While the article points out the Surface RT and its failure it neglects to mention the Surface 3. It was a smaller and cheaper Surface Pro with an Intel Core m chip and a max 4GB of RAM. The digitizer wasn't as good as the Pro but wasn't bad.
They were decent Windows laptops (with the keyboard cover) but shitty tablets. Far too heavy to use comfortably in a tablet form factor for long periods. The battery life under Windows 8 was good but under 10 really sucked.
Unless this new tablet is literally the size and weight of an iPad Pro there's no way for them to really compete as a Tablet. They'll make ok Windows laptops that can occasionally be used without a keyboard. Windows 10 also needs to suck way less on low powered machines, maybe even changing it back to an operating system from an ad delivery platform.
Not profitable means their costs equal their revenues. It does not mean they are losing money and need to get investor cash to keep operating. I don't know where you learned your definition of the word "profitable".
Tesla has had a lot of capital expenditures that have eaten up their profit. That isn't automatically negative because those expenditures will help control their marginal costs in the future which will definitely help their profitability down the line.
Tesla has had to build parts of their supply chain that simply did not exist before they started operations, at least not at the scale they need to meet their demand. It costs money to do this and by all reports they've been building up their supply chain as fast as possible.
Tesla does not need to make a profit today. They need to build up infrastructure and a supply chain that can let them make a profit tomorrow. As long as they're not losing money in the long term they'll be fine focusing on growth.
No one has to value someone's contribution in equal measure to the contributor. Not all comments on Slashdot are winners despite the opinion of the poster.
I haven't found that the moderation follows some sort of orthodoxy bias. There's a pretty broad range of demographics on Slashdot and there's very few homogenous demographic blocs. So there's not really any one orthodoxy that all moderation regresses towards. There are circle jerks on some topics but that's less common than places like reddit where every person gets a drive by vote on every comment.
In most cities the term "SWAT team" is waaaaay too broadly applied. When people hear "SWAT" they tend to think of a highly trained team of specialists with pinpoint marksmanship, nerves of steel, and balls (or ovaries) of solid brass.
The reality is most "SWAT" teams are regular patrolmen assigned to SWAT duty as part of their career path. They aren't best of the best volunteers but trying to get promoted. Smaller cities can't afford grueling training so their SWAT terms get maybe a dozen training hours a month and those officers have regular patrol beats.
So when SWAT responds to a call there's a good chance you're getting a bunch of operators with better than average but definitely not Delta levels of training that may have just come off a full patrol shift. The typical SWAT team has far less training than you'd probably want or expect them to have.
Please don't ever do this. Slashdot's moderation system is one of the few that actually works. There's no reason to make public the sources of a comment's moderation. If people are unhappy with a comment's moderation they can meta-moderate. That's why meta-moderation exists. All identifying moderators will do is provide targets for trolls.
If you want to improve moderation add some additional moderation tags or replace some as another poster suggested. There's no good moderation option for comments that are just pants on head stupid. Poe's law applies in those cases, it's not obvious if a stupid comment is simply ignorant or just trolling.
It's fairly safe to assume that actual human Twitter users follow bots, even when they donâ(TM)t know those accounts are in fact bots. So even if all 700k Russian propaganda followers were bots they still amplified the original message to all of their followers, some portion of whom are humans.
The situation is worse when you consider the retweets from people with large numbers of followers. All it takes is some non-bot with a lot of followers to massively amplify a propaganda message. If people are getting their "news" from Twitter they're going to spread the propaganda because it fits their personal world view.
Links to Breitbart, Blogspot, and some Libertarian "institute". Why in the fuck is this modded "Insightful"? The fucking Breitbart link doesn't even support the claim the article is making.
This is just a massive amount of projection. California's policies under Jerry Brown have balanced the budget and moved onto a budget surplus. This has been in addition to paying down the state's debt incurred under previous administrations.
Oh no a state with high taxes is doing extremely well! Better pull out the bullshit to make ludicrous claims otherwise! Taxes R the devil and an affront to bootstrappiness everywhere! California has no economic freedom! Regulations are like slave collars for bootstrappy independents! How dare the guv'ment tell bootstrappers they can't dump toxic waste where they please or treat workers like indentured servants!
