not artificial if you get money for it, with which to buy things. doesn't matter how pointless you might think a job is, only how much the person paying your believes it is.
Well there's a fundamental difference to a private company hiring you because they think you're doing a useful job and a public company hiring you to do busywork to pretend like you're not unemployed.
There's no reason a computer couldn't be trained on the many scores that Goldsmith wrote before he passed away, and then use AI to produce something that has unique elements but uses the same style as he did.
Unfortunately no, the computer doesn't understand what does and doesn't work together. Some people like salty popcorn and some sweet, but very few like half-salty, half-sweet popcorn or pepper popcorn. At best you'd get some kind of clustering where you get classic, middle-of-the-road recipes like lamb with rosemary and thyme. At the core of most the recent advances is self-learning, but it depends on some kind of evaluation of the final result. Like are you winning at Go, beating people at poker, reaching a higher score, completing a lap faster... if the computer can't tell if the music it produced is good or not it's just dumb processing. Unless it's got some amazing model to say what "sounds good" to a human, which would be a bigger thing than the algorithm.
According to the article, there are 37 exceptions out of 230 languages. Tea, with its two principal words, is actually above the average compared to a typical word for something that was unknown to the world at large until early modern times.
Well, tea was considerably earlier. Quoting a few Wiki snippets: "As prices continued to drop, tea became increasingly popular, and by 1750 had become the British national drink." vs "Prices of aluminium dropped, and aluminium had become widely used in jewelry, many everyday items, eyeglass frames, and optical instruments by the early 1890s." so it's early 18th century vs late 19th century. Late 19th century would be around the time you started having rapid long-distance communication via telegraph and telephone. Literacy, letters and newspapers were far more widespread so it'd be much more useful to have a common, global term than in centuries past. Post-radio and post-Internet even more so, unless you absolutely want your own word for cultural identity or language purity.
Chinese government only has access to those servers now, and you can opt-out like you always could of iCloud services - the iPhone is not tied to it in any way other than user convenience.
For now..... until the Chinese government starts looking into the people who have an iPhone and don't use iCloud and tie that or active use into the loyalty score somehow. As far as I know you can only turn it off, you can't fake using it. That's really the end game here, make most people give up their privacy without anything seemingly bad happening so the remainder stand out in a crowd. I mean 99% of what goes on at Facebook is meaningless drivel, the question is who's not on Facebook and what's not being posted to Facebook.
Down side is that for those who already feel like voting is like busy homework, this will add to the load.
If they think picking red or blue every few years is too much effort, maybe they're better off staying home. And honestly that could actually bring people out to vote primarily on a particular issue they care about rather than vote for Hillary vs Trump. Because I can see how neither would be particularly appealing....
What if a gorilla walks across the road in front of you?
You know, I've never been in that situation. Probably never will, unless I go driving in Africa or one escapes from a zoo somewhere. I kinda assume that I'd hit the brakes like if it was a elk or bear or bison or elephant or giraffe or gazelle or any other large animal on the road ahead of me, more on instinct than anything else. That's roughly what I do with cattle and sheep, anyway. Which is why I'm not really all that concerned, because the situation and response is so generic and pretty much universal.
If there is a concern it's when the car should do some kind of action that's against the norm, but contextually right. Like say there's a steep hill ahead of me, down the hill comes a big truck at high speed blinking the lights and sounding the horn. If you stand still you get flattened by 50 tons of truck ramming/crushing you. I'd violate pretty much any traffic law, go off-road or even cause a minor accident to dodge a fatal one. I don't see a computer going to those extremes, even if it'll prevent most "mundane" accidents.
Wow! It's like somehow I was in the immediate vicinity of a responsible adult at all times and my parents knew my safety was ok. Mind-blowing isn't it?
