One can only hope it hits the right people. Those fucking idiots who demand we open the network to the "bring your device from home" crowd. Remember when your network admin told you that it is a stupid idea - well here you go.
Remember when your network admin couldn't figure out how to segregate the wifi network, or set up mobile device policies in exchange? Well here you go.
I assume you argue that "Mayo" is a different word than "Mayonnaise," so there is no problem marketing "Just Mayo" or "Chipotle Mayo" as a mayonnaise substitute (without the word "substitute" on the front of the label). How would you feel about going to the store and getting some "OJ" that had no juice from oranges? If I read a label that said "Just OJ", I would assume it had only orange juice.
How would you feel about putting an image of eggs and a cross through them or some other way to quickly identify this is eggless mayonnaise substitute, and not mayonnaise?
That's funny, half the people I mentioned mayo to (admittedly, mostly young) said "its made from eggs? *uncooked* eggs?? how weird" I think that once this whole naming thing is settled with the FDA, whatever they end up calling it, no one will bat an eye that it's egg free as long as it tastes good.
Eggs are one of the best sources of protein, are natural and can be produced easily in a back yard chicken house. I have also read that most of the rhetoric about eggs being unhealthy has been debunked. Unless you are producing specifically for people with allergies, what's the point of an eggs substitute.
To get the same amount of food (mayo in this case) you have to put 20x more energy into the process to get it from a chicken egg, vs getting it from a pea plant. So at scale, it would be a far cheaper way to arrive at mayo. Today this means less cost to make a nice sandwich, but continued development could lead to far lower cost, but still tasty alternatives to mainstream protein sources.
Hmm, so to get an egg you need many gross things (chickens, hormones for the chickens, vaccines for the chickens, food for the chickens, fertilizer for the food for the chickens, etc etc etc) and yet to get peas you need a seed, sunlight, and water. Yep, let's go with eggs as being more natural!
Wait, you're comparing factory raised chickens with organic peas? Chickens only require two things food (pasture or feed) and water. All the other stuff is just to raise productivity. Commercial Ag peas use things like fertilizer, pesticides, etc. not just "seed, sunlight, and water".
Except, for the same energy input (cost) you can get the most pristine organic peas, vs what it would take to get a chicken to lay an egg. If you are trying to reduce the unknowns/unnecessaries from your food chain, it's a no-brainer.
Simple, natural food. I'd rather have that than a bunch of man- made chemicals. I'm currently trying to get rid of most of the chemicals man puts into things these days....and it ain't easy.
Hmm, so to get an egg you need many gross things (chickens, hormones for the chickens, vaccines for the chickens, food for the chickens, fertilizer for the food for the chickens, etc etc etc) and yet to get peas you need a seed, sunlight, and water. Yep, let's go with eggs as being more natural!
But seriously, eggs arent that bad for you, but they are incredibly energy intensive compared to just eating plants. Something like 20x more energy goes into an egg than goes into the peas that make up this product, to get the same result. Thats the big innovation, you can start to get foods on the shelf that really are far more sustainable (even if they arent cheaper yet) and leave more energy on the planet for something else to use, like perhaps more delicious beef.
Yes, because getting boys interested in computer programming has been a major problem...
Oh, and encouraging girls must necessarily also mean discouraging boys.
Do you hear yourself?
This discussion is especially hilarious because pro-male gender bias (marketing of early home computers strictly to boys starting in the early 80s) predated IT/CS being male-dominated, and all these guys are showing up just to say "hey you get your damn dirty discriminating paws off of the perfectly egalitarian IT/CS system!". If it weren't for biased sales and marketing there likely would be a very narrow gap between men and women in CS. More importantly, lots of very talented women would be able to displace some of the god awful men who find themselves in CS.
Seriously, if you want a car that's fun to hack go as old as you can find that still looks nice, runs smooth, and has 100k miles (to reduce the odds that poor maintenance habits have caught up with the motor). Avoid any car with theft provention since that will totally block the remote starter unless you get the factory-approved option.
