On the bright side it seems CPUs are again fast enough to decode most 1080p video streams without video card assist, so maybe we are not as far as we might otherwise be. I doubt 4k video is going to easily be decoded with today's CPUs, and complex games won't happen.
Actually that's just because people do crazy things in madVR, "normal" UHD decoding can be done in software (source):
In a JCT-VC document NTT DoCoMo showed that their HEVC software decoder could decode 3840x2160 at 60 fps using 3 decoding threads on a 2.7 GHz quad core Ivy Bridge CPU.
And java conventions of long method camel case names are regarded as silly in other languages, descriptive short methods are very possible
user = User.getUserByGuidBecauseImAJavaTwat(gid) vs user=User.(guid=gid)
And that makes sense to you? I don't recognize the language, but my guess it's one dot away from creating a user "user=User(guid=gid)". And if guid is a member variable, why are you assigning a value to it? Looks to me like you have some unnamed (...) function, does that imply "find"? Why? Go to your nearest CS school and 9 out of 10 pupils will figure out the purporse on the first function on the first try. You'd be lucky if 2 of 10 managed to guess the second. You're the kind of idiot which means people need 3-6 months of bootup time just to get into the head of the fucker who wrote the code.
I hate writing long variable and function names. I hate reading short variable and function names. And I've been back and forth, but here's my refined opinion: If you can't tell WTF the code is doing at a glance and want to add a micro-comment like "// find user", it's too obtuse. If you're trying to write a whole comment in the name like "getUserThatIsSomethingSomethingForWhateverBeforeThisAfterThat()", call it "getUser()" and write a damn comment. If it's ambigious, it's fine to start small and extend like if you used to have getUser() now you have getUserByGuid() and getUserByName().
As for the get/set prefix, I prefer the simpler user.guid() over user.getGuid() as it's really more a property than a function, you're just abstracting the implementation from the interface. Also you basically don't get any autocomplete before the 4th letter and it's not going to be consistent anyway, for true/false conditions you typically use "isSomething()". In this particularly case for a function I'd much rather call it "findUserByGuid()" though indicating it's a search on a set, not simply returning a value. Likewise if you have a class where you set numbers a and b and calculate the GCD, I'd much rather call the function calculateGcd() than getGcd() to point out that this function does the work. It gets a little ambiguous at times with "returnAddress()" the property vs "returnShipment()" the function where I sometimes reconsider that "getReturnAddress()" would be clearer but in 99% of the cases it's fine.
So Ubuntu got volume, are they making any money? Nobody can tell, since they're a black box private company but Red Hat got 7300 employees, $1.5 billion in revenue and turned a $178 million profit last year so they're making money. That's why Red Hat dropped RHL, it was a money sink with no end and no signs of improvement. Who cares if Ubuntu got 100000 installations making $0? I'd probably use Ubuntu over CentOS for an unsupported server too, but if I wanted support I'd probably go Red Hat. Without knowing how many of the Ubuntu servers have a support contract it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. Unless you think profit is decided by popular vote.
H.264 and JPEG are supposed to output random-looking bytes, by definitions. If you can compress those, something is very wrong.
Well, it seems to be applied per codec not a general compression algorithm like zip. And they probably say mobile-encoded for a reason, simple encoders have to work on low power and in real time, random JPGs from the Internet is probably the same. From what I can gather the algorithm basically take a global scan of the whole media and applies an optimized variable-length transformation making commonly used values shorter at the expense of making less commonly used values longer. Nothing you couldn't do with a proper two-pass encoding in the codec itself, the neat trick is doing it to someone else's already compressed media afterwards in a bit-reversible way. Very nice when you're a third party host, assuming the increase in CPU time is worth it but not so useful for everyone else.
Because you don't get to 'flip' anything without breaking entanglement. You can just measure one electron and be sure that the same measurement will give you the same result in entangled one. It is like having two random number generators with the same seed - they always give the same (random) answer, but it does not allow you to transmit anything.
That's the "local hidden variables" theory, in which both particles are set with some quantum state at entanglement and don't interact later but which we know is false. If we angle the detectors, collapsing the quantum state at one end will cause correlation at the other end that can't be explained by hidden variables. The funny thing is though is that in order to measure the correlation you need both sets of measurements, which you have to transfer from one to the other at classical speeds so you don't get FTL communication. But the change happens FTL, even though you can't determine it until later. Every time you think you understand QM, it just gets weirder.
