, we had the Little Ice Age. Whole villages in the Swiss Alps were destroyed because of glacier growth. Famines caused by cold-induced crop failures in France in 1693-94, Norway in 1695-96, and Sweden in 1696-97 killed 10% of the populations of each country. In China the Ming dynasty fell because of the droughts and subsequent famines caused by the cold. The city of Timbuktu was flooded at least 13 times by the Niger river because of unusually high snowpack on mountain peaks in North Africa that hasn't happened before or since.
The correct global average temperature is a good deal higher than it was before the Industrial Revolution because cold weather kills people.
I can remember reading a well reasoned post on slashdot, back around 2000, where the author basically said, the future of the internet isn't a Muslim and a Jewish person having a reasoned debate online (a la Locke and Demosthenes from Ender's Game)...
Pfffffft. Ender's Game has come to pass. Remember, Locke and Demosthenes were sock puppets, created for the sole purpose of furthering the political career of a scheming sociopathic child named Peter Wiggin. Only Locke was written as a reasoned debater. Demosthenes was written as a firebrand demogogue. Peter eventually became Hegemon of Earth.
Take a look at the Internet. That shit happened, word for word, and it worked.
So what's the alternative? Basically, the OP is saying "these darn stupid people, WhatsApp is guilty of letting them talk to each other".
Should we then manage our communication channels to prevent stupid people* from communicating? Isn't this what Twitter/Youtube/FB/etc are trying to do? *according to our very-personal definition of stupid
Thirty years ago, that was the norm. Newspapers, radio, and television were nearly pure push mediums. Sure you could write a letter to the editor, or call in to a radio show, but almost no one ever did, in per capita terms. A huge fraction of each of those audiences was purely passive. By definition, the "stupid" people could not communicate with each other, since newspapers and radio shows exercised draconian editorial control about which letters they would publish, or even how much of a letter to publish, or which calls to broadcast, or how much of a call to broadcast. Massive censorship of feedback was the norm.
The Internet is a radical departure from what was the norm of human communications since the beginning of human communication. The mail, including its ultimate expression, the Pony Express, is a point to point medium for everyone who isn't rich. For rich people, it's a push medium, mostly of spam. Telegrams were purely point to point. Newspapers, radio, and television were a bully pulpit, push mediums with zero audience participation. With the Internet, the masses can talk back, and everyone can hear them. This has never happened before, in the history of the world, and it's only a generation old at this point. It has never been possible for everyone to hear everyone else, in real time, until now.
Now that it's possible, now that the sheer stupidity of most humans is on display for all to see, various cultures are coming up with various responses. China has decided that stupid people can say whatever they want as long as it's apolitical. Europe first decided that stupid people can say whatever they want as long as it isn't about Nazis; now they're steadily adding more and more exceptions. America first decided that stupid people can say whatever they want, period. It remains to be seen if that will actually hold.
The Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves.
If the Founding Fathers had any inkling that something like the Internet was coming, they might have left out the "free speech" clause of the First Amendment. They very carefully designed the US Federal Government to be only somewhat representative, while having a lot of inertia to insulate it from the whims of stupid people in large numbers. Everything, from three separate branches of government, to the electoral college, to appointment of senators, was designed to make the US government ponderous, slow, predictable, and unresponsive without dramatic pressure.
Personally I think the free speech clause should survive, but the only way to make it work is brutally enforced net neutrality, brutally enforced Anti-Trust against ISPs, and, most importantly, symmetrical Internet connections everywhere. Without those things, the continued Facebookification of the Internet is inevitable, even if Facebook itself eventually fails. There are pressures that caused Facebook, and they are still operative, regardless of what happens to Facebook itself.
In the end, the Grand Experiment may come to an end. I can't trust you not to be an idiot and you can't trust me not to be an idiot, and the price of allowing and encouraging both of us to post our idiot ideas where every other idiot can read them might actually be too high. The jury is still out.
