I was waiting to see a stream of the third burn and I didn't see anything posted All I found is a tweet from Musk that it was successful. I haven't yet found any video of the event or any actual news reporting it.
If I were to have any complaint about the event is that a camera feed was not made available continually from pre-launch to final burn when the craft left Earth orbit several hours later.
That's actually a really good point... and one that I was going to mention myself. Does anybody know what the upper cap is on frequencies that can be produced by modern audio equipment?
This depends on many factors. Home equipment can certainly produce a frequency above 20kHz. For example the Marantz PM5005 is specified to achieve a frequency response up to 50kHz. Most high quality tweeters are capable of going well above 20kHz. Of course, not everyone has good equipment or speakers and there will be rolloff. In addition all of the signal processing and compression of the transmission likely has digital filters knocking out much of the out-of-band data. Practically I'd expect somewhere around 22-24kHz as a realistic maximum.
I'm betting that if they can even produce inaudible frequencies at all, it's not liable to be much higher than the maximum human hearing frequency, and that would still be well within the hearing range of many household pets, so I think we'd need to investigate that carefully before filling people's homes with it.
Nope. Obama failing to hold out for single payer and settling for Romneycare is what cost you. Countries with actual single payer systems spend half or less per capita with better outcomes for all.
I find this argument hilarious given Democrats had both Congress and the Presidency and when it was passed nobody said anything about keeping costs down. The entire selling point was to make more people buy insurance and add layers of complexity. Costs were going to go up, no matter what.
We all know that prices are essentially secret. Do you know that "billing" now accounts for 25% of all hospital spending? Hospital administration costs are 1.43% of the GDP. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/in-the-literature/2014/sep/hospital-administrative-costs
There is a tremendous amount of meat that can be trimmed from the bone and if anyone can do it, I'm hopeful this union of aggressive corporations will do a far better job than our government.
However my main point is the news shoving people with big scary numbers, to really prove a point, but while there is still a problem, the real numbers are not as obvious as the article is lead to believe, as this is over 10 years. Not one big shipment.
You are right. Without any comparison with other areas' usage it is impossible to draw any legitimate conclusion. If this rural area has the same drug usage as NYC that would mean one thing, however if all rural areas have statistically similar usage that means quite another.
The whole insurance principle is based on not knowing. It's gambling. You gamble that you will have an accident, and the insurance company gambles that you won't. A bookmaker will never charge you more for a bet than the next man just because you have a higher chance of winning. He adjusts the odds for everyone, not individually.
Insurance companies need to do the unintuitive thing of treating people more equally, or customers will flee, and the low-premium low-risk customers that stay won't pay enough to finance the business overhead.
The flaw in your argument is that in your example the bookmaker and you generally bet on a third party.
To provide a more accurate car analogy, you and a bookmaker may place a bet that *you* specifically will crash *your* car tomorrow. The next person to walk in makes the next bet with the bookmaker whether *they* will crash *their* car tomorrow. Since you are known for having a hotmail account, plus you have a history of speeding violations, your odds are not the same as the next person. The bookmaker knows and tracks 600 different things about you that are statistically relevant to determining your odds. These can and will include actuarial tables on every detail they can collect about you, unless deemed illegal to use in your locale.
Montana isn't exactly swimming in money. They're 35th in the nation on per capital GDP. And as a Red state they probably don't have the tax dollars to do that or the political will to raise those tax dollars.
Huh. Seems biased to me. Republicans did implement TARP and quantitative easing to stop the Recession. These things should have made Democrats happy, but the stereotypes persist.
Why is it that strange, conservative legislature with a liberal governor should end up more centrist with less stupid left or right wing bits.
Because that's how it used to be? People working together to solve problems? States have power over the federal government and I'm glad a small state is using it instead of just complaining.
I want net neutrality, but this is embarrassingly stupid. You can't have net neutrality in one state on a practical level to begin with, and this is definitely not something the states are empowered to do beside that.
We are a collection of states that can generally do what they want. You have it wrong, my friend. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The usual Commerce Clause that gives the federal government the authority to regulate interstate commerce, even as extended as it is, can hardly be used to override a state from placing equal access requirements on local services.
The thing about a second opinion is, it's not necessarily different from the first. The point of seeking a second opinion is not to keep talking to doctor after doctor until one says something you like. If every doctor has the same opinion, it's likely because that opinion is what is true.
And I did provide an example of someone you can go to in order to get a differing opinion if that's really what you're after: the kook down the street.