You must have been a dull kid. Me and my buddies, we were on our own a lot. Not neglect-like a lot, but shooting hoops at the local basketball court. Or going up to the nearby lake. Or collecting list golf balls at the local golf court and selling them back to golfers. Or walking my buddy's dogs. Or playing in the woods. We had a wrist watch and a time to be back. And we were back on time, because otherwise they'd really worry. And that was probably more control than my grandparents had over their kids. If your metric is safety and control, there's no doubt my parents had less. If there was a genuine emergency we didn't have a cell phone, not to call mum and dad, not to call 911, nothing. You could of course imagine all sorts of terrible things happening to us, but none of them did.
What it did learn us was independence and responsibility. Of course the governing theory today is that you should fake it and secretly know where they are and what they're doing anyway while pretending not to. To me it seems like a scary proposition, because once you're caught doing it you've violated the trust you pretended to give and said I don't really trust you anyway. I know this happened with my mom and some money that disappeared from my wallet, I knew where it went because I repaid a friend for something, candy or whatever but clearly she didn't know that. She clearly knew I had less money today than yesterday though. And I was like WTF mom you're rifling through my pockets now? Maybe with age I can see that as an attempt at parenting but back then I didn't see it as anything but betrayal.
So what do you do today if your car has some sort of mechanical failure? Sensors and processing is for the most part passive units, they'll probably have quite high durability and uptime. With some redundancy and error correction they'll probably not be significantly worse off than human-driven cars. A bigger concern is that the sensors are fine, but the AI doesn't understand where to go. But I imagine there'll be some form of remote driving capability built in to resolve that, assuming you're in good range of a cell network.
Not just the GPU.... SSD prices have been flat for like ~2 years. RAM prices are actually way up. I think for the first time in history you don't get a significantly better PC by waiting. It's not like last year's Ferrari is this year's BMW and next year's Kia anymore. I have a GTX 1080 TI, bought at roughly MSRP at launch because apparently it wasn't a very good mining card and for some reason the most expensive card I've ever bought is the one to stay the best in value. I'm just really sad that I didn't take the opportunity a while ago and bought 4x16GB RAM. Right now I see some of the value RAM has literally tripled in price. The CPU market is a little better but only because Ryzen has been pretty disruptive. But even there the poewr/watt, power/$ don't change as much as they used to. Basically it's becoming a normal market where the car from 10 years ago is roughly as fast in practice as the one you buy today.
"Thank you" doesn't cost you a dime, there is absolutely no drawback at all whatsoever to say "thank you". I fail to see the problem.
Who said it was? In any case these things are highly temporary, I'm pretty sure many start with "Siri, please remind me to buy milk tomorrow" but drop it after a little while. You might have said "Thank you" and "Have a nice day" to the bank teller but nobody talks to the ATM. Neither will they talk to the pizza bot after a little adjustment. People just feel they should say something, same way these people feel it should respond. In fact, hearing the exact same impersonal "You're welcome" recording 2-3 times in a row would probably kill it as fast as not saying anything at all.
Landing on Mars is more challenging than on the moon. High gravity and a thin atmosphere means you need a heat shield to deorbit, but you still can't ltouch down using parachutes.
Technically it's more challenging, but the result is considerably cheaper in terms of delta-v. Compared to a hypothetical Mars without atmosphere the heat shield and parachutes pay off well. Though parachutes are most viable for small payloads anyway, for large payloads you pretty much have to land propulsively. Yes, you can airdrop even a light tank here on Earth but not coming in hot and fast from space. Fortunately we have this guy with some experience in that area, landing rockets in a much denser atmosphere than Mars... too bad he's not working a Mars mission or anything like that.
Former, withdrawn charges shouldn't be grounds for arrest.
I think you're wrong, secondary crimes related to your arrest and incarceration should not automatically be expunged simply because the arrest or conviction was in error, invalid or dropped. Resisting arrest, causing a car chase, jail break, contempt of court, parole violation, skipping bail... attempting to evade the justice system should be a crime, even if you are innocent. If you try to escape jail and kill a prison guard it's still murder even if the rape case you originally served time for is later cleared by DNA evidence, it doesn't magically turn into a kidnapping where killing the kidnappers to escape is okay. It's just not how it works or how it should work.