Which brings me to the next point: If you want convenience you won't get it by spending days hacking your car... You will get it by buying a convenient car. There are so many low and mid model cars that offer complete convenience packages, so just buy it if you want it. Unless you are already an experienced automotive engineer you just won't be able to come out ahead by doing it yourself. Then, to get your geek on buy a OBD-2 to Bluetooth adapter, and a nice app (like Torque) for your smartphone.
Thats great - doesn't help me tho if the goal is to replace residential grid power with locally generated solar power tho, does it?
If your goal is to not have a grid any more, then yes. Doing away with the grid is something no one has mentioned in the context of a national energy plan, though. If your goal is to generate enough power for your home, you can do it during the day, sell it to the utility (if net metering is available in your area) and then use power from the grid at night. When your meter shows 0 net power, you have generated all the power you need (just not at the right time). There's no reason to stop using the grid.
The post is entirely correct. These other sources of energy are not efficient and reliable enough to be financially viable right now. This may change in ten or twenty years, but right now, solar and wind just aren't where they need to be.
Slashdot itself is becoming less and less a site for geeks and nerds. It has been infected by dogmatic brats who cannot tolerate discussion. This is just one example of many - I'm sure you'll find more as the comments flow in.
Because the parent is a troll. And wrong. Reliable is a term you are both misusing. Solar and wind generation is perfectly reliable, given the predictions that can be made about the source (since the reliability in question is of the cells/turbines themselves, which are extremely durable). Do they generate enough to satisfy year-round demand? Of course not. Neither do coal plants, and neither do nuclear plants, and neither do natural gas plants (by themselves). Are you saying those technologies are "unreliable" too?
Solar cell costs are plunging, while their efficiencies rise. I predict a collision, a market and a profit.
You might see one, if you could just plug solar cells into your house and magically get power all day. Most of our power usage in our house is at night, when... oops... there's no solar power.
So now you need batteries and inverters and all kinds of other junk to provide power when we're actually home. And you need enough to provide power to the whole house for a few days to cover the days when there's hardly any sun.
Solar cells could cost $0, and they still probably wouldn't make sense when compared to grid power that isn't made artifiicially expensive by Greenist boondoggles.
This is a pretty sad, and wrong, assertion. Electricity usage from industrial and commercial load peaks during the day, and those two combined far eclipse residential usage. Even if you could just generate solar power during the day to offset demand from those two, and keep a dirty coal burning plant around for all the TVs and light bulbs that are on in homes in the evening, we would be a lot farther ahead.
Really? Its 15.54 currently here in the UK, and its already dark. And I'm not even home yet. When I get home, there's the heating to go on (gas, luckily), food to be cooked (gas hob, electric oven), the house to be lit (electric), housework to be done (electric), and then entertainment for the evening (usually electric consuming). So from when I get home at 17.30 to when I go to bed at 22.30, there's 5 hours of electricity usage.
And that's not counting things like night storage heaters, economy 7 power use washing machines or dish washers that can be put on overnight etc.
So yes, the bulk of our power usage (and Im not the poster you replied to) is over night.
In the UK (like most first world nations) electricity peaks at around 2pm when commercial demand and residential demand are both high. By nightfall, commercial demand is ending (which accounts for a lot more total usage than residential) and residential power tapers off starting at 6pm.
can't just ban the blatant rip-off of rebate promotions?
If the company honors the rebate as promised, and provides the terms of the rebate up front, then it's not a rip-off. If they don't, well, then that's fraud -- there are already laws against it, although I wouldn't mind seeing more enforcement of those laws.
Why should the government prevent competent adults from entering into an agreement that includes a rebate? Sure, the companies are hoping that many will not claim it, but that's the customer's choice.
I don't like the hassle of rebates myself (when I compare prices, I don't take rebates into consideration), but I don't need the government making that decision for me.
