1993 all over again. Replace Apple vs Windows with Apple vs Android and it is pretty much history repeating.
Shiney only gets you so far, the market will always choose price and flexibility over the long run.
They're playing down the burn in issue, "[Burn-in] is a real issue, but it actually takes much longer use than any normal person would watch a single image". Our cable provider puts a square box at the bottom of the screen with channel info in it every time you change channels. I've had my plasma about 8 years and it has the shadow of that box burnt into it.
Seems odd they they can't adopt your model, I mean they have logs of every song played by which users so it should be trivial to allocate each user's contribution directly to the artists. In fact they could take it a step further and have user charts to see who gave the most money to which artist, then fans could compete with each other to see who is the biggest fan by who pays their favourite artist the most. Then the artist could reward their biggest fans with a phone call or something or a back stage pass. The technology is there to make this work, fans win, the artists win, if only the money grubbers that own the copyrights had more interest in making it work.
The thing that no one has mentioned yet, is that cops aren't going to "back off" at all. Each and every cop in the chase is racing for his "opportunity" to make a high profile bust.
At least that's your interpretation of how police act based on TV shows right? Here in Australia we have a whole bunch of rules and policies based around how police can engage in pursuits and under what circumstances they must disengage. Police vehicles and cameras, tracking and logging that enforce these rules and anyone caught breaking the rules finds themselves on desk duty pretty quick.
So the reason no-one has mentioned it, is because it is the stuff of fantasy and third-world police departments. Those of us in the civilised world look forward to this technology saving money, and more importantly saving lives.
What a lot of Australians don't even realise is that anything can happen, our political system guarantees almost no rights to citizens,
Yeah that sounds all scary the way you wrote that but it overlooks one fact, Australians have it pretty bloody good. A good litmus test of any system is to see what results it produces, and having traveled extensively I can confidently say that based on my own personal experiences, the Australian system is is one of the best. Sure we may not have a bill of rights or a cool-as-fuck constitution like our American friends. And we may have monkeys running the show and no real choice of leadership, but it seems to all work out ok in the end. She'll be right mate! cor struth blimey crikey dick cobber....
but effectively the injury/death rate is mostly effected by poor decisions by the cyclist, not the car.
I'd believe it too, although the same goes for cars too (and buses, trucks, motorcycles etc).
I operate all sorts of vehicles and I really struggle to see how two alert road users can ever collide (except mechanical failure). I do see operators of all types of vehicles putting themselves in really stupid positions at times and wonder if there is any smarter way to enforce road behaviour other than speeding tickets?
Seriously. Come up with some better arguments. Like, maybe ones that aren't complete nonsense.
How is it nonsense? A nuclear weapon is covered by the second amendment is is not? You only call it nonsense because it exposes the flaw in your logic. The right to bear arms is clearly ends when the arms are sufficiently powerful enough to cause too much damage. The question is where you you draw the line? Clearly you agree with Nuclear weapons? How about a Tomahawk cruise missle? Sidewinder A2AM? Gau-8? M134? AK47?
We both seem to agree that there is a line in there somewhere, you just refuse to admit it.
Interesting timing on this comment. Here in Australia we have a newly elected conservative Prime Minister who is a Bush wannabe. In today's news it was reported that he held a private dinner for journalists but only Murdoch's employees were invited, and they no-one was allowed to talk about it.
Murdoch is old and will die soon. I can't wait for that day.
Really, these guys are so bad at calculating casualties: you could stab more people to death for far less money and effort than these guys put into getting on a plane.
The difference is when you go on a stabbing rampage the maximum potential bodycount can be counted on one hand (or two if you get really lucky). With a plane, it might be zero, but if you do it right you get can get a couple of hundred. Plus the key reason for terrorism is the terror part. We hear about random stabbings and shootings all the time and hardly skip a beat. There's something about a plane crash that strikes a chord with the entire population. Having said that, I think a football stadium event could get the same effect
I think that as soon as the self driving car is practical it will become extinct, because it will be replaced with a self driving Winnebago. The car is designed around the driving function, if you don't need that you may as well have a mobile lounge room instead.
But I digress; the point isn't the intended use of the product,
Yes it is. Intended use is exactly what it is. You can't compare a law designed to reduce murder rates, to laws designed protect a a private company's profit margins.
the point is commercial reciprocity: if you're going to make a fuss about TX laws regarding the sale of Tesla cars, you'd be a hypocrite to not make a similar fuss about CA's laws regarding the sale of certain firearms.
That makes no sense whatsoever and shows just how looney the gun argument is. Why do you think it is that out of the entire western world, only a handful of nutbags in the deepest darkest parts of third world USA think guns are great? Everyone else seems to get by fine without them, what make you so different?
By least efficient I think you mean most efficient. A bus takes up about 3x as much space and uses about 3x as much fuel as a car. The catch is they carry 100x as many people as your average car making them 30x more efficient overall. Oh and where I live we have dedicated bus lanes so any trip during rush hour is always quicker by bus than by car.