Starlink and similar services can't simply come fast enough.
Starlink will be oversubscribed 20 seconds after it goes live. I know I'll have a signup bot ready and waiting.
Unfortunately all indications out of SpaceX is that they are not provisioning to deal with the fact that all 26 million Comcast subscribers would cheerfully tell Comcast to fuck off if they had any alternative. Followed by millions of Charter/Time Warner and Frontier captive "customers" as well. There are a few million people in rural locations who have no option for actual broadband but Starlink when it arrives. Their needs are going to be swamped by the tens of millions who have broadband but are dissatisfied with their current ISP, and have no alternative. SpaceX simply doesn't have the spectrum available to deal with that kind of demand, though the demand is definitely there.
Had the ACA not been signed, global temperatures would have increased by 17.152 degrees (NOT 17.149 degrees that some Republican thinktank lowballed).
I get sick and tired of the Trump disciples low-balling the amount the temperature would have increased. Scientists said 17.152 degrees, and they don't lie. In fact, Science never lies. Except when it claims that there are only two sexes because there are only two chromosome combinations.
. ..
Depending on your echo chamber, Poe's Law already applies to this whole post. Sarcasm/teenage trolling was so much more easily recognizable when I was young...
So do you really, typically sit closer than 0.78 screen heights (51" from a 65" TV)?
Yes, I frequently sit 0.78 screen heights from a 30" UltraHD monitor. It's farther if I lean back in my chair, but if I rest my chin on my elbow on the edge of my desk, it's that close. It's not HDR.
I will settle for the paperback version. You'd be blown away by the human brain's ability to 3D rendering from 'source code' in the form of skillfully crafted text.
Naw, you'd never understand. Never mind.
I read a book a day for the first 15 years of my life, as soon as I learned to read. I still read thousands of pages a year. Don't try to teach your grandmother to suck eggs.
When I was looking up info on how to configure an atomic clock, because you can get one for your computer for the cost of a new computer these days, they said you need to take into consideration the strength of gravity in your location.
Where did you find a personal atomic clock? Everything marketed by that name is nothing but a GPS receiver at best, or a radio synch receiver that may end up useless after NIST shuts off the beacons. It might help if I knew which technology it uses. Is it a cesium clock? Aluminum? Strontium?
People here can't fathom why anyone would get a degree in history when there are bridges to be built and that's pretty fucking sad.
We can fathom it just fine.
I personally was envious of Christopher Hitchens. He got a classical Oxford education in the humanities in the 1970s and it showed. His command of the language, his understanding of history, his argumentation ability, his critical thinking skills, his understanding of people, all top notch. Hearing him speak and argue extemporaneously was a joy, especially compared to listening to 99% of American "famous" people. American politicians especially have a hard time remembering their own damn points, and the moment they stray from their carefully memorized talking points, they flounder helplessly. That's not to say European politicians don't have the same problem. The number of people capable of really thinking is remarkably low, and many of them are hamstrung by a poor education. Mr. Hitchens was the pinnacle of what a classical education should achieve, but rarely does.
That's not to say I agreed with his every conclusion—I didn't. He was an ardent supporter of the US invasion of Iraq, even after he became a US citizen and had to foot the bill himself. I never understood that.
I suspect it's difficult to get a classical Oxford education in the humanities even at Oxford, nowadays. The post-modern infestation has spread everywhere.
Instead of this pointless arms race of resolution that no one actually supports, how about nice, high-quality, reliable 1080p HDTVs at a price point of $100US or less?
Never happen. There are minimums. In particular, there's a minimum amount of effort required to assemble an LCD TV. Once the yields on the panels themselves are high enough, and the factory is paid for (and some of them are paid for by now), that's the controlling factor. Some of the steps are still too finicky for robots so humans perform them, which induces a price floor a good deal higher than just the cost of materials + cost of energy to refine and assemble them. Still, you can get a $120 24" 1080p screen. It's sold as "factory reconditioned", which usually means "we want it outta the warehouse and we don't want to bother with the original warranty term, so this is how we unload them." Limit 10.