When rebate clearinghouses (the ones who actually fulfill the rebates, maybe) advertise their services as having "the lowest redemption rates" meaning basically that they are the best at scamming customers out of rebate money, something truly fucked up is going on. I agree that regulation should be used very sparingly but the whole premise of a rebate (as it is executed currently) is to entice someone into buying something with the speculation that many of them wont actually fulfill the rebate offer and get the discount they were promised.
The law I would pass is to require any rebate offer to be submitable in store (or wholly on-line for an online purchase) and present the customer with all necessary information and questions to fulfill the rebate at the point/time of sale. The companies can still collect their marketing data and time-shift the discount (the only possibly legitimate reasons to offer a rebate) and the consumers can walk away from the purchase not having to jump through any additional hoops (and open up opportunities for the submission to be lost) to get the money they were promised.
So Two Options...Declare all exclusivity/franchise agreements null and void and allow anyone with the capital to lay/string lines and provide service, or declare these fuckers utilities and MANDATE levels of service or tell them to GTFO and let someone else provide it.
Asymmetry of information really plays a hard role in this. TWC no doubt entered into an agreement with the muni that controls the utility right of way, such that there was a quid pro quo (they install coax and boxes and pay a franchise fee and they get a 10 year exclusivity agreement, or similar) and of course the local lawmakers ate it up because people moving into an area aren't going to look into local laws about media service agreements, they are just going to know the place is cable-ready. When cable TV started to grow exponentially, it was a given that only one company in any given area would have the incentive to hang/bury the lines because two in the market would make it unprofitable for both. We are at the point now where rising demand and lower costs of technology can support two or more providers in most urban and suburban areas, but why change the agreement precedent now? Its not like normal people have a clue how any of this works. The only hope is that second-tier providers (like Wide Open West) will push their way into your market looking for profit, and force coaxial competition.
Comcast offered a $50 cash card if we signed up for internet service with them. We signed up in May, and the card never came. We called and they denied that they ever offered the card. A few more calls later, they agreed that they offered it and said they would send it. It never came. Last month, five months, a final call was made and the card arrived.
Clearly they have a strategy of screwing customers, either through intentional scripting or extreme negligence.
The *only* reason to offer some sort of price promotion later instead of just giving you the discount up front and making you sign a contract (even for three months of service) is so that they can roll the dice on customers signing up after being enticed by the promotion, and then not claiming the promotion. Rebates work the same way. Why is it that we can pass a thousand consumer protection laws about credit card interest rates and privacy disclosures, but can't just ban the blatant rip-off of rebate promotions?
Google was previously located out of Moffett. The private company which operates Google's planes got the benefit of buying discounted fuel which NASA had purchased.
In other words, the taxpayer subsidized the fuel price Google was paying for its private aircraft.
So, are you OK with a multi-billion dollar corporation, owned by multi-billionaires, getting cut rate jet fuel from the government because they fly their aircraft out of a federal facility?
Because that sounds kind of insane to me. Even if it is only a "few million", why is Google being given this gift?
There was no gift at all. RTFA puts it this way: "While this arrangement did not cause an economic loss to NASA or DLA-Energy, it did result in considerable savings for H211 and engendered a sense of unfairness and a perception of favoritism toward H211 and its owners."
So, they are pissed that a perfectly legal "arrangement" between Google and NASA where the latter sold the former some jet fuel for *what they paid for it*, is now an official one that apparently will save NASA about $6 million a year. I wonder if anyone else actually tried to ask NASA to sell them fuel and got turned down? Or, is this "consumer protection" group just pissed that Google had the balls and they didn't? We may never know.
Yeah, they're just quaking their boots for the 3% Apple market and 0.8% Linux share.