What I think you are proposing prevents someone from finding the "kook down the street" because the forum is controlled by a governing body - in this case some consensus of "expert" doctors. What will happen is new ideas and medical procedures will be suppressed alongside the "kooks". Who controls the governing body? European doctors perform different techniques and drugs than US doctors which is different than Chinese doctors. What about procedures or drugs that are illegal in some places but widely used in other places? If you use set theory to only allow what is universally "correct" much information is excluded.
And if they use a panel of experts than the experts are controlling the news people see. That's not good either.
... Why? What if, instead of calling them "experts," we called them "journalists"? Is that still bad? Even though that's how it is anyway, and how it has always been?
You could make the standard argument about bias, but that's why we get our news from multiple sources (multiple journalists) instead of just one. Let's try a medical analogy: your rely on your doctor for medical advice, because you doctor spends all of his time on that crap and knows a lot more about it than you do. If you disagree with your doctor or don't like what he says, then you get a second opinion from another knowledgeable doctor who, let me repeat, follows developments in his field closely and knows more about it than you do.
To complete the analogy: Where do you go to get your second opinion when only doctors who have the same opinion are allowed to talk about it on the forum you use? Perhaps you can go to another forum where only doctors with a different opinion are allowed?
The only end I see with this approach is building up the walls to your personal echo chamber.
I don't hate either, actually. Google is everywhere and I appreciate their efforts to make my life easier, even if at the same time they're recording every time I hit the head ( 2.5 times on average, I looked it up ). And comcast is the only game in town for reliable and fast internet connectivity.
I wish that weren't the case, I really do, but the fact is both companies are doing everything they can to make my life easier. Given all the folks who are actively trying to do the opposite, I have to say I appreciate them.
All of these companies are after profit. They all want you in their walled garden to spend all of your money with their products and their partners. Knowing how often you hit the head provides them valuable data with which they can push advertising and other products. Perhaps that is what you want. However I know that elsewhere in the world you can get fiber straight to your home for around 30 euro a month without that sort of relationship. Buying products sponsored by and having a symbiotic relationship with Comcast is not something I want and I should have that choice.
I really don't understand why Americans tolerate their current voting system. Computer-tallied paper ballots and pencils with ballot boxes and any manual counting observed by the candidate's representatives is pretty solid.
Computer kiosks with known flaws, with the electronic records purged ASAP looks an awful lot like the dream system of someone who wants to generate whatever result they like and should offend (and terrify) the average voter.
You are right. In my state it it still done on paper with optical scanners. The electronic voting machines are not ubiquitous in the USA.
Best as I can determine the electronic voting machines without a paper trail is only done in the following 11 states: Virginia, Texas, Tennesee, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Louisiana, Kentucky, Indiana, Florida, and Delaware.
I gave you a bloody map, what more do you want? And why are you putting "charging stations" in quotes? Superchargers are real. There are 7619 supercharger stalls operational today (aka, not counting those under construction). The average spacing along US interstates is about 70 miles (a bit more in more densely populated areas, a bit less in less densely populated ones), evenly spaced. Doubling by the end of next year. And that's just Tesla's network.
I'd love an electric car but the lack of charging stations is a real issue. It's going to be overcome but 7619 charging stations really isn't a solid number compared with 150,000 gas stations.
I live near Boston and during my 70 mile round trip commute there are no charging stations en route or nearby either end. The closest station is well out of the way, so my only option is my house which would need a high power outlet to be routed. I would have to carefully monitor the charge and ensure to plug the car in every two days or I'd be stuck. I fill up on gasoline once a week which takes about 3 minutes.
As of today an electric car doesn't serve my needs. I really want a Tesla though.
There is no gun forcing you to take a job you can't do well enough to earn a decent living doing
Of course not. You always can just starve to death, that's always an option.
No problem. The economy is bad, you just die. Problem solved.
In the USA 3,933 people died in 2014 of malnutrition according to the CDC. Of these the vast majority were older than 75 or otherwise out of the working pool. In 2012 the count was 3,382 and in 2010 during the poor economy the count was 2,948 with similar age trends.
Where do you get your findings that people are dying of starvation for reasons other than abuse and neglect of the elderly?
My interests have not been represented in quite a few years. I am white, heterosexual, have medical insurance provided by my employer(s), college educated with BS and MS degrees in my chosen professional field, widowed, no kids, make too much money to claim lower bracket tax deductions and not enough money to take advantage of the higher bracket tax deductions, and practice no denomination of religious beliefs.