Once you hit the very bottom of the margins, manufacturers stop making things in favor of something with higher margins.
A person with 20/20 visual acuity would need to sit 0.39 screen heights away to get the full benefit of the 4,320x7680 resolution. That would be 25 inches on a 65 inch diagonal TV.
That's 7680x4320 for most people...
And that sounds like just what I want. I specifically want a display device that can exceed human visual acuity. When you've successfully exceeded reality, we're done. Until then, we're not done. If I can see the pixels, they're too big. If I can't see the pixels for any reasonable use-case, then they're finally small enough. 4320p might finally be enough. 2160p isn't. Not quite.
Think of a gated community setting up its own new fast network. Its not going to be a new ISP out in the wider community. No ISP wants to just be an ISP for a gated community.
An ISP run as a co-op by the members of the gated community does.
By giving some freedom back to who and what an ISP is local communities can grow their own ISP without federal laws setting out what an approved competitive ISP is. By removing more and more federal NN rules and network laws people all over the USA can have the freedom to become their own ISP.
Horseshit. Net neutrality for a new ISP is the default. Networking equipment is out-of-the-box neutral. Only asshats in the incumbent national ISPs want to violate net neutrality and they want to do it for more money, not because it's either necessary for operation or better for the customers. Neither is true.
Without having to be come a "competitive" new ISP state/nation wide.
More horseshit. No new ISP has to instantly be national before it's legal, Not now, not ever. Nor does this law make it any easier to be a new ISP. It just means the incumbents can gouge you more than before because suddenly their monopoly status is ignored by the government.
I was in Tempe about 2 weeks ago and these things were all over the place. Twice i observed them driving erratically. One time it was trying to change lanes, but seemingly couldn't decide what to do. It moved halfway over, before reaching an intersection, then moved back over, applying the brakes unnecessarily, and then trying again.
The SUV behind me did that twice yesterday morning. It definitely wasn't a self-driving car of any sort. If that's the worst a self-driving car does (I know it's not), they'd be ready to go.
Posting a liknk to Breitbart is more or less equivalent to saying "my pisshead mates down the pub told me". I mean sure, it might be true, but neither lends more credibility to the claim.
"I won't believe that boy who cried wolf until he's been eaten." - serviscope_minor
Well... yeah, actually. That's how that works. That is, in fact, the moral of the story. Liars are not believed even when they tell the truth. Breitbart lies incessantly, therefore it is not to be believed.
I understand thinking is hard for you, but you could at least try.
sure...until someone sticks duct tape, reflective tape, and some graffiti all over the stop signs...game over man.
Nope. The car has its own internal map. For a route it drives regularly, it knows in detail where to expect the stop signs, just like a human driver, but with an infallible memory that is never tired or distracted or drunk or demented or confused. If somebody has fooled with the sign, the car can still behave correctly. (Uber's probably doesn't, but it could.) For routes the car doesn't drive regularly, it may miss the sign and try to drive through the intersection, only to jam on the brakes when somebody pulls out in front of it, just like a human driver. But odds are it won't, since most of the self-driving efforts today are networked, and every car in the fleet has access to the data of every other car in the fleet. Once there's ubiquity of any particular networked self-driving car, every car in the network will be equally as good at navigating the streets that any car in the network navigates regularly, including noticing things like missing or defaced stop signs.
Can I get a recipe complete with required equipment list for the manufacture of LSD or methamphetamine off the internet too since all information is just so legal now?
It's impossible for conservatives to seal themselves in echo chambers. The left wing media is too loud.