So you've got 20 years of professional experience yet don't recognize the dangers of MITM attacks from non-HTTPS pages?
For public sites where you don't log in, I think https is a net reduction of security.
If you are connecting to an unprotected page basically nothing on it can be actually trusted. While a page might look normal every resource and link could have been rewritten to do something malicious. You have no way of knowing that anything loaded over HTTP is what the server actually intended to send.
Links could route through fishing sites and malicious resources could be added. One of the best features of HTTPS is to make resources resistant to MITM attacks. An page with no PII can be intercepted and modified to leak that data without you even knowing.
Most people don't want or need their ISP or corporate gateway caching content. For one a browser's cache is more effective for most content since it's loaded from disk (or RAM) rather than coming over a network. Second it's more effective for ISPs to forego their own caching and simply let CDNs with their colocated edge caches handle the task. The content from the CDN to client is going to be encrypted using the source site's credentials (or authorized credentials) so end users can trust the data path to the server and the ISPs don't need to pay for the hardware. Since CDNs colocate edge caches everywhere they can afford there's little if any performance difference between a third party edge cache to the client and an ISP's edge cache to a client. They're likely to be hosted in the same buildings on the same networks.
I think communications for such a mission would require a pretty significant portion of the mass budget on the craft. It would also end up being a significant portion of the mission infrastructure cost. I'd think Arecibo-like telescopes in LaGrange orbits and likely the far side of the Moon for the "ground" element and a massive reflector on the craft itself.
It might also be possible to launch a series of probes that can act as power boosting relays for each other. The first probe would have a lot of the science instruments and the follow-ons would use that space for more antenna and transceiver mass.
My pessimism kicks in unfortunately and sees this whole idea as futile since Congress doesnâ(TM)t give NASA a budget large enough for a long enough period of time to plan any sort of long term mission let alone an extremely long term one.
The issue of replaceable batteries has nothing to do with manufacturing costs or wanting people to replace phones. Lithium polymer batteries are the only way to offer decent battery life in current phone designs.
All the things that make the last few iterations of smart phones worth owning all suck power. Bright high density displays? Lots of power. High bandwidth LTE? Lots of power. High density storage? Lots of power. For all the power saving tricks used on phones they are very power hungry yet.
Traditional lithium ion cells have bulky packaging and are heavy. The market has routiney chosen lighter and thinner over heavier and bulkier when it comes to phones. Using traditional LiIon cells in current phone form factors would result in really terrible battery life.
Because of this phones have used lithium polymer batteries for the past decade or so. The big difference is they pack a lot more power in the same volume. The downside is lithium polymer batteries are fairly fragile and if mistreated in the slightest can be very dangerous. Older phones with replaceable lipoly batteries packed them in tough plastic cases so they were safe to handle. This did not provide optimum power density for the volume.
Non-replaceable batteries do away with the plastic casing in order to fill that volume with power storage. Without having to worry about a hard casing lipoly batteries can have more conformal shapes to the phone chassis to pack yet more power into the device. They also need room to expand as they heat (as Samsung learned) from charging or heavy draw.
In order to get some sort of insurance underwriting certification lipoly batteries need cases that eat usable volume inside phones. So most companies are forgoing user replaceable batteries so they donâ(TM)t get sued when theyâ(TM)re punctured and burn a house down since in normal use untrained users wonâ(TM)t be fiddling with them.
In short there is a technical need to use non-replaceable batteries. In order to offer marketable features manufacturers need to use as much interior volume of a phone for power storage as possible. Replaceable batteries need volume âoewastingâ casing to make them safe to handle.
Holy shit your oversimplification of the situation is amazingly intellectually bankrupt. The actual reality of the situation is nowhere near as binary as youâ(TM)re trying to suggest.
The Presidential election is really hundreds of district elections for electors which then cast the votes for the President. Illegally influencing Presidential elections does not require all of the winning partyâ(TM)s voters to be âoesheepâ. It doesnâ(TM)t even need a majority to be âoesheepâ.