In fact, you are exactly the demographic that the Democratic party represents. Sure, they give some lip service to progressive ideas and identity politics, but that's because that's what people like you want to hear. But the establishment Democrats do nothing to support policies to actually help the poor and working class - they help people like you. It's why urban centers on the costs are so blue.
Uh, I'm not sure where you get your information however the Democrats haven't supported the middle class and especially the white, male middle class for years. They emphasize support for minorities and the working poor who are abundant in the urban centers on the coasts.
Dude it's about 17 years old which is a long long ancient time on a technology scale. It's time to move on. Do you get free car service too for 17 year old cars?
What is reasonable? Most users are just waiting for their caps in their power supplies or motherboard to blow and they will be replaced. Some are old people afraid of change who go out of their way to use ancient software on new hardware. That is on them.
Mozilla should display a friendly message claiming their PC will no longer be supported and it's time to upgrade
There is a difference between not being supported and actively denying the installation. Like it or not, old systems will not go away because you wish it. Ask me about my legacy Windows NT 4.0 and 2000 systems.
One might think you'd have already installed the software prior to the cataclysm.
Why would you think this?
Separately I've been burned a few times by apps that I downloaded in advance of going to a remote area. When I get there I find I can't use them because they need a network connection to register.
Apps are designed for always-on connectivity. Expecting them to work in a disaster is wishful thinking.
Also, the car had many advantages over the horse, while the electric car has almost none over a combustion engine one.
Apart from the massive lack of nasty emissions in precisely the places where people want to breathe and fuel economy?
Yes, apart from that.
The reduction of emissions is a general, nonspecific benefit. The econobox cars that current electric cars are replacing are not a substantial source of tailpipe pollution, and there is additional pollution taking place in the upstream production line for the batteries and electronics (even if the pollution by additional electrical generation and transmission is excluded from the equation - which is another generally uncertain amount).
Fuel economy is another benefit that is murky to the average car purchaser. Sure the petrol cost drops to zero. Is that worth a loss in driving distance and refueling convenience?
If regulations are required to alter consumer buying decisions, the benefits of the switch are not compelling on their own. The horse to the automobile switch happened voluntarily.
The switch to electric will happen, possibly with people kicking and screaming, and/or making ICE only available to the rich.
The Drive app is replaced by the "backup and sync" app which does EXACTLY the same thing (plus you can sync directories other than the "Google Drive" one). It has a different icon and name, but it is basically an update, a version 2.0. The functionality is not "going away", if you install the new program is removes and replaces the old one, you don't even need to login again, everything is carried over.
So, what's the problem?
Google Drive is not exactly the same as Google Backup and Sync. As per the summary it may be similar, but not exactly the same at the least because Photos Uploader is also in the picture. It also suggests there are changes requiring additional "replacement" programs to be installed. I hypothesize that the icons and links may be different as well.
One good example are the federal laws illegalizing pot, do you really want the President to vigorously prosecute such laws? Where I am, differently setup Federal system, pot is defacto legal due to the Provincial government (Constitutionally required to enforce laws) not enforcing the Federal (Constitutionally in charge of criminal law) laws. At that it has devolved to the municipalities to enforce the drug selling trade through business license costs and rules like "so far from a school".
It's still less simple. The tenth amendment delegates non-enumerated powers to the States as we are a union of separate States. The federal enforcement you are referring to concerning drugs is derived from interstate commerce. The State laws are not generally superseded by Federal laws. The drinking age is a state law, for example. It was imposed via threat of losing federal road funding and each state made their individual law.
Of course there are specific examples of cooperation that you can find - however the feds have no jurisdiction to enforce state laws and the local police have no jurisdiction to enforce federal laws. (There are extradition procedures, it's not like they have to let you go).
Slashdot Mirror
There's one more burn, I believe, in several hours.
This was an amazing accomplishment and it makes me excited for the next few years!
I found this link from the ISS showing the launch. Fast forward to 47 minutes. http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/112609768
I was waiting to see a stream of the third burn and I didn't see anything posted All I found is a tweet from Musk that it was successful. I haven't yet found any video of the event or any actual news reporting it.
If I were to have any complaint about the event is that a camera feed was not made available continually from pre-launch to final burn when the craft left Earth orbit several hours later.
That's actually a really good point... and one that I was going to mention myself. Does anybody know what the upper cap is on frequencies that can be produced by modern audio equipment?