It's hard to believe psychology studies are more reproducible than cancer studies (11% reproducible): http://www.nature.com/nature/j...
It seems you don't understand what it is you linked to or you're trolling, the key here is preclinical. That is, there's an 11% chance we can reproduce lab results on actual people in clinical trials, so if you're in the first round of an experimental drug 9 out of 10 times it won't work. That sucks, but our understanding of the body and cancer isn't better so we have no choice but to experiment in practice. It says nothing about how reproducible the clinical results are, but before it's through all the rounds and approved for general use I would think we know with 99%+ certainty they will work. Until then, well that's why we call them experimental.
Do we really want Google or Mozilla, or any other browser determining what content we can see or not see in a browser? I understand the security problems with Flash and I am not a fan of Flash, but everybody gets upset if an ISP blocks content, so why is it okay for a browser to do so? What next, will they block? This seems like an awfully big slippery slope and people are just accepting it.
Not really the same situation, I think a browser is perfectly entitled to say what third party plug-in/add-on/extension APIs it will allow, how they'll run and so on. Just like Firefox just decided to change their extension API, now whether it's a good idea is a different story but they're certainly entitled to do so. Would you be opposed to IE dropping support for ActiveX plug-ins too? I'm here assuming that there's some technical difference in flash between ads and video players, not that Google is actually sitting there saying that's an ad and that is not.
Curious: what prompted Max Rossett to spend hours solving programming puzzles before being even given the opportunity to submit contact information for a job consideration?
This may be news to you, but many people will take on a challenge just because it's a challenge like climbing a mountain only to climb back down. Particularly if you think it would impress someone you'd like to impress. And unless you think Google has an odd way of providing entertainment, it should be pretty obvious they want to find someone who can solve those puzzles. If a company is looking for your competence, well then add 2+2 (no, that won't qualify you for a position at Google) about what might come next. And if not a job offer, then probably some kind of PR stunt price. Whatever it is, would it be rational to think at the end of it all they're going to say "Hope you enjoyed the challenge, have a nice day!" and nothing more?
what does binning for low power usage mean, exactly?
Some chips perform well with low drive current, think about it like being able to read reasonably well in poor lighting.
and that translates somehow into "luxury product"
If lower power usage or being smaller/lighter/quieter is more important than raw performance, it might be. All depends on what you value.
Anyway, the really big question is the headline which you didn't mention anymore, not what this card is but what it isn't. I expected the Nano to be half the Fury at half the price competing in the $2-300 market, instead it looks like the R300 series is here to stay a while - on the shelves, I think.nVidia must be laughing so hard now, realizing there's nothing new to compete in the GTX960/970 territory for a while.
Bringing this back on topic: Disappointed with new tech? Welcome to the club. Hardware has become so stagnant in the last 5 years. 28nm. *yawn*. Yet-another-Megaherz or "core"./sarcasm Yay. (...) When is the next (tech) revolution going to happen?
Actually I feel we've had several since the PC revolution. There was the network revolution with the Internet. The mobile revolution that lets you use it anywhere, any time. And with fiber rolling out I'd say we're in the middle of a bandwidth revolution. Even if you extrapolate like crazy going from 8GB to 16GB RAM isn't going to feel like going from 8MB to 16MB. The changes were huge because there was so much you couldn't do with 8MB, there's not so much you can't do with 8GB. Welcome back to the real world, where cars and planes don't go twice as fast with double the capacity and mileage three years later. Has it actually bugged you that you don't have terahertz processors or terabytes of RAM or petabytes of storage lately? I can't really say that I have, I often wish shit would work better but it's not because they lack hardware resources. There was a time when the really hardware wasn't capable even if you wrote optimized assembler, today it's 99.99% the software that's not capable.
The TV show might in some ways be considered censored for good taste!
Perhaps in terms of content, but not in terms of being explicit and graphic. Whenever others have showed violence or sexual assault by or on young people usually it's far more implied or indirectly shown. They show the burned carcass that's supposed to be Bran and Rickon, Geoffrey very painfully dying of poison, Arya cutting a man's throat, Sansa getting raped, princess Shireen burned at the stake, Olly stabbing John Snow and the list just goes on. I almost expected them to film Meryn Trant having his way with the young girl in the brothel, but I guess even they decided that would be over the top. Yes, the books are cruel but they could have shown it far more subtly if they wanted to. I'm sure they're aware of all the headlines they get though and being so mainstream and established they can push it without getting much social stigma attached. At least going by their ratings they're still in the zone where most people want to tune in to whatever fucked up thing happens next rather than turn away in disgust. More people than you think have some morbid curiosity.