Learning a third language is easier when you know a second language. Hungarian kids somehow learn Esperanto and then English like 40% faster if they learn English only to the same eventual English fluency. Go figure.
Well Hungarian is not part of the Indo-European language family meaning English is as foreign to them as Chinese or Japanese. Esperanto is a good mix of Germanic, Romance and Slavic but all firmly rooted in the Indo-European tree. And to learn a second language you need to learn about and be able to map between different language constructs. You might say you go from one to two languages but you go from zero to one translations and then it's easier to add more. So easier yeah, is it worth the detour if the goal is to learn English? Probably not. Same way it's easier to pick up an OOP-based Programming language if you know another, but it's not worth learning C# if the goal is to learn Java or Swift.
Except after rebooting, panic lock, or 48 hours the PIN is required to unlock the phone first. If you think someone is gonna take your phone for bad purposes, shut it down or panic lock it quick. Then the facial/fingerprint recognition is useless.
Or just disable the damn thing if you believe there's any reason the police would want to go on a fishing expedition using your phone. You don't have to use it...
The Villages referred to in this article is in Florida. It says so right in the summary. The rest of your comment is correct. The Villages is not populated by poor retirees.
Apparently they have many different locations called "The Villages", even in the summary they mention "the smaller San Jose Development".
Most senior citizens donâ(TM)t have copious amounts of spare cash - so this first really needs to filter down to the low end of the automotive market.
But you don't need "most", you need a market that has moderate wealth and who'd desperately like to get back to the freedom of having a car. I think my parents would be a good case, they lost their driver's licenses involuntarily - okay my mom gave hers up, but only because it was obvious she wasn't fit to drive anymore - and they have a down paid house and comfortable economy. They could take taxis and occasionally they do but it's to them different, it's like not their car, driven by a stranger and for some things like going to their cabin it feels awkwardly expensive even though that's more psychological. I mean let's say they'd probably have a $30k car each if they could drive, together plus extra "I want it" factor... I think they'd pay $100k for a self-driving car.
Not that this sounds like anything like that, it's a slow-moving ride with a safety driver meaning it's basically just testing of the kind Google has been doing for many years. This seems to be more of a novelty, but I guess they're hoping to be bought by someone trying to jump on the SDC bandwagon. I'd be very surprised if this is the path to market dominance. But they, the more the merrier I just wish they'd get there... they've barely started to put the safety driver in the back seat, much less kick him out entirely.
It's more like you took over a franchise restaurant but it still has the same name and the same product it's just "under new management". For many people it's still "the place that was full of rat turds", to be honest I don't quite understand the value of tarnished brands but it seems the whole marketing world disagrees with my valuation so maybe they're on to something. I'd probably say okay let's take the system, users, code and all that but let's make a brand do-over, this is not SourceForge anymore it's a new service run by different people and we'll treat you better. I mean kudos for wanting to "restore" the SourceForge name to honor but I'm not sure it was worth saving. But hey it's your money I'm just playing armchair quarterback here.
Or, maybe it's the 10 years of advancing robotics and automation technology that has lowered the pricepoint to one that is acceptable. A decade is a long stretch for tech, and the price per performance is steadily dropping.
Which is probably why this is a red herring to stop workers from demanding higher wages rather the robots being ready. I expect the time between a robot is a $20/hr equivalent boondoggle because of all the customer frustration / stoppages / maintenance / babysitting / quality assurance etc. and a $5/hr burger making monster is actually going to be quite short. They want to get to the latter no matter if the workers are paid $7.25 or $10 or $11 or $15 bucks an hour. But if you can keep workers from charging more because they think it'll save them from the robots...
And in a free market, exactly what is supposed to happen when the price of food is higher than one's salary?
If there really was people starving to death there'd be a famine declared and the UN, Red Cross etc. would bring emergency aid. But I guess that was mostly hyperbole?