You've never met my mother. Or anyone else over the age of 75. It is trivially easy for conservatives to seal themselves in echo chambers. They simply do not use the Internet. At all. They watch Fox News when they watch cable TV at all, but their primary source of news is talk radio. Which is the poster child for an echo chamber, and it is overwhelmingly dominated by neo-conservatives.
All you need to do is go to Facebook or Google News to see what the Left wants you to hear.
I would bet a steak dinner my mother has never done either in her entire life. She doesn't know that Google even has a news portal. Odds are she will die without ever knowing. She has an email address. I know for a fact she hasn't read it in half a year. And it's Yahoo, not Google, so she can't even accidentally stumble onto a Google property.
Walk into an airport and CNN is spewing fake news in your face.
My mother hasn't been in an airport since 1988, when she flew to California alone for her brother's funeral. My father won't fly, so they don't go to airports. A whole lot of older people never fly.
The conservative echo chamber is much tighter than you think.
Would you say that American society has not been coarsened and dumbed down in the last generation or two?
I would say it has not been, yes. Instead, I would say that the coarser, dumber parts of society are considerably more visible now than they ever have been in history. And there are a lot more people.
There aren't more coarse idiots in society now per capita. There's just more people and Twitter. When John Milton could claim he'd read every book available, there were a thousand assholes down the street who couldn't read at all. Nowadays, you can claim you've read every journal article published in your field of science in the past decade, and there are a thousand assholes down the street who can't even spell the name of your specialization. Nothing's changed, qualitatively. It's just that you're aware of their existence now, because they tweet.
I contend the opposite. The literacy rate has never been higher. Efforts to educate have never been broader. Availability of facts has never been better. Slashdot conceit likes to complain about the functionally illiterate in society, but the truth is there are more functionally literate now than ever before. Sure, there are people who simply can't comprehend much of anything. They post on YouTube. There are many many people who can comprehend the things they read. Maybe not perfectly, or even well, since there's plenty of people right down near the functionally illiterate line who just happen to be on the other side of that line, but they can read and understand. And write. On Twitter. So now you know they're out there. They always were. You just couldn't tell. The world isn't neatly funneled through Walter Cronkite anymore.
The original rule was obvious bullshit. Price controls should be imposed unless 100% of potential customers have at least one competitive provider at each and every location.
Eliminating even the pretense of controlling the monopoly is not better. A new rule should actually control the monopoly. Or better yet, make it untenable to be a monopoly.
Soft metals like aluminum and brass can be melted with pretty simple backyard forges. Something that can melt steel is perhaps moderately more complex.
Not really. You can buy a Fresnel lens by mail order than can melt steel quite handily. Or in the case of the video, pull one out of an old rear projection TV. You can make cast steel in a backyard forge for $0 in fuel cost. It only requires a sunny afternoon. And a respirator.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sticking by what I said about this yesterday: It's UNENFORCEABLE and TOOTHLESS.
It's selectively enforceable, same as MP3 uploads. There will be more Joel Tenenbaums, more Jammie Thomas-Rassets, more Mark Shumakers. This time in Europe. Random meming kids will get sued and lose and get saddled with gigantic judgements they'll never pay off, and will never work again because of it.
And nothing else will change much.
You forgot non-GMO. But I can't figure out how "vegetarian" can possibly be combined with "free-range, cruelty free".
Listen up brothers and sisters, come hear my desperate tale.
I speak of our friends of nature trapped in the dirt like a jail.
Vegetables live in oppression, served on our tables each night.
This killing of veggies is madness—I say we take up the fight!
Salads are only for murderers; coleslaw's a facist regime.
Don't think that they don't have feelings, just cause a radish can't scream.
I've heard the screams of the vegetables (scream, scream, scream),
watching their skins being peeled (having their insides revealed),
grated and steamed with no mercy (burning off calories),
how do you think that feels? (Bet it hurts really bad.)
Carrot juice constitutes murder. (And that's a real crime.)
Greenhouses prisons for slaves. (Let my vegetables go!)