This depends on many factors. Home equipment can certainly produce a frequency above 20kHz. For example the Marantz PM5005 is specified to achieve a frequency response up to 50kHz. Most high quality tweeters are capable of going well above 20kHz. Of course, not everyone has good equipment or speakers and there will be rolloff. In addition all of the signal processing and compression of the transmission likely has digital filters knocking out much of the out-of-band data. Practically I'd expect somewhere around 22-24kHz as a realistic maximum.
I'm betting that if they can even produce inaudible frequencies at all, it's not liable to be much higher than the maximum human hearing frequency, and that would still be well within the hearing range of many household pets, so I think we'd need to investigate that carefully before filling people's homes with it.
The signal doesn't have to be loud.
Nope. Obama failing to hold out for single payer and settling for Romneycare is what cost you. Countries with actual single payer systems spend half or less per capita with better outcomes for all.
I find this argument hilarious given Democrats had both Congress and the Presidency and when it was passed nobody said anything about keeping costs down. The entire selling point was to make more people buy insurance and add layers of complexity. Costs were going to go up, no matter what.
We all know that prices are essentially secret. Do you know that "billing" now accounts for 25% of all hospital spending? Hospital administration costs are 1.43% of the GDP. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/in-the-literature/2014/sep/hospital-administrative-costs
There is a tremendous amount of meat that can be trimmed from the bone and if anyone can do it, I'm hopeful this union of aggressive corporations will do a far better job than our government.
However my main point is the news shoving people with big scary numbers, to really prove a point, but while there is still a problem, the real numbers are not as obvious as the article is lead to believe, as this is over 10 years. Not one big shipment.
You are right. Without any comparison with other areas' usage it is impossible to draw any legitimate conclusion. If this rural area has the same drug usage as NYC that would mean one thing, however if all rural areas have statistically similar usage that means quite another.
The whole insurance principle is based on not knowing. It's gambling. You gamble that you will have an accident, and the insurance company gambles that you won't.
A bookmaker will never charge you more for a bet than the next man just because you have a higher chance of winning. He adjusts the odds for everyone, not individually.
Insurance companies need to do the unintuitive thing of treating people more equally, or customers will flee, and the low-premium low-risk customers that stay won't pay enough to finance the business overhead.
The flaw in your argument is that in your example the bookmaker and you generally bet on a third party.
To provide a more accurate car analogy, you and a bookmaker may place a bet that *you* specifically will crash *your* car tomorrow. The next person to walk in makes the next bet with the bookmaker whether *they* will crash *their* car tomorrow. Since you are known for having a hotmail account, plus you have a history of speeding violations, your odds are not the same as the next person. The bookmaker knows and tracks 600 different things about you that are statistically relevant to determining your odds. These can and will include actuarial tables on every detail they can collect about you, unless deemed illegal to use in your locale.
Montana isn't exactly swimming in money. They're 35th in the nation on per capital GDP. And as a Red state they probably don't have the tax dollars to do that or the political will to raise those tax dollars.
Huh. Seems biased to me. Republicans did implement TARP and quantitative easing to stop the Recession. These things should have made Democrats happy, but the stereotypes persist.
Why is it that strange, conservative legislature with a liberal governor should end up more centrist with less stupid left or right wing bits.
Because that's how it used to be? People working together to solve problems? States have power over the federal government and I'm glad a small state is using it instead of just complaining.
I want net neutrality, but this is embarrassingly stupid. You can't have net neutrality in one state on a practical level to begin with, and this is definitely not something the states are empowered to do beside that.
We are a collection of states that can generally do what they want. You have it wrong, my friend. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The usual Commerce Clause that gives the federal government the authority to regulate interstate commerce, even as extended as it is, can hardly be used to override a state from placing equal access requirements on local services.
The thing about a second opinion is, it's not necessarily different from the first. The point of seeking a second opinion is not to keep talking to doctor after doctor until one says something you like. If every doctor has the same opinion, it's likely because that opinion is what is true.
And I did provide an example of someone you can go to in order to get a differing opinion if that's really what you're after: the kook down the street.
What I think you are proposing prevents someone from finding the "kook down the street" because the forum is controlled by a governing body - in this case some consensus of "expert" doctors. What will happen is new ideas and medical procedures will be suppressed alongside the "kooks". Who controls the governing body? European doctors perform different techniques and drugs than US doctors which is different than Chinese doctors. What about procedures or drugs that are illegal in some places but widely used in other places? If you use set theory to only allow what is universally "correct" much information is excluded.