The point is right there in the second paragraph of the article: "The company will let developers build.NET cloud applications on multiple platforms; it is promising future support of the.NET Core server runtime and framework for Mac and Linux"
The cloud market is dominated by Linux and linux-like systems, no one is doing Windows in the cloud except Microsoft Azure and that hasn't been going very well for them (hard to make money selling yourself OS licenses). So, get the stack into the cloud and maybe just maybe companies doing hybrid cloud deployments or are otherwise cloud-averse due to the lack of Windows presence can now get their feet wet. If they stick with.net, they will no doubt be still buying Windows licenses and MSDN subscriptions for a while. Without this bridge, companies just make the jump completely away from Microsoft.
Here in the US (at least near a major city), LTE is last gen tech.
This. Now, with "XLTE" I can blow past my monthly data cap in 13 minutes of full speed downloading! The future has arrived.
I don't really even understand the point in XLTE anyways. I can pull 50mbit on my LTE. Why would anyone need faster over a cell phone?
My speeds range from 15 to 65mbits. I would guess average around 20.
XLTE isn't really a thing, it's Verizon marketing-speak for extra bands of regular LTE spectrum with which they make data move really really fast. The difference is really noticeable, but only because most of their LTE markets are saturated and the extra bands are needed to maintain true LTE speeds.
Yes it's slow, but it's usable as long as it's over $5 (seems to be the right price to limit demand). I consider $8 for a 5 hours not a terrible price at all, about 5% of a cheap tick, or 2% of a last minute one, for immense improvement of flight quality. Though when it used to be $5 on southwest, I always marveled they made it not worth the five dollars, the recent price increase brings it in line with others.
It used to be worth it, until they made the seats so damn close together that laptop use is excruciating unless you're in first class. Heaven forbid the sod in front of you reclines his seat, in which case there literally isn't room for the laptop to fully open unless you suck your chest in. Nah, I would rather get my work done in the relative comfort of the terminal, and use the in flight time for catching up on podcasts or reading.
Where exactly does the water for the Capital building (Congress) come from? Has anyone checked into this?
It's well known that they use Deer Park bottled water (almost a million dollars a year worth). Have you ever tried that crap? How can it not be infected.
I'm not able to function mentally at 100% any time I'm infected with a cold virus. We all know this: it's miserable having a cold. The good news is, when your immune system fights it off you're back to normal (more or less) after a week. Are they saying the effects of this ATCV-1 virus are permanent?
Considering they weren't even trying, and managed to find a sample where 44% of the participants had the virus... Its hard to imagine that the effects could be short term unless the research was done literally on a boat on the lake.
Surely the router firewall would block all this traffic by default?
Enter: UPnP! That, and people who figure out *just* enough of their router to forward port 80 from the outside to the inside (some make this really easy and even just allow you to pick the inside device verbatim as opposed to an address that has to be statically assigned.)
What is the actual risk here to those using cameras as baby monitors?
Step 1: Someone sees a baby sleeping Step 2: ???? Step 3: Profit?
"Help! A stranger saw my baby turn over. Call the police!!!" ?
You could make the rather egregious leap that it would assist in kidnapping the child (a crime) since you know exactly where/when they sleep. If someone decided to stand at the curb and look at your kid's window for an awkwardly long time, would you call the police? But yes, the baby monitor thing is just a headline-getter.
Using the cams to identify high value merchandise (certainly some of these cams are protecting things of actual value?) and also identify when no one is around, and then take the final step of disabling the camera's record/alert functionality (if there even is any) would be a slam dunk hollywood-style heist, done without even hiring the nerdy sidekick hacker to sit in the van and jam on his keyboard for the duration of the job.
Slashdot Mirror
One can only hope it hits the right people. Those fucking idiots who demand we open the network to the "bring your device from home" crowd.
Remember when your network admin told you that it is a stupid idea - well here you go.
Remember when your network admin couldn't figure out how to segregate the wifi network, or set up mobile device policies in exchange? Well here you go.