It's time to stop all this gardening. (It's dirty as hell.)
Let's call a spade a spade (is a spade is a spade is a spade).
—Arrogant Worms
That's not a random from-my-ass number, that's the level of CO2 that was in the atmosphere before the industrial revolution. The -correct- global average temperature is one that fits well with our established civilization and gives good crop yields, which is one that results from pre-industrial CO2 levels or slightly above.
Bullshit. No it isn't. In pre-industrial times, we had the Little Ice Age. Whole villages in the Swiss Alps were destroyed because of glacier growth. Famines caused by cold-induced crop failures in France in 1693-94, Norway in 1695-96, and Sweden in 1696-97 killed 10% of the populations of each country. In China the Ming dynasty fell because of the droughts and subsequent famines caused by the cold. The city of Timbuktu was flooded at least 13 times by the Niger river because of unusually high snowpack on mountain peaks in North Africa that hasn't happened before or since.
The correct global average temperature is a good deal higher than it was before the Industrial Revolution because cold weather kills people.
It's in the Pacific, so it doesn't need to worry about hurricanes.
Instead, it has to worry about typhoons. Except it won't "worry" about them. It will just break, or end up on the roof of some poor Hawaiian's house.
I can remember reading a well reasoned post on slashdot, back around 2000, where the author basically said, the future of the internet isn't a Muslim and a Jewish person having a reasoned debate online (a la Locke and Demosthenes from Ender's Game)...
Pfffffft. Ender's Game has come to pass. Remember, Locke and Demosthenes were sock puppets, created for the sole purpose of furthering the political career of a scheming sociopathic child named Peter Wiggin. Only Locke was written as a reasoned debater. Demosthenes was written as a firebrand demogogue. Peter eventually became Hegemon of Earth.
Take a look at the Internet. That shit happened, word for word, and it worked.
So what's the alternative?
Basically, the OP is saying "these darn stupid people, WhatsApp is guilty of letting them talk to each other".
Should we then manage our communication channels to prevent stupid people* from communicating? Isn't this what Twitter/Youtube/FB/etc are trying to do?
*according to our very-personal definition of stupid
Thirty years ago, that was the norm. Newspapers, radio, and television were nearly pure push mediums. Sure you could write a letter to the editor, or call in to a radio show, but almost no one ever did, in per capita terms. A huge fraction of each of those audiences was purely passive. By definition, the "stupid" people could not communicate with each other, since newspapers and radio shows exercised draconian editorial control about which letters they would publish, or even how much of a letter to publish, or which calls to broadcast, or how much of a call to broadcast. Massive censorship of feedback was the norm.
The Internet is a radical departure from what was the norm of human communications since the beginning of human communication. The mail, including its ultimate expression, the Pony Express, is a point to point medium for everyone who isn't rich. For rich people, it's a push medium, mostly of spam. Telegrams were purely point to point. Newspapers, radio, and television were a bully pulpit, push mediums with zero audience participation. With the Internet, the masses can talk back, and everyone can hear them. This has never happened before, in the history of the world, and it's only a generation old at this point. It has never been possible for everyone to hear everyone else, in real time, until now.
Now that it's possible, now that the sheer stupidity of most humans is on display for all to see, various cultures are coming up with various responses. China has decided that stupid people can say whatever they want as long as it's apolitical. Europe first decided that stupid people can say whatever they want as long as it isn't about Nazis; now they're steadily adding more and more exceptions. America first decided that stupid people can say whatever they want, period. It remains to be seen if that will actually hold.
The Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves.
If the Founding Fathers had any inkling that something like the Internet was coming, they might have left out the "free speech" clause of the First Amendment. They very carefully designed the US Federal Government to be only somewhat representative, while having a lot of inertia to insulate it from the whims of stupid people in large numbers. Everything, from three separate branches of government, to the electoral college, to appointment of senators, was designed to make the US government ponderous, slow, predictable, and unresponsive without dramatic pressure.