And if they use a panel of experts than the experts are controlling the news people see. That's not good either.
... Why? What if, instead of calling them "experts," we called them "journalists"? Is that still bad? Even though that's how it is anyway, and how it has always been?
You could make the standard argument about bias, but that's why we get our news from multiple sources (multiple journalists) instead of just one. Let's try a medical analogy: your rely on your doctor for medical advice, because you doctor spends all of his time on that crap and knows a lot more about it than you do. If you disagree with your doctor or don't like what he says, then you get a second opinion from another knowledgeable doctor who, let me repeat, follows developments in his field closely and knows more about it than you do.
To complete the analogy: Where do you go to get your second opinion when only doctors who have the same opinion are allowed to talk about it on the forum you use? Perhaps you can go to another forum where only doctors with a different opinion are allowed?
The only end I see with this approach is building up the walls to your personal echo chamber.
Well, you have to launch it from your submarine anyway - you don't want it to detonate on top of you, do you?
This is a "Drone Torpedo" capable of 6,200mile range. It *is* the submarine.
If the owner is providing slow support to move wires, cables, etc., then that is another matter.
That was exactly the matter that OTMR was intended to address. How else would you have addressed this matter?
Take them to court. That's why you pay your lawyers.
Uh they did. And they lost? Expect slow or no support on moving wires in the future.
I don't hate either, actually. Google is everywhere and I appreciate their efforts to make my life easier, even if at the same time they're recording every time I hit the head ( 2.5 times on average, I looked it up ). And comcast is the only game in town for reliable and fast internet connectivity.
I wish that weren't the case, I really do, but the fact is both companies are doing everything they can to make my life easier. Given all the folks who are actively trying to do the opposite, I have to say I appreciate them.
All of these companies are after profit. They all want you in their walled garden to spend all of your money with their products and their partners. Knowing how often you hit the head provides them valuable data with which they can push advertising and other products. Perhaps that is what you want. However I know that elsewhere in the world you can get fiber straight to your home for around 30 euro a month without that sort of relationship. Buying products sponsored by and having a symbiotic relationship with Comcast is not something I want and I should have that choice.
I really don't understand why Americans tolerate their current voting system. Computer-tallied paper ballots and pencils with ballot boxes and any manual counting observed by the candidate's representatives is pretty solid.
Computer kiosks with known flaws, with the electronic records purged ASAP looks an awful lot like the dream system of someone who wants to generate whatever result they like and should offend (and terrify) the average voter.
You are right. In my state it it still done on paper with optical scanners. The electronic voting machines are not ubiquitous in the USA.
Best as I can determine the electronic voting machines without a paper trail is only done in the following 11 states: Virginia, Texas, Tennesee, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Louisiana, Kentucky, Indiana, Florida, and Delaware.
Sure corruption is bad - but it's teenaged acne next to the cancer of "the opposition are the enemy" that Democrats embrace today.
Fixed that for you.
I gave you a bloody map, what more do you want? And why are you putting "charging stations" in quotes? Superchargers are real. There are 7619 supercharger stalls operational today (aka, not counting those under construction). The average spacing along US interstates is about 70 miles (a bit more in more densely populated areas, a bit less in less densely populated ones), evenly spaced. Doubling by the end of next year. And that's just Tesla's network.
I'd love an electric car but the lack of charging stations is a real issue. It's going to be overcome but 7619 charging stations really isn't a solid number compared with 150,000 gas stations.
I live near Boston and during my 70 mile round trip commute there are no charging stations en route or nearby either end. The closest station is well out of the way, so my only option is my house which would need a high power outlet to be routed. I would have to carefully monitor the charge and ensure to plug the car in every two days or I'd be stuck. I fill up on gasoline once a week which takes about 3 minutes.
As of today an electric car doesn't serve my needs. I really want a Tesla though.
There is no gun forcing you to take a job you can't do well enough to earn a decent living doing
Of course not. You always can just starve to death, that's always an option.
No problem. The economy is bad, you just die. Problem solved.
In the USA 3,933 people died in 2014 of malnutrition according to the CDC. Of these the vast majority were older than 75 or otherwise out of the working pool. In 2012 the count was 3,382 and in 2010 during the poor economy the count was 2,948 with similar age trends.
Where do you get your findings that people are dying of starvation for reasons other than abuse and neglect of the elderly?