Automate the cop. The car can drive by itself, but traffic control at the intersection needs a human?
I don't know any place you'd put a cop instead of a traffic light, but there are quite a few scenarios where a cop needs to ad hoc direct traffic like near the scene of an accident so emergency services get through. No matter what you do you won't get away from it entirely.
As to what lawyer decided to make a real life case out of this
Presumably one not working on contingency. Because as long as they're making up medical fiction and not asking him to make up legal fiction, I'd be willing to bill these crazies until they run out of money.
Well I think we can all agree that blindly accepting what other people tell you as fact shows absolutely zero critical thinking. Questioning it, being able to understand explanations and making logical arguments on their own is a good step. Sure, the next step is being able to detect questionable premises, faulty logic, spurious reasoning and other fallacies but that's a pretty tall order for a six year old. Basically, if you don't know how to do it right you're not going to spot anyone doing it wrong, so I'd say he's on the very right track. Sounds like he's already passed certain adults...
Why not have an option in the middle somewhere. 1 Gbps is way more than I need, but 5 Mbps is on the cusp of being too slow for my tastes. Why not have a $30-$40 a month option for 100 Mbps?
Probably because they're not going to install 100 Mbit ports or send out 100 Mbit cable modems, the fiber line and all the associated overhead with maintenance and repair, billing and support is the same and most people will just finish their downloads faster so their cost structure is almost flat, except for a few massive bandwidth hogs. I would strongly suggest that it's the other way around, those who offer many tiers use it to cripple capacity far beyond reason on the lowest levels to make the higher tiers seem more reasonable, like 30 Mbit / $40, 100 Mbit / $60, 300 Mbit / $80, 1000 Mbit / $100. Would that be better?
Don't forget the $300 + $25/year (wasn't that free?) is subsidized to get a foot in the door, it almost certainly doesn't reflect the actual cost. It's more like the companies throwing credit cards around hoping you'll start using them. Here they're just hoping that eventually people will want to watch high quality Netflix and YouTube becoming $70/month "real" customers. It's not really the bandwidth that costs, even though that's what people base their expectation of price on.
If you work with Windows daily, you're going to hate it. If you work with Mac daily, you're going to hate it. If you work with Linux daily, you're going to hate it.
Because who the fsck cares about an OS when it's working? It's when you have a problem - and they all have them - you notice them. The question is not if it's flowers and sunshine, it's whether you'd really want to switch and I'd say that after working with Linux daily for 20 years you really don't. I'm pretty sure you could have gotten yourself a non-Linux position, then you can complain about the mysterious blob crashing and curse Redmond or Cupertino.
Correction: Happy Birthday GNU/Linux. After all, GNU software makes up 75% of the codebase of any "Linux" distribution. Show some respect.
Actually last year they shipped more than one billion NotGNU/Linux devices, BusyBox means there's many non-GNU embedded devices and if GNU vanished most the gaps left would quickly be covered by LLVM to replace GCC and the BSD userland. And it's not nearly 75% GNU projects, perhaps 75% (L)GPL licensed code but that's not why RMS wanted to call it that.
Nah. Don't underestimate humans' desire to have other humans serving them. We could automate away all waitstaff tomorrow, but people like having some peon come and take their order. Tipping amplifies the power trip further by letting the patron decide the size of the proverbial table scraps thrown to the server.
Unless it would have an impact on cost, capacity, response time, opening hours and whatnot. Line at the counter because that guy costs money? Put up five terminals, always one free and if keeps prices down too that's great. Want to pay your bills at 3AM? Online banking is always open. The downside is that a robot can't really improvise and be service-minded, not that it lacks a pulse.
Until a true AI can be developed automation could only replace manual labor jobs, any job that needs thought involved is going to be out. There is also the problem of troubleshooting and fixing the robots, something I doubt could be automated except for the most routine breakage. (...) This has been a pretty consistent trend, manual labor replaced with white collar high wage jobs (in lower numbers), often the cost savings aren't very high in labor rates, but the savings come from more precise work by the robots. For example, automotive welding now is perfect almost every time.
The trend is towards more and more defective items being replaced, not repaired exactly because repairmen can't keep up with the speed, precision and specialization of mass production, not to mention the logistics of parts and repair tools. Clothes and small electronics are good examples, it's not worth people's time to repair relative to the cost of buying a new one. And more advanced machinery run more and more self-diagnostics, there's less and less babysitting. Even the parts you do replace are more and more entire sub-assemblies. Whatever we do in the future, repair won't employ many.