So it's a religion that is making people rich or not then?
A religion whose leader lives in a castle so fantastic that it is even recognised as a separate country? I'm pretty sure Jesus never lived like that...
And what fantastic timing, a Catholic priest with a 42 million dollar house: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24638430
So I'm guessing that I get close to the 35mi/60km per day where generally on a typical day.
Guess again. Actually instead of relying on wildly inaccurate guessing I suggest you should maybe go for a 60km walk and get back to me. Trust me, standing around Disneyworld for a day shuffling a few metres here and there while sitting down on rides and eating lunch etc is not even close a 60km straight march.
It's very comparable. A human can keep up a 3mph walk forever as well. A 3mph pace is not hard for a human at all and without
a pack 30 miles a day would not be an issue for a human. 35 miles per day, six days a week indefinitely would not be a problem for
the average person either.
Define "average person". I walk a lot compared to an average western person. I try to knock over a couple of kilometres a day, which might not sound like much, but compared to your average lazy westerner whose only walking is from the bedroom to the garage, it is above average.
I can walk about 5kms at about 5km/h without thinking about it, but more than that and I feel it. And I do this almost every day. If I do a 10km walk I need a rest and don't feel much like repeating it the next day. 35miles (60km) in one day would kill me.
I work in a company of 2000 people and looking around I would bet my house that at least half of them couldn't walk 5km a day for one week. 60 km a day would pose a huge problem for most western people.
Except you've just added a half million more people to the unemployment line. And those people used to pay tax, and each and every dollar they spent generated tax revenue too. Austerity doesn't work.
Where does everyone park their cars? I see a little arrow saying car park building, but a building that size will still need a lot of asphalt to park a lot of cars.
You do know that "The World" is bigger than Minnesota right? I live in Australia (Not Austria), we have thousands of solar powered houses (ie generate more power electricity than they use) most of these have been constructed/converted in the last 11 years. An average house only needs a 3-5kw PV system to be net zero. These systems retail for a few thousand dollars, or about 3 years worth of electricity bills.
Through the process of evolution, progress comes through in the end.
It doesn't matter how many Bush's or Obama's we have leading us down the garden path, every now and again you get a Jefferson or a Lincoln which gives a net gain.
Slashdot Mirror
1993 all over again. Replace Apple vs Windows with Apple vs Android and it is pretty much history repeating. Shiney only gets you so far, the market will always choose price and flexibility over the long run.
The bicycle of political influence? You really just said that?
They're playing down the burn in issue, "[Burn-in] is a real issue, but it actually takes much longer use than any normal person would watch a single image". Our cable provider puts a square box at the bottom of the screen with channel info in it every time you change channels. I've had my plasma about 8 years and it has the shadow of that box burnt into it.
Seems odd they they can't adopt your model, I mean they have logs of every song played by which users so it should be trivial to allocate each user's contribution directly to the artists. In fact they could take it a step further and have user charts to see who gave the most money to which artist, then fans could compete with each other to see who is the biggest fan by who pays their favourite artist the most. Then the artist could reward their biggest fans with a phone call or something or a back stage pass. The technology is there to make this work, fans win, the artists win, if only the money grubbers that own the copyrights had more interest in making it work.
The thing that no one has mentioned yet, is that cops aren't going to "back off" at all. Each and every cop in the chase is racing for his "opportunity" to make a high profile bust.
At least that's your interpretation of how police act based on TV shows right? Here in Australia we have a whole bunch of rules and policies based around how police can engage in pursuits and under what circumstances they must disengage. Police vehicles and cameras, tracking and logging that enforce these rules and anyone caught breaking the rules finds themselves on desk duty pretty quick. So the reason no-one has mentioned it, is because it is the stuff of fantasy and third-world police departments. Those of us in the civilised world look forward to this technology saving money, and more importantly saving lives.
What a lot of Australians don't even realise is that anything can happen, our political system guarantees almost no rights to citizens,
Yeah that sounds all scary the way you wrote that but it overlooks one fact, Australians have it pretty bloody good. A good litmus test of any system is to see what results it produces, and having traveled extensively I can confidently say that based on my own personal experiences, the Australian system is is one of the best. Sure we may not have a bill of rights or a cool-as-fuck constitution like our American friends. And we may have monkeys running the show and no real choice of leadership, but it seems to all work out ok in the end. She'll be right mate! cor struth blimey crikey dick cobber....
The fact that the USA, UK, Canada, and Australia have a very close relationship
Hey, hey don't forget little old New Zealand. There are 5 eyes you know, not four...
but effectively the injury/death rate is mostly effected by poor decisions by the cyclist, not the car.
I'd believe it too, although the same goes for cars too (and buses, trucks, motorcycles etc). I operate all sorts of vehicles and I really struggle to see how two alert road users can ever collide (except mechanical failure). I do see operators of all types of vehicles putting themselves in really stupid positions at times and wonder if there is any smarter way to enforce road behaviour other than speeding tickets?