Hi,
I assume you argue that "Mayo" is a different word than "Mayonnaise," so there is no problem marketing "Just Mayo" or "Chipotle Mayo" as a mayonnaise substitute (without the word "substitute" on the front of the label). How would you feel about going to the store and getting some "OJ" that had no juice from oranges? If I read a label that said "Just OJ", I would assume it had only orange juice.
How would you feel about putting an image of eggs and a cross through them or some other way to quickly identify this is eggless mayonnaise substitute, and not mayonnaise?
That's funny, half the people I mentioned mayo to (admittedly, mostly young) said "its made from eggs? *uncooked* eggs?? how weird" I think that once this whole naming thing is settled with the FDA, whatever they end up calling it, no one will bat an eye that it's egg free as long as it tastes good.
Eggs are one of the best sources of protein, are natural and can be produced easily in a back yard chicken house. I have also read that most of the rhetoric about eggs being unhealthy has been debunked. Unless you are producing specifically for people with allergies, what's the point of an eggs substitute.
To get the same amount of food (mayo in this case) you have to put 20x more energy into the process to get it from a chicken egg, vs getting it from a pea plant. So at scale, it would be a far cheaper way to arrive at mayo. Today this means less cost to make a nice sandwich, but continued development could lead to far lower cost, but still tasty alternatives to mainstream protein sources.
Hmm, so to get an egg you need many gross things (chickens, hormones for the chickens, vaccines for the chickens, food for the chickens, fertilizer for the food for the chickens, etc etc etc) and yet to get peas you need a seed, sunlight, and water. Yep, let's go with eggs as being more natural!
Wait, you're comparing factory raised chickens with organic peas? Chickens only require two things food (pasture or feed) and water. All the other stuff is just to raise productivity. Commercial Ag peas use things like fertilizer, pesticides, etc. not just "seed, sunlight, and water".
Except, for the same energy input (cost) you can get the most pristine organic peas, vs what it would take to get a chicken to lay an egg. If you are trying to reduce the unknowns/unnecessaries from your food chain, it's a no-brainer.
I was wondering the same thing.
And by the way..what's wrong with eating an EGG?
Simple, natural food. I'd rather have that than a bunch of man- made chemicals. I'm currently trying to get rid of most of the chemicals man puts into things these days....and it ain't easy.
Hmm, so to get an egg you need many gross things (chickens, hormones for the chickens, vaccines for the chickens, food for the chickens, fertilizer for the food for the chickens, etc etc etc) and yet to get peas you need a seed, sunlight, and water. Yep, let's go with eggs as being more natural!
But seriously, eggs arent that bad for you, but they are incredibly energy intensive compared to just eating plants. Something like 20x more energy goes into an egg than goes into the peas that make up this product, to get the same result. Thats the big innovation, you can start to get foods on the shelf that really are far more sustainable (even if they arent cheaper yet) and leave more energy on the planet for something else to use, like perhaps more delicious beef.
Yes, because getting boys interested in computer programming has been a major problem...
Oh, and encouraging girls must necessarily also mean discouraging boys.
Do you hear yourself?
This discussion is especially hilarious because pro-male gender bias (marketing of early home computers strictly to boys starting in the early 80s) predated IT/CS being male-dominated, and all these guys are showing up just to say "hey you get your damn dirty discriminating paws off of the perfectly egalitarian IT/CS system!". If it weren't for biased sales and marketing there likely would be a very narrow gap between men and women in CS. More importantly, lots of very talented women would be able to displace some of the god awful men who find themselves in CS.
Seriously, if you want a car that's fun to hack go as old as you can find that still looks nice, runs smooth, and has 100k miles (to reduce the odds that poor maintenance habits have caught up with the motor). Avoid any car with theft provention since that will totally block the remote starter unless you get the factory-approved option.