Swinging an election through illegal influence can be done by targeting a relatively small number of swing districts in swing states. This effect has been amplified with ridiculous gerrymandering of the last century (thanks so much Reapportionment Act of 1929) and disenfranchisement campaigns.
The allegations against Russia include not just the hacking of the DNCâ(TM)s e-mail but an astroturfing and advertising campaign to help Trump and damage Clinton. Literally fake news articles written by content farms and actual Russian intelligence agents/contractors were pushed by thousands of social media bots and fake accounts. A great many of these have been found to be based in Russia. The same patterns have been seen in several recent elections in Europe as well.
The actual fake news articles used mastheads and site themes aping legitimate news organizations. Facebook and Twitter were gamed to make these sites look like they were widely read and highly regarded. Some people influenced by that misinformation campaign were indeed sheep. It certainly helped Trump in that he routinely decried the mainstream media as collectively untrustworthy. To even the less sheep-like voters the tide of real looking articles confirming their preconceived beliefs put them in a bubble insulated from reality or rationality. Trump campaign officials and Trump himself even amplified these literally fake news stories during the campaign.
Which goes back to swing districts and states. If a few thousand people in a relatively small number of districts were influenced by that PSYOPS campaign to 1) vote Trump 2) vote third party or 3) stay home because Clinton either âoehas it in the bagâ or is a master criminal then the state will go Trump. If you go back to the vote counts in swing states youâ(TM)ll see a lot of districts went Trump by small margins that tended to go contrary to historical voting patterns. Just like regular product advertising you donâ(TM)t need to influence everyone just enough to profit.
So we get rid of insurance but single-payer is a no go...the way to pay for medical care is then âoebe richâ? If you donâ(TM)t want to suffer from chronic conditions with expensive treatment then simply donâ(TM)t be not rich?
Even if you take all of the insurance industry padding out of medical bills they are still not cheap. The bottom four quintiles of the population wouldnâ(TM)t be able to afford more than occasional clinic visits. Treatment of chronic conditions would only end up available to the wealthy, even a good portion of the top quintile of the population would find treatment inaccessible.
Insurance works by risk pooling. Thereâ(TM)s nothing fundamentally wrong with risk pooling and is exactly what a single-payer system would do. Everyone pays into the system which has funds to pay for individual expenses because not everyone gets expensive to treat conditions simultaneously. Overall productivity increases because everyone has ready access to basic healthcare and doesnâ(TM)t need to choose between food and a trip to the doctor or filling a prescription.
When people can see a doctor for minor conditions without resorting to an emergency room visit not only do they see less impact from minor conditions but can get early identification and treatment for major ones. Businesses win because their workers are sick at work less often (just by having their symptoms effectively treated sooner) which limits the spread of disease through the staff.
Single-payer has the same benefits economically as just eliminating health insurance with the added bonus of people having effective healthcare.
As a shareholder Appleâ(TM)s taxes have little impact on you. Their share value is what someone thinks they can sell a share for tomorrow so they offer you slightly less than that number today. Share prices have little to do with a companyâ(TM)s fundamentals anymore. That is unless youâ(TM)re an institutional investor that might actually make some real money off dividends.
Full disclosure: I also own Apple stock and I donâ(TM)t think Apple is âoecheatingâ on their taxes. They pay what and to whom they are legally obliged to pay. Those taxes just donâ(TM)t affect my holdings very much if at all.
What taxes are you paying on money written down as expenses? If things you might buy are dual-use (cars, computers, etc) why arenâ(TM)t you buying them through your company and making them company assets that are written off?
Youâ(TM)re paying taxes on your net revenue, not gross. If youâ(TM)re not taking advantages of tax breaks and write-offs, which exist specifically to ease tax burdens on small businesses, youâ(TM)re just screwing yourself.
Unless youâ(TM)re no longer actually a small business why are you paying yourself a wage such youâ(TM)re paying income tax? If you have so much income youâ(TM)re in the highest tax brackets then you can afford a good accountant to reduce your tax burden completely above board.
Pai could read up on WEAs. They work with existing cell phones with no additional hardware necessary. They use out of band signaling so a flooded network does not affect them and cell sites don't actually need MSC connectivity to send them out.