If a man wants to meet women, he needs to do things that women also do, or to do things that women find interesting. The fewer women in the hobby or interest area the lower his chances.
I'd take another step back and say if you want to meet people in general, pick a social hobby. Despite the club meetings and the "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" moments, the vast majority of the time you'll be fiddling with this model alone and photos and videos won't really do it justice. Not that there's anything wrong with it having a one-man hobby, it's just not the thing for meeting people. Doesn't really matter if it's teamwork or competitive or just a collective experience, in between you'll get to know each other.
The article is not clear if this only for guest use or for general public to use. If it's for general public, I'm not interested in becoming an electric gas station.
Even at full tilt a Wall Connector can provide 58 miles/hour for a single car which would take 4-5 hours for a 90 kWh model, longer if you can't supply 80A(!) or the car doesn't have dual chargers so I don't see it being very useful as a makeshift gas station. It'd occupy your parking spot not to mention I don't see anything about any kind of compensation for electricity so I assume they're giving away the box, for you to offer charging as a service to your guests at a price you set with Tesla staying entirely hands off.
I've been an Airbnb host for over a year now, with over 50 clients and never had anyone ask about electric car charging. Tesla only produces approx. 2000 cars/month. Ford/GM sell way more than this in a day. Until they get their production numbers up and I start getting charging inquires, I can't see this as being a useful upgrade to my property.
You're looking at it from the wrong perspective. Tesla is looking to give Tesla owners an opportunity to rent an AirBnB for the night and start the next morning or every morning with a fully charged car, so the owners don't have to find/wait at superchargers. The owners who install it hopes Tesla owners - despite being few - will use the few houses that do have a charger over all the others that don't. Basically a niche of the supply satisfying a niche of the demand.
I think it's a good move by Tesla, because their range is far beyond the daily commute as long as you return to base. The supercharger network is strategically positioned so it's used for road trips and not daily charging. But if you're staying in a foreign city and don't have any easy access to a charger, having an EV becomes painful. Sure, they could try to get hotels and such to offer it but they're big and slow to move and would need a reservation and billing solution. If they can convince a few AirBnB hosts to add it as an option, they just bought their customers a very nice solution.
Will it pay off? Not sure but if you're in the lower end of the installation costs with $200 and is renting out a whole house - the linked map showed most cost around $500/night it basically takes one Tesla owner on a stop-over staying one night that it'd otherwise be empty to break even. First I'd check the supercharger map and if there's anyone else with a charger nearby, but if there's neither I'd probably be willing to roll the dice.
After digging a bit (I read German) the basis for this foodscare is related to a "birthday train" lawsuit, in which the court found that the design elements could be copyrighted as a work of art despite its functional elements as a toy train, like a sculpture. Basically it gave "functional art" (angewandten Kunst) more of the same protections as "non-functional art" (zweckfreien Kunst). So while you won't get sued for making a hot dog, copying someone's fancy and unique cake design might land you in trouble.
None of this will have any effect on making food pictures on social media, any more than you'll get in trouble for making a photo of a copyrighted statue. It does open up quite a few cans of worms since anything reasonably unique you create might get a quasi-design patent lasting life+70, so it's a IPR minefield for everything from furniture designers to hair dressers, but the photographers don't have much to worry about. Nobody's actually been sued over food photos and it's unlikely anyone will.
Both the 650 Ti and the 950 are built on a 28nm process. Sure, that's not the only parameter that matters but I don't think it's a reasonable upgrade path at all. If you need more performance you should probably go for something bigger, or better yet, wait until 14/16nm becomes a reality for GPUs.
Pre- and post-Maxwell makes a huge difference, competing with 65nm Pentium IV vs 65nm Intel Core or 32nm Westmere vs 32nm Sandy Bridge. For sure there'll always be something better next year but Pascal is probably a year or more away and that's a long time if you want better graphics now.
Don't forget it was a trial that everybody expected to end. I probably got 30 years left to retirement, what would say three or five years slacking on "mincome" do for my career and employment opportunities? You don't see the real effects until you can depend on it to guarantee your income tomorrow, not just today.
Slashdot Mirror
On the bright side it seems CPUs are again fast enough to decode most 1080p video streams without video card assist, so maybe we are not as far as we might otherwise be. I doubt 4k video is going to easily be decoded with today's CPUs, and complex games won't happen.