Personally I think the free speech clause should survive, but the only way to make it work is brutally enforced net neutrality, brutally enforced Anti-Trust against ISPs, and, most importantly, symmetrical Internet connections everywhere. Without those things, the continued Facebookification of the Internet is inevitable, even if Facebook itself eventually fails. There are pressures that caused Facebook, and they are still operative, regardless of what happens to Facebook itself.
In the end, the Grand Experiment may come to an end. I can't trust you not to be an idiot and you can't trust me not to be an idiot, and the price of allowing and encouraging both of us to post our idiot ideas where every other idiot can read them might actually be too high. The jury is still out.
Starlink and similar services can't simply come fast enough.
Starlink will be oversubscribed 20 seconds after it goes live. I know I'll have a signup bot ready and waiting.
Unfortunately all indications out of SpaceX is that they are not provisioning to deal with the fact that all 26 million Comcast subscribers would cheerfully tell Comcast to fuck off if they had any alternative. Followed by millions of Charter/Time Warner and Frontier captive "customers" as well. There are a few million people in rural locations who have no option for actual broadband but Starlink when it arrives. Their needs are going to be swamped by the tens of millions who have broadband but are dissatisfied with their current ISP, and have no alternative. SpaceX simply doesn't have the spectrum available to deal with that kind of demand, though the demand is definitely there.
Had the ACA not been signed, global temperatures would have increased by 17.152 degrees (NOT 17.149 degrees that some Republican thinktank lowballed).
I get sick and tired of the Trump disciples low-balling the amount the temperature would have increased. Scientists said 17.152 degrees, and they don't lie. In fact, Science never lies. Except when it claims that there are only two sexes because there are only two chromosome combinations.
. . .
Depending on your echo chamber, Poe's Law already applies to this whole post. Sarcasm/teenage trolling was so much more easily recognizable when I was young...
So do you really, typically sit closer than 0.78 screen heights (51" from a 65" TV)?
Yes, I frequently sit 0.78 screen heights from a 30" UltraHD monitor. It's farther if I lean back in my chair, but if I rest my chin on my elbow on the edge of my desk, it's that close. It's not HDR.
I will settle for the paperback version. You'd be blown away by the human brain's ability to 3D rendering from 'source code' in the form of skillfully crafted text.
Naw, you'd never understand. Never mind.
I read a book a day for the first 15 years of my life, as soon as I learned to read. I still read thousands of pages a year. Don't try to teach your grandmother to suck eggs.
Obligatory go DIAF comment that's needed in these kinds of threads so we can all pad our victim card.
Hey! I haven't received my victim card! I'm being discriminated against! Disenfranchised! Mother!
When I was looking up info on how to configure an atomic clock, because you can get one for your computer for the cost of a new computer these days, they said you need to take into consideration the strength of gravity in your location.
Where did you find a personal atomic clock? Everything marketed by that name is nothing but a GPS receiver at best, or a radio synch receiver that may end up useless after NIST shuts off the beacons. It might help if I knew which technology it uses. Is it a cesium clock? Aluminum? Strontium?
People here can't fathom why anyone would get a degree in history when there are bridges to be built and that's pretty fucking sad.
We can fathom it just fine.
I personally was envious of Christopher Hitchens. He got a classical Oxford education in the humanities in the 1970s and it showed. His command of the language, his understanding of history, his argumentation ability, his critical thinking skills, his understanding of people, all top notch. Hearing him speak and argue extemporaneously was a joy, especially compared to listening to 99% of American "famous" people. American politicians especially have a hard time remembering their own damn points, and the moment they stray from their carefully memorized talking points, they flounder helplessly. That's not to say European politicians don't have the same problem. The number of people capable of really thinking is remarkably low, and many of them are hamstrung by a poor education. Mr. Hitchens was the pinnacle of what a classical education should achieve, but rarely does.