Which brings me to the next point: If you want convenience you won't get it by spending days hacking your car... You will get it by buying a convenient car. There are so many low and mid model cars that offer complete convenience packages, so just buy it if you want it. Unless you are already an experienced automotive engineer you just won't be able to come out ahead by doing it yourself. Then, to get your geek on buy a OBD-2 to Bluetooth adapter, and a nice app (like Torque) for your smartphone.
This documentary about Tetris is fascinating
Almost as fascinating as this documentary about Russia, based on the music and themes in Tetris...
Thats great - doesn't help me tho if the goal is to replace residential grid power with locally generated solar power tho, does it?
If your goal is to not have a grid any more, then yes. Doing away with the grid is something no one has mentioned in the context of a national energy plan, though. If your goal is to generate enough power for your home, you can do it during the day, sell it to the utility (if net metering is available in your area) and then use power from the grid at night. When your meter shows 0 net power, you have generated all the power you need (just not at the right time). There's no reason to stop using the grid.
Interesting definition of 'reliable' you pulled from a dark place there jeff. How does reliable related to 'capacity factor' in fantasy land?
BTW the last generation of turbines were so reliable they couldn't pay for their own maintenance once the tax breaks ended.
Try figuring out basic grammar, and then we can have a discussion.
Why is the parent modded down as a troll?
The post is entirely correct. These other sources of energy are not efficient and reliable enough to be financially viable right now. This may change in ten or twenty years, but right now, solar and wind just aren't where they need to be.
Slashdot itself is becoming less and less a site for geeks and nerds. It has been infected by dogmatic brats who cannot tolerate discussion. This is just one example of many - I'm sure you'll find more as the comments flow in.
Because the parent is a troll. And wrong. Reliable is a term you are both misusing. Solar and wind generation is perfectly reliable, given the predictions that can be made about the source (since the reliability in question is of the cells/turbines themselves, which are extremely durable). Do they generate enough to satisfy year-round demand? Of course not. Neither do coal plants, and neither do nuclear plants, and neither do natural gas plants (by themselves). Are you saying those technologies are "unreliable" too?
Solar cell costs are plunging, while their efficiencies rise. I predict a collision, a market and a profit.
You might see one, if you could just plug solar cells into your house and magically get power all day. Most of our power usage in our house is at night, when... oops... there's no solar power.
So now you need batteries and inverters and all kinds of other junk to provide power when we're actually home. And you need enough to provide power to the whole house for a few days to cover the days when there's hardly any sun.
Solar cells could cost $0, and they still probably wouldn't make sense when compared to grid power that isn't made artifiicially expensive by Greenist boondoggles.
This is a pretty sad, and wrong, assertion. Electricity usage from industrial and commercial load peaks during the day, and those two combined far eclipse residential usage. Even if you could just generate solar power during the day to offset demand from those two, and keep a dirty coal burning plant around for all the TVs and light bulbs that are on in homes in the evening, we would be a lot farther ahead.
Really? Its 15.54 currently here in the UK, and its already dark. And I'm not even home yet. When I get home, there's the heating to go on (gas, luckily), food to be cooked (gas hob, electric oven), the house to be lit (electric), housework to be done (electric), and then entertainment for the evening (usually electric consuming). So from when I get home at 17.30 to when I go to bed at 22.30, there's 5 hours of electricity usage.
And that's not counting things like night storage heaters, economy 7 power use washing machines or dish washers that can be put on overnight etc.
So yes, the bulk of our power usage (and Im not the poster you replied to) is over night.
In the UK (like most first world nations) electricity peaks at around 2pm when commercial demand and residential demand are both high. By nightfall, commercial demand is ending (which accounts for a lot more total usage than residential) and residential power tapers off starting at 6pm.
can't just ban the blatant rip-off of rebate promotions?
If the company honors the rebate as promised, and provides the terms of the rebate up front, then it's not a rip-off. If they don't, well, then that's fraud -- there are already laws against it, although I wouldn't mind seeing more enforcement of those laws.