Actually that's just because people do crazy things in madVR, "normal" UHD decoding can be done in software (source):
In a JCT-VC document NTT DoCoMo showed that their HEVC software decoder could decode 3840x2160 at 60 fps using 3 decoding threads on a 2.7 GHz quad core Ivy Bridge CPU.
And java conventions of long method camel case names are regarded as silly in other languages, descriptive short methods are very possible
user = User.getUserByGuidBecauseImAJavaTwat(gid)
vs
user=User.(guid=gid)
And that makes sense to you? I don't recognize the language, but my guess it's one dot away from creating a user "user=User(guid=gid)". And if guid is a member variable, why are you assigning a value to it? Looks to me like you have some unnamed (...) function, does that imply "find"? Why? Go to your nearest CS school and 9 out of 10 pupils will figure out the purporse on the first function on the first try. You'd be lucky if 2 of 10 managed to guess the second. You're the kind of idiot which means people need 3-6 months of bootup time just to get into the head of the fucker who wrote the code.
I hate writing long variable and function names. I hate reading short variable and function names. And I've been back and forth, but here's my refined opinion: If you can't tell WTF the code is doing at a glance and want to add a micro-comment like "// find user", it's too obtuse. If you're trying to write a whole comment in the name like "getUserThatIsSomethingSomethingForWhateverBeforeThisAfterThat()", call it "getUser()" and write a damn comment. If it's ambigious, it's fine to start small and extend like if you used to have getUser() now you have getUserByGuid() and getUserByName().
As for the get/set prefix, I prefer the simpler user.guid() over user.getGuid() as it's really more a property than a function, you're just abstracting the implementation from the interface. Also you basically don't get any autocomplete before the 4th letter and it's not going to be consistent anyway, for true/false conditions you typically use "isSomething()". In this particularly case for a function I'd much rather call it "findUserByGuid()" though indicating it's a search on a set, not simply returning a value. Likewise if you have a class where you set numbers a and b and calculate the GCD, I'd much rather call the function calculateGcd() than getGcd() to point out that this function does the work. It gets a little ambiguous at times with "returnAddress()" the property vs "returnShipment()" the function where I sometimes reconsider that "getReturnAddress()" would be clearer but in 99% of the cases it's fine.
So Ubuntu got volume, are they making any money? Nobody can tell, since they're a black box private company but Red Hat got 7300 employees, $1.5 billion in revenue and turned a $178 million profit last year so they're making money. That's why Red Hat dropped RHL, it was a money sink with no end and no signs of improvement. Who cares if Ubuntu got 100000 installations making $0? I'd probably use Ubuntu over CentOS for an unsupported server too, but if I wanted support I'd probably go Red Hat. Without knowing how many of the Ubuntu servers have a support contract it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. Unless you think profit is decided by popular vote.
H.264 and JPEG are supposed to output random-looking bytes, by definitions. If you can compress those, something is very wrong.
Well, it seems to be applied per codec not a general compression algorithm like zip. And they probably say mobile-encoded for a reason, simple encoders have to work on low power and in real time, random JPGs from the Internet is probably the same. From what I can gather the algorithm basically take a global scan of the whole media and applies an optimized variable-length transformation making commonly used values shorter at the expense of making less commonly used values longer. Nothing you couldn't do with a proper two-pass encoding in the codec itself, the neat trick is doing it to someone else's already compressed media afterwards in a bit-reversible way. Very nice when you're a third party host, assuming the increase in CPU time is worth it but not so useful for everyone else.
Because you don't get to 'flip' anything without breaking entanglement. You can just measure one electron and be sure that the same measurement will give you the same result in entangled one. It is like having two random number generators with the same seed - they always give the same (random) answer, but it does not allow you to transmit anything.
That's the "local hidden variables" theory, in which both particles are set with some quantum state at entanglement and don't interact later but which we know is false. If we angle the detectors, collapsing the quantum state at one end will cause correlation at the other end that can't be explained by hidden variables. The funny thing is though is that in order to measure the correlation you need both sets of measurements, which you have to transfer from one to the other at classical speeds so you don't get FTL communication. But the change happens FTL, even though you can't determine it until later. Every time you think you understand QM, it just gets weirder.
It's hard to believe psychology studies are more reproducible than cancer studies (11% reproducible): http://www.nature.com/nature/j...