That's not to say I agreed with his every conclusion—I didn't. He was an ardent supporter of the US invasion of Iraq, even after he became a US citizen and had to foot the bill himself. I never understood that.
I suspect it's difficult to get a classical Oxford education in the humanities even at Oxford, nowadays. The post-modern infestation has spread everywhere.
Instead of this pointless arms race of resolution that no one actually supports, how about nice, high-quality, reliable 1080p HDTVs at a price point of $100US or less?
Never happen. There are minimums. In particular, there's a minimum amount of effort required to assemble an LCD TV. Once the yields on the panels themselves are high enough, and the factory is paid for (and some of them are paid for by now), that's the controlling factor. Some of the steps are still too finicky for robots so humans perform them, which induces a price floor a good deal higher than just the cost of materials + cost of energy to refine and assemble them. Still, you can get a $120 24" 1080p screen. It's sold as "factory reconditioned", which usually means "we want it outta the warehouse and we don't want to bother with the original warranty term, so this is how we unload them." Limit 10.
Once you hit the very bottom of the margins, manufacturers stop making things in favor of something with higher margins.
A person with 20/20 visual acuity would need to sit 0.39 screen heights away to get the full benefit of the 4,320x7680 resolution. That would be 25 inches on a 65 inch diagonal TV.
That's 7680x4320 for most people...
And that sounds like just what I want. I specifically want a display device that can exceed human visual acuity. When you've successfully exceeded reality, we're done. Until then, we're not done. If I can see the pixels, they're too big. If I can't see the pixels for any reasonable use-case, then they're finally small enough. 4320p might finally be enough. 2160p isn't. Not quite.
Think of a gated community setting up its own new fast network.
Its not going to be a new ISP out in the wider community.
No ISP wants to just be an ISP for a gated community.
An ISP run as a co-op by the members of the gated community does.
By giving some freedom back to who and what an ISP is local communities can grow their own ISP without federal laws setting out what an approved competitive ISP is.
By removing more and more federal NN rules and network laws people all over the USA can have the freedom to become their own ISP.
Horseshit. Net neutrality for a new ISP is the default. Networking equipment is out-of-the-box neutral. Only asshats in the incumbent national ISPs want to violate net neutrality and they want to do it for more money, not because it's either necessary for operation or better for the customers. Neither is true.
Without having to be come a "competitive" new ISP state/nation wide.
More horseshit. No new ISP has to instantly be national before it's legal, Not now, not ever. Nor does this law make it any easier to be a new ISP. It just means the incumbents can gouge you more than before because suddenly their monopoly status is ignored by the government.
I was in Tempe about 2 weeks ago and these things were all over the place. Twice i observed them driving erratically. One time it was trying to change lanes, but seemingly couldn't decide what to do. It moved halfway over, before reaching an intersection, then moved back over, applying the brakes unnecessarily, and then trying again.
The SUV behind me did that twice yesterday morning. It definitely wasn't a self-driving car of any sort. If that's the worst a self-driving car does (I know it's not), they'd be ready to go.
Facebook censors. [breitbart.com]
Posting a liknk to Breitbart is more or less equivalent to saying "my pisshead mates down the pub told me". I mean sure, it might be true, but neither lends more credibility to the claim.
"I won't believe that boy who cried wolf until he's been eaten." - serviscope_minor
Well... yeah, actually. That's how that works. That is, in fact, the moral of the story. Liars are not believed even when they tell the truth. Breitbart lies incessantly, therefore it is not to be believed.
I understand thinking is hard for you, but you could at least try.
sure...until someone sticks duct tape, reflective tape, and some graffiti all over the stop signs...game over man.