Why should the government prevent competent adults from entering into an agreement that includes a rebate? Sure, the companies are hoping that many will not claim it, but that's the customer's choice.
I don't like the hassle of rebates myself (when I compare prices, I don't take rebates into consideration), but I don't need the government making that decision for me.
When rebate clearinghouses (the ones who actually fulfill the rebates, maybe) advertise their services as having "the lowest redemption rates" meaning basically that they are the best at scamming customers out of rebate money, something truly fucked up is going on. I agree that regulation should be used very sparingly but the whole premise of a rebate (as it is executed currently) is to entice someone into buying something with the speculation that many of them wont actually fulfill the rebate offer and get the discount they were promised.
The law I would pass is to require any rebate offer to be submitable in store (or wholly on-line for an online purchase) and present the customer with all necessary information and questions to fulfill the rebate at the point/time of sale. The companies can still collect their marketing data and time-shift the discount (the only possibly legitimate reasons to offer a rebate) and the consumers can walk away from the purchase not having to jump through any additional hoops (and open up opportunities for the submission to be lost) to get the money they were promised.
So Two Options...Declare all exclusivity/franchise agreements null and void and allow anyone with the capital to lay/string lines and provide service, or declare these fuckers utilities and MANDATE levels of service or tell them to GTFO and let someone else provide it.
Asymmetry of information really plays a hard role in this. TWC no doubt entered into an agreement with the muni that controls the utility right of way, such that there was a quid pro quo (they install coax and boxes and pay a franchise fee and they get a 10 year exclusivity agreement, or similar) and of course the local lawmakers ate it up because people moving into an area aren't going to look into local laws about media service agreements, they are just going to know the place is cable-ready. When cable TV started to grow exponentially, it was a given that only one company in any given area would have the incentive to hang/bury the lines because two in the market would make it unprofitable for both. We are at the point now where rising demand and lower costs of technology can support two or more providers in most urban and suburban areas, but why change the agreement precedent now? Its not like normal people have a clue how any of this works. The only hope is that second-tier providers (like Wide Open West) will push their way into your market looking for profit, and force coaxial competition.
Comcast offered a $50 cash card if we signed up for internet service with them. We signed up in May, and the card never came. We called and they denied that they ever offered the card. A few more calls later, they agreed that they offered it and said they would send it. It never came. Last month, five months, a final call was made and the card arrived.
Clearly they have a strategy of screwing customers, either through intentional scripting or extreme negligence.
The *only* reason to offer some sort of price promotion later instead of just giving you the discount up front and making you sign a contract (even for three months of service) is so that they can roll the dice on customers signing up after being enticed by the promotion, and then not claiming the promotion. Rebates work the same way. Why is it that we can pass a thousand consumer protection laws about credit card interest rates and privacy disclosures, but can't just ban the blatant rip-off of rebate promotions?
I don't think this was "excess jet fuel".
Google was previously located out of Moffett. The private company which operates Google's planes got the benefit of buying discounted fuel which NASA had purchased.
In other words, the taxpayer subsidized the fuel price Google was paying for its private aircraft.
So, are you OK with a multi-billion dollar corporation, owned by multi-billionaires, getting cut rate jet fuel from the government because they fly their aircraft out of a federal facility?
Because that sounds kind of insane to me. Even if it is only a "few million", why is Google being given this gift?
There was no gift at all. RTFA puts it this way: "While this arrangement did not cause an economic loss to NASA or DLA-Energy, it did result in considerable savings for H211 and engendered a sense of unfairness and a perception of favoritism toward H211 and its owners."
So, they are pissed that a perfectly legal "arrangement" between Google and NASA where the latter sold the former some jet fuel for *what they paid for it*, is now an official one that apparently will save NASA about $6 million a year. I wonder if anyone else actually tried to ask NASA to sell them fuel and got turned down? Or, is this "consumer protection" group just pissed that Google had the balls and they didn't? We may never know.