It seems you don't understand what it is you linked to or you're trolling, the key here is preclinical. That is, there's an 11% chance we can reproduce lab results on actual people in clinical trials, so if you're in the first round of an experimental drug 9 out of 10 times it won't work. That sucks, but our understanding of the body and cancer isn't better so we have no choice but to experiment in practice. It says nothing about how reproducible the clinical results are, but before it's through all the rounds and approved for general use I would think we know with 99%+ certainty they will work. Until then, well that's why we call them experimental.
Do we really want Google or Mozilla, or any other browser determining what content we can see or not see in a browser? I understand the security problems with Flash and I am not a fan of Flash, but everybody gets upset if an ISP blocks content, so why is it okay for a browser to do so? What next, will they block? This seems like an awfully big slippery slope and people are just accepting it.
Not really the same situation, I think a browser is perfectly entitled to say what third party plug-in/add-on/extension APIs it will allow, how they'll run and so on. Just like Firefox just decided to change their extension API, now whether it's a good idea is a different story but they're certainly entitled to do so. Would you be opposed to IE dropping support for ActiveX plug-ins too? I'm here assuming that there's some technical difference in flash between ads and video players, not that Google is actually sitting there saying that's an ad and that is not.
Curious: what prompted Max Rossett to spend hours solving programming puzzles before being even given the opportunity to submit contact information for a job consideration?
This may be news to you, but many people will take on a challenge just because it's a challenge like climbing a mountain only to climb back down. Particularly if you think it would impress someone you'd like to impress. And unless you think Google has an odd way of providing entertainment, it should be pretty obvious they want to find someone who can solve those puzzles. If a company is looking for your competence, well then add 2+2 (no, that won't qualify you for a position at Google) about what might come next. And if not a job offer, then probably some kind of PR stunt price. Whatever it is, would it be rational to think at the end of it all they're going to say "Hope you enjoyed the challenge, have a nice day!" and nothing more?
what does binning for low power usage mean, exactly?
Some chips perform well with low drive current, think about it like being able to read reasonably well in poor lighting.
and that translates somehow into "luxury product"
If lower power usage or being smaller/lighter/quieter is more important than raw performance, it might be. All depends on what you value.
Anyway, the really big question is the headline which you didn't mention anymore, not what this card is but what it isn't. I expected the Nano to be half the Fury at half the price competing in the $2-300 market, instead it looks like the R300 series is here to stay a while - on the shelves, I think.nVidia must be laughing so hard now, realizing there's nothing new to compete in the GTX960/970 territory for a while.
Bringing this back on topic: Disappointed with new tech? Welcome to the club. Hardware has become so stagnant in the last 5 years. 28nm. *yawn*. Yet-another-Megaherz or "core". /sarcasm Yay. (...) When is the next (tech) revolution going to happen?
Actually I feel we've had several since the PC revolution. There was the network revolution with the Internet. The mobile revolution that lets you use it anywhere, any time. And with fiber rolling out I'd say we're in the middle of a bandwidth revolution. Even if you extrapolate like crazy going from 8GB to 16GB RAM isn't going to feel like going from 8MB to 16MB. The changes were huge because there was so much you couldn't do with 8MB, there's not so much you can't do with 8GB. Welcome back to the real world, where cars and planes don't go twice as fast with double the capacity and mileage three years later. Has it actually bugged you that you don't have terahertz processors or terabytes of RAM or petabytes of storage lately? I can't really say that I have, I often wish shit would work better but it's not because they lack hardware resources. There was a time when the really hardware wasn't capable even if you wrote optimized assembler, today it's 99.99% the software that's not capable.
The TV show might in some ways be considered censored for good taste!
Perhaps in terms of content, but not in terms of being explicit and graphic. Whenever others have showed violence or sexual assault by or on young people usually it's far more implied or indirectly shown. They show the burned carcass that's supposed to be Bran and Rickon, Geoffrey very painfully dying of poison, Arya cutting a man's throat, Sansa getting raped, princess Shireen burned at the stake, Olly stabbing John Snow and the list just goes on. I almost expected them to film Meryn Trant having his way with the young girl in the brothel, but I guess even they decided that would be over the top. Yes, the books are cruel but they could have shown it far more subtly if they wanted to. I'm sure they're aware of all the headlines they get though and being so mainstream and established they can push it without getting much social stigma attached. At least going by their ratings they're still in the zone where most people want to tune in to whatever fucked up thing happens next rather than turn away in disgust. More people than you think have some morbid curiosity.