Pai could also call out the CTIA et al, for dragging their feet and suing the government to not be required add backup power to cell sites. This was something the FCC mandated after Katrina but got thrown into legal limbo for years by the CTIA.
There's no amplifier on those phones with an analog audio jack. So even if the situation was as simple as enabling a software change (it isn't) the FM reception would be complete shit. You'd have to stand under the transmitter to get a usable signal.
The South Korean version of this is called DMB and is distinct from but similar in concept to 1seg. The US might see this some day in the form of ATSC-M/H.
All of them are similar in they use H.264 for video and HE-AAC for audio multiplexed in an MPEG transport stream.
Problem: Duplicate entries frequently appear in feed clients.
This is entirely the fault of the client software and rarely the fault of the feed producer. Even if it is the fault of the feed producer it's the sort of problem they'll have with JSON feeds.
Problem: It's expensive to serve up a feed that contains all of a site's content stretching back for years.
In what way do you think that serving up old content via JSON will be less expensive than via RSS. There will be fewer characters representing tags and such but that's not so big of a difference as to automatically make JSON better. Compressing the feed is going to largely solve the issue of file size between the two formats.
Besides RSS is not really what I would expect a site to use to provide links to their historical pages. That's the job of a sitemap (XML, HTML, or whatever) or possibly OPML. Someone looking for historical links isn't necessarily looking for the syndication features of RSS but instead just a list of links that they will go and spider themselves.
Neither RSS or JSON is really appropriate to provide clients with the entirety of a site's historical content.
Problem: Clients have to implement their own searching and scraping to find favicons, images, or other resources.
This just doesn't make sense. RSS and Atom both have rel property support in tags. So it's trivial for the client to discover supplementary resources for an article. If a producer is not going to include those things in their RSS feed they're not necessarily going to include them in their JSON feeds either. The "Extensible" portion of XML allows producers to add all the extra tags or properties they want as clients will only pay attention to the ones they actually use.
None of the issues you listed are actually issues. Beyond that bad XML produced by whomever is much easier to fix than adopting yet another "standard" only supported by some small fraction of devices on the web. XML's been around a long time and is pretty boring so I don't know what software stacks you think don't have XML support built in. Most stacks likely have fairly robust XML processing capabilities like validation and transforms beyond just deserialization.
With past more competent Presidents the issue of public wifi would be immaterial. The presidential entourage travels with a security tent they set up in the President's suite. These are resistant to all sorts of bugs and block radio emissions. A competent President in a public place would excuse themselves from a public dinner and conduct sensitive government business there.
An incompetent one will just sit in the fucking dining room and light the table with their cell phones where any jackass with a phone can photograph them.
Being that the Mar-a-Lago has shitty network security and wifi that can be accessed by a boat in the lagoon, anyone interesting in bugging the President can just load the hotel's TVs, POS systems, telephones, and network printers with malware. They would have a reasonable chance of catching sensitive discussions because the administration doesn't see any need to discuss sensitive topics in private secure locations.
...or they want a working system out of the box. Fedora requires adding the rpmfusion repo in order to have a robust selection of programs - ones that are readily available on Ubuntu. This extra step is opaque and difficult to discover for inexperienced end users. This has always been a problem with Red Hat based distros, they don't or won't provide a robust default package repo so users have always had to turn to third parties.
The news is not the size of the crowd but the fact the President can't accept a fact contrary to his personal narrative and move on. It's more important that the a hit to the man's ego is assuaged than something of substance be done.
It's newsworthy that the President, commander in chief of the world's most powerful military, is so petty and thin skinned. There's absolutely no need for the press to give the President some sort of leeway for their first days and weeks in office. The job of the press is to bring information to the people, not kowtow to the government.
Politicians will lie by very rarely will they straight up deny an easily demonstrated fact. If you allow straight up fiction to become the historical record then you're allowing someone to write their own history.
It seems like every other story hitting the front page lately is challenging the Betteridge law of headlines. It makes for shitty discussion because it's turning a news item into a binary proposition. There's not a lot of room for expansion or commentary.