My interests have not been represented in quite a few years. I am white, heterosexual, have medical insurance provided by my employer(s), college educated with BS and MS degrees in my chosen professional field, widowed, no kids, make too much money to claim lower bracket tax deductions and not enough money to take advantage of the higher bracket tax deductions, and practice no denomination of religious beliefs.
In fact, you are exactly the demographic that the Democratic party represents. Sure, they give some lip service to progressive ideas and identity politics, but that's because that's what people like you want to hear. But the establishment Democrats do nothing to support policies to actually help the poor and working class - they help people like you. It's why urban centers on the costs are so blue.
Uh, I'm not sure where you get your information however the Democrats haven't supported the middle class and especially the white, male middle class for years. They emphasize support for minorities and the working poor who are abundant in the urban centers on the coasts.
Article says "Could endanger *entire* ships" If this flaw can't sink or disable the engines it isn't endangering them, much less the *entire* ship.
"Apple will embrace Face ID as its authentication method for a competitive advantage over Android smartphones"
seems a bit premature to speak of a "competitive advantage" when the feature is not even widely embraced as yet.
It's not even released yet.
Dude it's about 17 years old which is a long long ancient time on a technology scale. It's time to move on. Do you get free car service too for 17 year old cars?
What is reasonable? Most users are just waiting for their caps in their power supplies or motherboard to blow and they will be replaced. Some are old people afraid of change who go out of their way to use ancient software on new hardware. That is on them.
Mozilla should display a friendly message claiming their PC will no longer be supported and it's time to upgrade
There is a difference between not being supported and actively denying the installation. Like it or not, old systems will not go away because you wish it. Ask me about my legacy Windows NT 4.0 and 2000 systems.
One might think you'd have already installed the software prior to the cataclysm.
Why would you think this?
Separately I've been burned a few times by apps that I downloaded in advance of going to a remote area. When I get there I find I can't use them because they need a network connection to register.
Apps are designed for always-on connectivity. Expecting them to work in a disaster is wishful thinking.
Also, the car had many advantages over the horse, while the electric car has almost none over a combustion engine one.
Apart from the massive lack of nasty emissions in precisely the places where people want to breathe and fuel economy?
Yes, apart from that.
The reduction of emissions is a general, nonspecific benefit. The econobox cars that current electric cars are replacing are not a substantial source of tailpipe pollution, and there is additional pollution taking place in the upstream production line for the batteries and electronics (even if the pollution by additional electrical generation and transmission is excluded from the equation - which is another generally uncertain amount).
Fuel economy is another benefit that is murky to the average car purchaser. Sure the petrol cost drops to zero. Is that worth a loss in driving distance and refueling convenience?
If regulations are required to alter consumer buying decisions, the benefits of the switch are not compelling on their own. The horse to the automobile switch happened voluntarily.
The switch to electric will happen, possibly with people kicking and screaming, and/or making ICE only available to the rich.
The Drive app is replaced by the "backup and sync" app which does EXACTLY the same thing (plus you can sync directories other than the "Google Drive" one). It has a different icon and name, but it is basically an update, a version 2.0. The functionality is not "going away", if you install the new program is removes and replaces the old one, you don't even need to login again, everything is carried over.
So, what's the problem?
Google Drive is not exactly the same as Google Backup and Sync. As per the summary it may be similar, but not exactly the same at the least because Photos Uploader is also in the picture. It also suggests there are changes requiring additional "replacement" programs to be installed. I hypothesize that the icons and links may be different as well.
It's never as simple as you state.
One good example are the federal laws illegalizing pot, do you really want the President to vigorously prosecute such laws? Where I am, differently setup Federal system, pot is defacto legal due to the Provincial government (Constitutionally required to enforce laws) not enforcing the Federal (Constitutionally in charge of criminal law) laws. At that it has devolved to the municipalities to enforce the drug selling trade through business license costs and rules like "so far from a school".
It's still less simple. The tenth amendment delegates non-enumerated powers to the States as we are a union of separate States. The federal enforcement you are referring to concerning drugs is derived from interstate commerce. The State laws are not generally superseded by Federal laws. The drinking age is a state law, for example. It was imposed via threat of losing federal road funding and each state made their individual law.
Of course there are specific examples of cooperation that you can find - however the feds have no jurisdiction to enforce state laws and the local police have no jurisdiction to enforce federal laws. (There are extradition procedures, it's not like they have to let you go).