Automate the cop. The car can drive by itself, but traffic control at the intersection needs a human?
I don't know any place you'd put a cop instead of a traffic light, but there are quite a few scenarios where a cop needs to ad hoc direct traffic like near the scene of an accident so emergency services get through. No matter what you do you won't get away from it entirely.
As to what lawyer decided to make a real life case out of this
Presumably one not working on contingency. Because as long as they're making up medical fiction and not asking him to make up legal fiction, I'd be willing to bill these crazies until they run out of money.
Well I think we can all agree that blindly accepting what other people tell you as fact shows absolutely zero critical thinking. Questioning it, being able to understand explanations and making logical arguments on their own is a good step. Sure, the next step is being able to detect questionable premises, faulty logic, spurious reasoning and other fallacies but that's a pretty tall order for a six year old. Basically, if you don't know how to do it right you're not going to spot anyone doing it wrong, so I'd say he's on the very right track. Sounds like he's already passed certain adults...
Why not have an option in the middle somewhere. 1 Gbps is way more than I need, but 5 Mbps is on the cusp of being too slow for my tastes. Why not have a $30-$40 a month option for 100 Mbps?
Probably because they're not going to install 100 Mbit ports or send out 100 Mbit cable modems, the fiber line and all the associated overhead with maintenance and repair, billing and support is the same and most people will just finish their downloads faster so their cost structure is almost flat, except for a few massive bandwidth hogs. I would strongly suggest that it's the other way around, those who offer many tiers use it to cripple capacity far beyond reason on the lowest levels to make the higher tiers seem more reasonable, like 30 Mbit / $40, 100 Mbit / $60, 300 Mbit / $80, 1000 Mbit / $100. Would that be better?
Don't forget the $300 + $25/year (wasn't that free?) is subsidized to get a foot in the door, it almost certainly doesn't reflect the actual cost. It's more like the companies throwing credit cards around hoping you'll start using them. Here they're just hoping that eventually people will want to watch high quality Netflix and YouTube becoming $70/month "real" customers. It's not really the bandwidth that costs, even though that's what people base their expectation of price on.
If you work with Windows daily, you're going to hate it.
If you work with Mac daily, you're going to hate it.
If you work with Linux daily, you're going to hate it.
Because who the fsck cares about an OS when it's working? It's when you have a problem - and they all have them - you notice them. The question is not if it's flowers and sunshine, it's whether you'd really want to switch and I'd say that after working with Linux daily for 20 years you really don't. I'm pretty sure you could have gotten yourself a non-Linux position, then you can complain about the mysterious blob crashing and curse Redmond or Cupertino.
Correction: Happy Birthday GNU/Linux. After all, GNU software makes up 75% of the codebase of any "Linux" distribution. Show some respect.
Actually last year they shipped more than one billion NotGNU/Linux devices, BusyBox means there's many non-GNU embedded devices and if GNU vanished most the gaps left would quickly be covered by LLVM to replace GCC and the BSD userland. And it's not nearly 75% GNU projects, perhaps 75% (L)GPL licensed code but that's not why RMS wanted to call it that.
Nah. Don't underestimate humans' desire to have other humans serving them. We could automate away all waitstaff tomorrow, but people like having some peon come and take their order. Tipping amplifies the power trip further by letting the patron decide the size of the proverbial table scraps thrown to the server.
Unless it would have an impact on cost, capacity, response time, opening hours and whatnot. Line at the counter because that guy costs money? Put up five terminals, always one free and if keeps prices down too that's great. Want to pay your bills at 3AM? Online banking is always open. The downside is that a robot can't really improvise and be service-minded, not that it lacks a pulse.
Until a true AI can be developed automation could only replace manual labor jobs, any job that needs thought involved is going to be out. There is also the problem of troubleshooting and fixing the robots, something I doubt could be automated except for the most routine breakage.
(...)
This has been a pretty consistent trend, manual labor replaced with white collar high wage jobs (in lower numbers), often the cost savings aren't very high in labor rates, but the savings come from more precise work by the robots. For example, automotive welding now is perfect almost every time.
The trend is towards more and more defective items being replaced, not repaired exactly because repairmen can't keep up with the speed, precision and specialization of mass production, not to mention the logistics of parts and repair tools. Clothes and small electronics are good examples, it's not worth people's time to repair relative to the cost of buying a new one. And more advanced machinery run more and more self-diagnostics, there's less and less babysitting. Even the parts you do replace are more and more entire sub-assemblies. Whatever we do in the future, repair won't employ many.