Slashdot Mirror
While the article points out the Surface RT and its failure it neglects to mention the Surface 3. It was a smaller and cheaper Surface Pro with an Intel Core m chip and a max 4GB of RAM. The digitizer wasn't as good as the Pro but wasn't bad.
They were decent Windows laptops (with the keyboard cover) but shitty tablets. Far too heavy to use comfortably in a tablet form factor for long periods. The battery life under Windows 8 was good but under 10 really sucked.
Unless this new tablet is literally the size and weight of an iPad Pro there's no way for them to really compete as a Tablet. They'll make ok Windows laptops that can occasionally be used without a keyboard. Windows 10 also needs to suck way less on low powered machines, maybe even changing it back to an operating system from an ad delivery platform.
Not profitable means their costs equal their revenues. It does not mean they are losing money and need to get investor cash to keep operating. I don't know where you learned your definition of the word "profitable".
Tesla has had a lot of capital expenditures that have eaten up their profit. That isn't automatically negative because those expenditures will help control their marginal costs in the future which will definitely help their profitability down the line.
Tesla has had to build parts of their supply chain that simply did not exist before they started operations, at least not at the scale they need to meet their demand. It costs money to do this and by all reports they've been building up their supply chain as fast as possible.
Tesla does not need to make a profit today. They need to build up infrastructure and a supply chain that can let them make a profit tomorrow. As long as they're not losing money in the long term they'll be fine focusing on growth.
Not with that attitude!
No one has to value someone's contribution in equal measure to the contributor. Not all comments on Slashdot are winners despite the opinion of the poster.
I haven't found that the moderation follows some sort of orthodoxy bias. There's a pretty broad range of demographics on Slashdot and there's very few homogenous demographic blocs. So there's not really any one orthodoxy that all moderation regresses towards. There are circle jerks on some topics but that's less common than places like reddit where every person gets a drive by vote on every comment.
In most cities the term "SWAT team" is waaaaay too broadly applied. When people hear "SWAT" they tend to think of a highly trained team of specialists with pinpoint marksmanship, nerves of steel, and balls (or ovaries) of solid brass.
The reality is most "SWAT" teams are regular patrolmen assigned to SWAT duty as part of their career path. They aren't best of the best volunteers but trying to get promoted. Smaller cities can't afford grueling training so their SWAT terms get maybe a dozen training hours a month and those officers have regular patrol beats.
So when SWAT responds to a call there's a good chance you're getting a bunch of operators with better than average but definitely not Delta levels of training that may have just come off a full patrol shift. The typical SWAT team has far less training than you'd probably want or expect them to have.
Please don't ever do this. Slashdot's moderation system is one of the few that actually works. There's no reason to make public the sources of a comment's moderation. If people are unhappy with a comment's moderation they can meta-moderate. That's why meta-moderation exists. All identifying moderators will do is provide targets for trolls.
If you want to improve moderation add some additional moderation tags or replace some as another poster suggested. There's no good moderation option for comments that are just pants on head stupid. Poe's law applies in those cases, it's not obvious if a stupid comment is simply ignorant or just trolling.
Well it's a good thing we invented republics then.
It's fairly safe to assume that actual human Twitter users follow bots, even when they donâ(TM)t know those accounts are in fact bots. So even if all 700k Russian propaganda followers were bots they still amplified the original message to all of their followers, some portion of whom are humans.
The situation is worse when you consider the retweets from people with large numbers of followers. All it takes is some non-bot with a lot of followers to massively amplify a propaganda message. If people are getting their "news" from Twitter they're going to spread the propaganda because it fits their personal world view.
Links to Breitbart, Blogspot, and some Libertarian "institute". Why in the fuck is this modded "Insightful"? The fucking Breitbart link doesn't even support the claim the article is making.
This is just a massive amount of projection. California's policies under Jerry Brown have balanced the budget and moved onto a budget surplus. This has been in addition to paying down the state's debt incurred under previous administrations.
Oh no a state with high taxes is doing extremely well! Better pull out the bullshit to make ludicrous claims otherwise! Taxes R the devil and an affront to bootstrappiness everywhere! California has no economic freedom! Regulations are like slave collars for bootstrappy independents! How dare the guv'ment tell bootstrappers they can't dump toxic waste where they please or treat workers like indentured servants!