Yeah, they're just quaking their boots for the 3% Apple market and 0.8% Linux share.
The point is right there in the second paragraph of the article: "The company will let developers build .NET cloud applications on multiple platforms; it is promising future support of the .NET Core server runtime and framework for Mac and Linux"
The cloud market is dominated by Linux and linux-like systems, no one is doing Windows in the cloud except Microsoft Azure and that hasn't been going very well for them (hard to make money selling yourself OS licenses). So, get the stack into the cloud and maybe just maybe companies doing hybrid cloud deployments or are otherwise cloud-averse due to the lack of Windows presence can now get their feet wet. If they stick with .net, they will no doubt be still buying Windows licenses and MSDN subscriptions for a while. Without this bridge, companies just make the jump completely away from Microsoft.
Here in the US (at least near a major city), LTE is last gen tech.
This. Now, with "XLTE" I can blow past my monthly data cap in 13 minutes of full speed downloading! The future has arrived.
I don't really even understand the point in XLTE anyways. I can pull 50mbit on my LTE. Why would anyone need faster over a cell phone?
My speeds range from 15 to 65mbits. I would guess average around 20.
XLTE isn't really a thing, it's Verizon marketing-speak for extra bands of regular LTE spectrum with which they make data move really really fast. The difference is really noticeable, but only because most of their LTE markets are saturated and the extra bands are needed to maintain true LTE speeds.
Here in the US (at least near a major city), LTE is last gen tech.
This. Now, with "XLTE" I can blow past my monthly data cap in 13 minutes of full speed downloading! The future has arrived.
Yes it's slow, but it's usable as long as it's over $5 (seems to be the right price to limit demand). I consider $8 for a 5 hours not a terrible price at all, about 5% of a cheap tick, or 2% of a last minute one, for immense improvement of flight quality. Though when it used to be $5 on southwest, I always marveled they made it not worth the five dollars, the recent price increase brings it in line with others.
It used to be worth it, until they made the seats so damn close together that laptop use is excruciating unless you're in first class. Heaven forbid the sod in front of you reclines his seat, in which case there literally isn't room for the laptop to fully open unless you suck your chest in. Nah, I would rather get my work done in the relative comfort of the terminal, and use the in flight time for catching up on podcasts or reading.
Where exactly does the water for the Capital building (Congress) come from? Has anyone checked into this?
It's well known that they use Deer Park bottled water (almost a million dollars a year worth). Have you ever tried that crap? How can it not be infected.
I'm not able to function mentally at 100% any time I'm infected with a cold virus. We all know this: it's miserable having a cold. The good news is, when your immune system fights it off you're back to normal (more or less) after a week. Are they saying the effects of this ATCV-1 virus are permanent?
Considering they weren't even trying, and managed to find a sample where 44% of the participants had the virus... Its hard to imagine that the effects could be short term unless the research was done literally on a boat on the lake.
Surely the router firewall would block all this traffic by default?
Enter: UPnP! That, and people who figure out *just* enough of their router to forward port 80 from the outside to the inside (some make this really easy and even just allow you to pick the inside device verbatim as opposed to an address that has to be statically assigned.)
What is the actual risk here to those using cameras as baby monitors?
Step 1: Someone sees a baby sleeping
Step 2: ????
Step 3: Profit?
"Help! A stranger saw my baby turn over. Call the police!!!" ?
You could make the rather egregious leap that it would assist in kidnapping the child (a crime) since you know exactly where/when they sleep. If someone decided to stand at the curb and look at your kid's window for an awkwardly long time, would you call the police? But yes, the baby monitor thing is just a headline-getter.
Using the cams to identify high value merchandise (certainly some of these cams are protecting things of actual value?) and also identify when no one is around, and then take the final step of disabling the camera's record/alert functionality (if there even is any) would be a slam dunk hollywood-style heist, done without even hiring the nerdy sidekick hacker to sit in the van and jam on his keyboard for the duration of the job.