Seriously. Come up with some better arguments. Like, maybe ones that aren't complete nonsense.
How is it nonsense? A nuclear weapon is covered by the second amendment is is not? You only call it nonsense because it exposes the flaw in your logic. The right to bear arms is clearly ends when the arms are sufficiently powerful enough to cause too much damage. The question is where you you draw the line? Clearly you agree with Nuclear weapons? How about a Tomahawk cruise missle? Sidewinder A2AM? Gau-8? M134? AK47? We both seem to agree that there is a line in there somewhere, you just refuse to admit it.
Interesting timing on this comment. Here in Australia we have a newly elected conservative Prime Minister who is a Bush wannabe. In today's news it was reported that he held a private dinner for journalists but only Murdoch's employees were invited, and they no-one was allowed to talk about it. Murdoch is old and will die soon. I can't wait for that day.
Really, these guys are so bad at calculating casualties: you could stab more people to death for far less money and effort than these guys put into getting on a plane.
The difference is when you go on a stabbing rampage the maximum potential bodycount can be counted on one hand (or two if you get really lucky). With a plane, it might be zero, but if you do it right you get can get a couple of hundred. Plus the key reason for terrorism is the terror part. We hear about random stabbings and shootings all the time and hardly skip a beat. There's something about a plane crash that strikes a chord with the entire population. Having said that, I think a football stadium event could get the same effect
I think that as soon as the self driving car is practical it will become extinct, because it will be replaced with a self driving Winnebago. The car is designed around the driving function, if you don't need that you may as well have a mobile lounge room instead.
When I grew up, the word terrorist was a white guy in a balaclava, in the last 20 years it now means brown guy with a beard and a funny hat.
But I digress; the point isn't the intended use of the product,
Yes it is. Intended use is exactly what it is. You can't compare a law designed to reduce murder rates, to laws designed protect a a private company's profit margins.
the point is commercial reciprocity: if you're going to make a fuss about TX laws regarding the sale of Tesla cars, you'd be a hypocrite to not make a similar fuss about CA's laws regarding the sale of certain firearms.
That makes no sense whatsoever and shows just how looney the gun argument is. Why do you think it is that out of the entire western world, only a handful of nutbags in the deepest darkest parts of third world USA think guns are great? Everyone else seems to get by fine without them, what make you so different?
In your state can I buy a nuclear weapon for personal protection? Why not?
By least efficient I think you mean most efficient. A bus takes up about 3x as much space and uses about 3x as much fuel as a car. The catch is they carry 100x as many people as your average car making them 30x more efficient overall. Oh and where I live we have dedicated bus lanes so any trip during rush hour is always quicker by bus than by car.
So it's a religion that is making people rich or not then? A religion whose leader lives in a castle so fantastic that it is even recognised as a separate country? I'm pretty sure Jesus never lived like that... And what fantastic timing, a Catholic priest with a 42 million dollar house: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24638430
So I'm guessing that I get close to the 35mi/60km per day where generally on a typical day.
Guess again. Actually instead of relying on wildly inaccurate guessing I suggest you should maybe go for a 60km walk and get back to me. Trust me, standing around Disneyworld for a day shuffling a few metres here and there while sitting down on rides and eating lunch etc is not even close a 60km straight march.
The Pope has a pretty fancy house. Who paid for that?
It's very comparable. A human can keep up a 3mph walk forever as well. A 3mph pace is not hard for a human at all and without a pack 30 miles a day would not be an issue for a human. 35 miles per day, six days a week indefinitely would not be a problem for the average person either.
Define "average person". I walk a lot compared to an average western person. I try to knock over a couple of kilometres a day, which might not sound like much, but compared to your average lazy westerner whose only walking is from the bedroom to the garage, it is above average. I can walk about 5kms at about 5km/h without thinking about it, but more than that and I feel it. And I do this almost every day. If I do a 10km walk I need a rest and don't feel much like repeating it the next day. 35miles (60km) in one day would kill me. I work in a company of 2000 people and looking around I would bet my house that at least half of them couldn't walk 5km a day for one week. 60 km a day would pose a huge problem for most western people.
50lbs an hour! That's a lot of stuff. Where do peasants in the desert a hold of so much stuff to use as fuel?
Except you've just added a half million more people to the unemployment line. And those people used to pay tax, and each and every dollar they spent generated tax revenue too. Austerity doesn't work.
Where does everyone park their cars? I see a little arrow saying car park building, but a building that size will still need a lot of asphalt to park a lot of cars.
You do know that "The World" is bigger than Minnesota right? I live in Australia (Not Austria), we have thousands of solar powered houses (ie generate more power electricity than they use) most of these have been constructed/converted in the last 11 years. An average house only needs a 3-5kw PV system to be net zero. These systems retail for a few thousand dollars, or about 3 years worth of electricity bills.
Through the process of evolution, progress comes through in the end. It doesn't matter how many Bush's or Obama's we have leading us down the garden path, every now and again you get a Jefferson or a Lincoln which gives a net gain.