So you've got 20 years of professional experience yet don't recognize the dangers of MITM attacks from non-HTTPS pages?
If you are connecting to an unprotected page basically nothing on it can be actually trusted. While a page might look normal every resource and link could have been rewritten to do something malicious. You have no way of knowing that anything loaded over HTTP is what the server actually intended to send.
Links could route through fishing sites and malicious resources could be added. One of the best features of HTTPS is to make resources resistant to MITM attacks. An page with no PII can be intercepted and modified to leak that data without you even knowing.
Most people don't want or need their ISP or corporate gateway caching content. For one a browser's cache is more effective for most content since it's loaded from disk (or RAM) rather than coming over a network. Second it's more effective for ISPs to forego their own caching and simply let CDNs with their colocated edge caches handle the task. The content from the CDN to client is going to be encrypted using the source site's credentials (or authorized credentials) so end users can trust the data path to the server and the ISPs don't need to pay for the hardware. Since CDNs colocate edge caches everywhere they can afford there's little if any performance difference between a third party edge cache to the client and an ISP's edge cache to a client. They're likely to be hosted in the same buildings on the same networks.
I think communications for such a mission would require a pretty significant portion of the mass budget on the craft. It would also end up being a significant portion of the mission infrastructure cost. I'd think Arecibo-like telescopes in LaGrange orbits and likely the far side of the Moon for the "ground" element and a massive reflector on the craft itself.
It might also be possible to launch a series of probes that can act as power boosting relays for each other. The first probe would have a lot of the science instruments and the follow-ons would use that space for more antenna and transceiver mass.
My pessimism kicks in unfortunately and sees this whole idea as futile since Congress doesnâ(TM)t give NASA a budget large enough for a long enough period of time to plan any sort of long term mission let alone an extremely long term one.
The issue of replaceable batteries has nothing to do with manufacturing costs or wanting people to replace phones. Lithium polymer batteries are the only way to offer decent battery life in current phone designs.
All the things that make the last few iterations of smart phones worth owning all suck power. Bright high density displays? Lots of power. High bandwidth LTE? Lots of power. High density storage? Lots of power. For all the power saving tricks used on phones they are very power hungry yet.
Traditional lithium ion cells have bulky packaging and are heavy. The market has routiney chosen lighter and thinner over heavier and bulkier when it comes to phones. Using traditional LiIon cells in current phone form factors would result in really terrible battery life.
Because of this phones have used lithium polymer batteries for the past decade or so. The big difference is they pack a lot more power in the same volume. The downside is lithium polymer batteries are fairly fragile and if mistreated in the slightest can be very dangerous. Older phones with replaceable lipoly batteries packed them in tough plastic cases so they were safe to handle. This did not provide optimum power density for the volume.
Non-replaceable batteries do away with the plastic casing in order to fill that volume with power storage. Without having to worry about a hard casing lipoly batteries can have more conformal shapes to the phone chassis to pack yet more power into the device. They also need room to expand as they heat (as Samsung learned) from charging or heavy draw.
In order to get some sort of insurance underwriting certification lipoly batteries need cases that eat usable volume inside phones. So most companies are forgoing user replaceable batteries so they donâ(TM)t get sued when theyâ(TM)re punctured and burn a house down since in normal use untrained users wonâ(TM)t be fiddling with them.
In short there is a technical need to use non-replaceable batteries. In order to offer marketable features manufacturers need to use as much interior volume of a phone for power storage as possible. Replaceable batteries need volume âoewastingâ casing to make them safe to handle.
Holy shit your oversimplification of the situation is amazingly intellectually bankrupt. The actual reality of the situation is nowhere near as binary as youâ(TM)re trying to suggest.
The Presidential election is really hundreds of district elections for electors which then cast the votes for the President. Illegally influencing Presidential elections does not require all of the winning partyâ(TM)s voters to be âoesheepâ. It doesnâ(TM)t even need a majority to be âoesheepâ.