If a man wants to meet women, he needs to do things that women also do, or to do things that women find interesting. The fewer women in the hobby or interest area the lower his chances.
I'd take another step back and say if you want to meet people in general, pick a social hobby. Despite the club meetings and the "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" moments, the vast majority of the time you'll be fiddling with this model alone and photos and videos won't really do it justice. Not that there's anything wrong with it having a one-man hobby, it's just not the thing for meeting people. Doesn't really matter if it's teamwork or competitive or just a collective experience, in between you'll get to know each other.
The article is not clear if this only for guest use or for general public to use. If it's for general public, I'm not interested in becoming an electric gas station.
Even at full tilt a Wall Connector can provide 58 miles/hour for a single car which would take 4-5 hours for a 90 kWh model, longer if you can't supply 80A(!) or the car doesn't have dual chargers so I don't see it being very useful as a makeshift gas station. It'd occupy your parking spot not to mention I don't see anything about any kind of compensation for electricity so I assume they're giving away the box, for you to offer charging as a service to your guests at a price you set with Tesla staying entirely hands off.
I've been an Airbnb host for over a year now, with over 50 clients and never had anyone ask about electric car charging. Tesla only produces approx. 2000 cars/month. Ford/GM sell way more than this in a day. Until they get their production numbers up and I start getting charging inquires, I can't see this as being a useful upgrade to my property.
You're looking at it from the wrong perspective. Tesla is looking to give Tesla owners an opportunity to rent an AirBnB for the night and start the next morning or every morning with a fully charged car, so the owners don't have to find/wait at superchargers. The owners who install it hopes Tesla owners - despite being few - will use the few houses that do have a charger over all the others that don't. Basically a niche of the supply satisfying a niche of the demand.
I think it's a good move by Tesla, because their range is far beyond the daily commute as long as you return to base. The supercharger network is strategically positioned so it's used for road trips and not daily charging. But if you're staying in a foreign city and don't have any easy access to a charger, having an EV becomes painful. Sure, they could try to get hotels and such to offer it but they're big and slow to move and would need a reservation and billing solution. If they can convince a few AirBnB hosts to add it as an option, they just bought their customers a very nice solution.
Will it pay off? Not sure but if you're in the lower end of the installation costs with $200 and is renting out a whole house - the linked map showed most cost around $500/night it basically takes one Tesla owner on a stop-over staying one night that it'd otherwise be empty to break even. First I'd check the supercharger map and if there's anyone else with a charger nearby, but if there's neither I'd probably be willing to roll the dice.
After digging a bit (I read German) the basis for this foodscare is related to a "birthday train" lawsuit, in which the court found that the design elements could be copyrighted as a work of art despite its functional elements as a toy train, like a sculpture. Basically it gave "functional art" (angewandten Kunst) more of the same protections as "non-functional art" (zweckfreien Kunst). So while you won't get sued for making a hot dog, copying someone's fancy and unique cake design might land you in trouble.
None of this will have any effect on making food pictures on social media, any more than you'll get in trouble for making a photo of a copyrighted statue. It does open up quite a few cans of worms since anything reasonably unique you create might get a quasi-design patent lasting life+70, so it's a IPR minefield for everything from furniture designers to hair dressers, but the photographers don't have much to worry about. Nobody's actually been sued over food photos and it's unlikely anyone will.
Both the 650 Ti and the 950 are built on a 28nm process. Sure, that's not the only parameter that matters but I don't think it's a reasonable upgrade path at all. If you need more performance you should probably go for something bigger, or better yet, wait until 14/16nm becomes a reality for GPUs.
Pre- and post-Maxwell makes a huge difference, competing with 65nm Pentium IV vs 65nm Intel Core or 32nm Westmere vs 32nm Sandy Bridge. For sure there'll always be something better next year but Pascal is probably a year or more away and that's a long time if you want better graphics now.
Don't forget it was a trial that everybody expected to end. I probably got 30 years left to retirement, what would say three or five years slacking on "mincome" do for my career and employment opportunities? You don't see the real effects until you can depend on it to guarantee your income tomorrow, not just today.
I think the number on my card is 970. This is 950. Are smaller numbers better than bigger numbers?
For your wallet, in general yes. Also for your power bill.
Or is this an older card that they've kept in a box for a year before revealing to the world?
It's basically the same technology as the 970, on a chip half the size.
How would this improve my life?
Judging by the inaneness of your post, the only way is up.