Nope. The car has its own internal map. For a route it drives regularly, it knows in detail where to expect the stop signs, just like a human driver, but with an infallible memory that is never tired or distracted or drunk or demented or confused. If somebody has fooled with the sign, the car can still behave correctly. (Uber's probably doesn't, but it could.) For routes the car doesn't drive regularly, it may miss the sign and try to drive through the intersection, only to jam on the brakes when somebody pulls out in front of it, just like a human driver. But odds are it won't, since most of the self-driving efforts today are networked, and every car in the fleet has access to the data of every other car in the fleet. Once there's ubiquity of any particular networked self-driving car, every car in the network will be equally as good at navigating the streets that any car in the network navigates regularly, including noticing things like missing or defaced stop signs.
Can I get a recipe complete with required equipment list for the manufacture of LSD or methamphetamine off the internet too since all information is just so legal now?
Yes, you can. Or would you prefer detailed instructions direct from the U.S. government?
And if you'd like details of how to implement the described process safely on an industrial scale, watch Breaking Bad.
It's impossible for conservatives to seal themselves in echo chambers. The left wing media is too loud.
You've never met my mother. Or anyone else over the age of 75. It is trivially easy for conservatives to seal themselves in echo chambers. They simply do not use the Internet. At all. They watch Fox News when they watch cable TV at all, but their primary source of news is talk radio. Which is the poster child for an echo chamber, and it is overwhelmingly dominated by neo-conservatives.
All you need to do is go to Facebook or Google News to see what the Left wants you to hear.
I would bet a steak dinner my mother has never done either in her entire life. She doesn't know that Google even has a news portal. Odds are she will die without ever knowing. She has an email address. I know for a fact she hasn't read it in half a year. And it's Yahoo, not Google, so she can't even accidentally stumble onto a Google property.
Walk into an airport and CNN is spewing fake news in your face.
My mother hasn't been in an airport since 1988, when she flew to California alone for her brother's funeral. My father won't fly, so they don't go to airports. A whole lot of older people never fly.
The conservative echo chamber is much tighter than you think.
Would you say that American society has not been coarsened and dumbed down in the last generation or two?
I would say it has not been, yes. Instead, I would say that the coarser, dumber parts of society are considerably more visible now than they ever have been in history. And there are a lot more people.
There aren't more coarse idiots in society now per capita. There's just more people and Twitter. When John Milton could claim he'd read every book available, there were a thousand assholes down the street who couldn't read at all. Nowadays, you can claim you've read every journal article published in your field of science in the past decade, and there are a thousand assholes down the street who can't even spell the name of your specialization. Nothing's changed, qualitatively. It's just that you're aware of their existence now, because they tweet.
I contend the opposite. The literacy rate has never been higher. Efforts to educate have never been broader. Availability of facts has never been better. Slashdot conceit likes to complain about the functionally illiterate in society, but the truth is there are more functionally literate now than ever before. Sure, there are people who simply can't comprehend much of anything. They post on YouTube. There are many many people who can comprehend the things they read. Maybe not perfectly, or even well, since there's plenty of people right down near the functionally illiterate line who just happen to be on the other side of that line, but they can read and understand. And write. On Twitter. So now you know they're out there. They always were. You just couldn't tell. The world isn't neatly funneled through Walter Cronkite anymore.
The original rule was obvious bullshit. Price controls should be imposed unless 100% of potential customers have at least one competitive provider at each and every location.
Eliminating even the pretense of controlling the monopoly is not better. A new rule should actually control the monopoly. Or better yet, make it untenable to be a monopoly.
Soft metals like aluminum and brass can be melted with pretty simple backyard forges. Something that can melt steel is perhaps moderately more complex.
Not really. You can buy a Fresnel lens by mail order than can melt steel quite handily. Or in the case of the video, pull one out of an old rear projection TV. You can make cast steel in a backyard forge for $0 in fuel cost. It only requires a sunny afternoon. And a respirator.
Isnt' it time for you to go pick some tractor parts from the machine tree, wouldn't want them to fall off and rust.
Your ideas intrigue me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter. Where do I get a machine tree? That sounds very useful.