Swinging an election through illegal influence can be done by targeting a relatively small number of swing districts in swing states. This effect has been amplified with ridiculous gerrymandering of the last century (thanks so much Reapportionment Act of 1929) and disenfranchisement campaigns.
The allegations against Russia include not just the hacking of the DNCâ(TM)s e-mail but an astroturfing and advertising campaign to help Trump and damage Clinton. Literally fake news articles written by content farms and actual Russian intelligence agents/contractors were pushed by thousands of social media bots and fake accounts. A great many of these have been found to be based in Russia. The same patterns have been seen in several recent elections in Europe as well.
The actual fake news articles used mastheads and site themes aping legitimate news organizations. Facebook and Twitter were gamed to make these sites look like they were widely read and highly regarded. Some people influenced by that misinformation campaign were indeed sheep. It certainly helped Trump in that he routinely decried the mainstream media as collectively untrustworthy. To even the less sheep-like voters the tide of real looking articles confirming their preconceived beliefs put them in a bubble insulated from reality or rationality. Trump campaign officials and Trump himself even amplified these literally fake news stories during the campaign.
Which goes back to swing districts and states. If a few thousand people in a relatively small number of districts were influenced by that PSYOPS campaign to 1) vote Trump 2) vote third party or 3) stay home because Clinton either âoehas it in the bagâ or is a master criminal then the state will go Trump. If you go back to the vote counts in swing states youâ(TM)ll see a lot of districts went Trump by small margins that tended to go contrary to historical voting patterns. Just like regular product advertising you donâ(TM)t need to influence everyone just enough to profit.
So we get rid of insurance but single-payer is a no go...the way to pay for medical care is then âoebe richâ? If you donâ(TM)t want to suffer from chronic conditions with expensive treatment then simply donâ(TM)t be not rich?
Even if you take all of the insurance industry padding out of medical bills they are still not cheap. The bottom four quintiles of the population wouldnâ(TM)t be able to afford more than occasional clinic visits. Treatment of chronic conditions would only end up available to the wealthy, even a good portion of the top quintile of the population would find treatment inaccessible.
Insurance works by risk pooling. Thereâ(TM)s nothing fundamentally wrong with risk pooling and is exactly what a single-payer system would do. Everyone pays into the system which has funds to pay for individual expenses because not everyone gets expensive to treat conditions simultaneously. Overall productivity increases because everyone has ready access to basic healthcare and doesnâ(TM)t need to choose between food and a trip to the doctor or filling a prescription.
When people can see a doctor for minor conditions without resorting to an emergency room visit not only do they see less impact from minor conditions but can get early identification and treatment for major ones. Businesses win because their workers are sick at work less often (just by having their symptoms effectively treated sooner) which limits the spread of disease through the staff.
Single-payer has the same benefits economically as just eliminating health insurance with the added bonus of people having effective healthcare.
As a shareholder Appleâ(TM)s taxes have little impact on you. Their share value is what someone thinks they can sell a share for tomorrow so they offer you slightly less than that number today. Share prices have little to do with a companyâ(TM)s fundamentals anymore. That is unless youâ(TM)re an institutional investor that might actually make some real money off dividends.
Full disclosure: I also own Apple stock and I donâ(TM)t think Apple is âoecheatingâ on their taxes. They pay what and to whom they are legally obliged to pay. Those taxes just donâ(TM)t affect my holdings very much if at all.
What taxes are you paying on money written down as expenses? If things you might buy are dual-use (cars, computers, etc) why arenâ(TM)t you buying them through your company and making them company assets that are written off?
Youâ(TM)re paying taxes on your net revenue, not gross. If youâ(TM)re not taking advantages of tax breaks and write-offs, which exist specifically to ease tax burdens on small businesses, youâ(TM)re just screwing yourself.
Unless youâ(TM)re no longer actually a small business why are you paying yourself a wage such youâ(TM)re paying income tax? If you have so much income youâ(TM)re in the highest tax brackets then you can afford a good accountant to reduce your tax burden completely above board.
Pai could read up on WEAs. They work with existing cell phones with no additional hardware necessary. They use out of band signaling so a flooded network does not affect them and cell sites don't actually need MSC connectivity to send them out.
Pai could also call out the CTIA et al, for dragging their feet and suing the government to not be required add backup power to cell sites. This was something the FCC mandated after Katrina but got thrown into legal limbo for years by the CTIA.
There's no amplifier on those phones with an analog audio jack. So even if the situation was as simple as enabling a software change (it isn't) the FM reception would be complete shit. You'd have to stand under the transmitter to get a usable signal.
The South Korean version of this is called DMB and is distinct from but similar in concept to 1seg. The US might see this some day in the form of ATSC-M/H.
All of them are similar in they use H.264 for video and HE-AAC for audio multiplexed in an MPEG transport stream.
This is entirely the fault of the client software and rarely the fault of the feed producer. Even if it is the fault of the feed producer it's the sort of problem they'll have with JSON feeds.
In what way do you think that serving up old content via JSON will be less expensive than via RSS. There will be fewer characters representing tags and such but that's not so big of a difference as to automatically make JSON better. Compressing the feed is going to largely solve the issue of file size between the two formats.
Besides RSS is not really what I would expect a site to use to provide links to their historical pages. That's the job of a sitemap (XML, HTML, or whatever) or possibly OPML. Someone looking for historical links isn't necessarily looking for the syndication features of RSS but instead just a list of links that they will go and spider themselves.
Neither RSS or JSON is really appropriate to provide clients with the entirety of a site's historical content.
This just doesn't make sense. RSS and Atom both have rel property support in tags. So it's trivial for the client to discover supplementary resources for an article. If a producer is not going to include those things in their RSS feed they're not necessarily going to include them in their JSON feeds either. The "Extensible" portion of XML allows producers to add all the extra tags or properties they want as clients will only pay attention to the ones they actually use.
None of the issues you listed are actually issues. Beyond that bad XML produced by whomever is much easier to fix than adopting yet another "standard" only supported by some small fraction of devices on the web. XML's been around a long time and is pretty boring so I don't know what software stacks you think don't have XML support built in. Most stacks likely have fairly robust XML processing capabilities like validation and transforms beyond just deserialization.
With past more competent Presidents the issue of public wifi would be immaterial. The presidential entourage travels with a security tent they set up in the President's suite. These are resistant to all sorts of bugs and block radio emissions. A competent President in a public place would excuse themselves from a public dinner and conduct sensitive government business there.
An incompetent one will just sit in the fucking dining room and light the table with their cell phones where any jackass with a phone can photograph them.
Being that the Mar-a-Lago has shitty network security and wifi that can be accessed by a boat in the lagoon, anyone interesting in bugging the President can just load the hotel's TVs, POS systems, telephones, and network printers with malware. They would have a reasonable chance of catching sensitive discussions because the administration doesn't see any need to discuss sensitive topics in private secure locations.
Why are they discussing sensitive matters in insecure environments? Because they're fucking clown shoes. They think it's ok to just break out sensitive intelligence documents in the middle of a crowded dining room at a hotel. Trump's personal body guard can't figure out how to use a fucking Manila folder to keep the Secretary of Defense's phone number private.
...or they want a working system out of the box. Fedora requires adding the rpmfusion repo in order to have a robust selection of programs - ones that are readily available on Ubuntu. This extra step is opaque and difficult to discover for inexperienced end users. This has always been a problem with Red Hat based distros, they don't or won't provide a robust default package repo so users have always had to turn to third parties.
The news is not the size of the crowd but the fact the President can't accept a fact contrary to his personal narrative and move on. It's more important that the a hit to the man's ego is assuaged than something of substance be done.
It's newsworthy that the President, commander in chief of the world's most powerful military, is so petty and thin skinned. There's absolutely no need for the press to give the President some sort of leeway for their first days and weeks in office. The job of the press is to bring information to the people, not kowtow to the government.
Politicians will lie by very rarely will they straight up deny an easily demonstrated fact. If you allow straight up fiction to become the historical record then you're allowing someone to write their own history.
It seems like every other story hitting the front page lately is challenging the Betteridge law of headlines. It makes for shitty discussion because it's turning a news item into a binary proposition. There's not a lot of room for expansion or commentary.