Allowing a random coffee shop to be your ISP is never going to be high security. But I think "Hey wait, why are there two CoffeeShop SSIDs?" is probably going to be an improvement. That could actually be a router feature, like if it detects another access point trying to send with the same SSID it'd send the manager some kind of alert. I think you'd pretty soon discover who's doing it...
Having read it, the only difference I can see is that my summary of it is shorter and more direct.
Your summary: Google should avoid hiring women because they may be less apt at X. His argument: Due to biological differences Google won't find equally many women to do X.
Let me try to make the argument even blunter, imagine you want employees that are over six feet tall for some reason. There are obviously women taller than that and men shorter than that, but you will find the pool is highly skewed against men. What he's saying is that great, you can hire every woman over six feet tall you can find, but you can't expect them to be half the employees because they're not half the workforce and everybody wants those that tick the diversity boxes.
The only way you can force an artificial balance in an unbalanced pool is to pay them more so all the tall women come work for you while everyone else is skewed even more or lower demands so that women actually don't have to be so tall as men. Either way they get special treatment for their diversity, not their actual work output. And that this is unfair both to the women who did pass the same qualifications as everyone else and the men who got bumped down the list.
Of course he wasn't talking about something as unalterable as height, he was talking about qualified tech workers. And that if Google wants more women in tech, they should spend their money on bringing up more qualified female candidates not make special rules for females. And his theory was that you still wouldn't get equal representation because men and women think differently and have different interests and values and that Google shouldn't begin with the answer being 50:50 and construe that everything that's not must be the result of gender discrimination of some form.
Of course this offended a bunch of SJW activists that think sex is a social construct and that boys would play with dolls and wear pink tutus while girls would play with cars and toy soldiers if nobody boxed them into gender roles. There's no doubt that in many companies and workplaces there has been a lot of resistance and bigotry against those that go against traditional gender roles and I hope we'll get past that as individuals. But seemingly no matter how far equality goes there still seem to be rather large statistical differences in the career paths we choose.
but most people figure out after filming a ski run or two that they aren't Shane McConkey (RIP) and won't be filming much of interest. Then, the gopro goes in the drawer, never to be used again.
Uhm, have you ever looked at a normal person's social media feed? Objectively it's full of everyday people doing everyday things. Lots of people have an action camera and make pretty mundane clips to say "Hey, I'm skiing in the Alps" not "Watch me do a triple backflip" using it more or less like a dash cam. Their problem is that the market is pretty saturated and there's very little reason to upgrade your camera, it's about form factor, robustness, weather sealing and mounting accessories. It's more about having a camera running when something cool/unexpected happens than than the actual camera quality. And if you don't need it anymore there's always someone willing to buy it second hand, they just don't exit the market very often.
Fair enough. But then the people who get cheap CPUs are selling them in enormous volumes. All that's happening is that if you commit to buying 10,000 CPUs you pay a lot less than someone who only wants to buy one. Also soldered CPUs tend to be cheaper than socketed ones.
All good points, but I think you're far more dependent on the whole ecosystem to get at that profit. Not just the things AMD controls but third party chips, OS support, put in a premium model with good screen, design, keyboard, ergonomics and so on. They're quite typecast as the "value" brand and I think OEMs would have to work pretty hard to make it sell. Whereas with desktop and server components it's a lot easier to sell on benchmarks, you deliver the FPS? It's a good gaming card. Stick it in the box of your choice, use the monitor and accessories you want.
It's also the part of the market most threatened by a disruptive change like Apple making an ARM-based Mac, success of ARM-based Win10 laptops or ARM-based Chromebook or just the evolution of smartphone/tablet/docking solutions to reduce future demand. I think AMD can make a lot more money being the alternative to Intel/nVidia than getting into that crossfire. They kinda already did when they got out of the "big CPU" game in 2012 and continued with their APUs, it was not a success. And they kinda need to keep up with graphics in order to remain the preferred console partner.
Don't knock low power mobile. A lot more people buy laptops with integrated graphics than a typical gaming rig. And Intel are making pretty good money in that market - look at the prices on these chips. It's $300 to $500 for an i7.
I wouldn't trust Intel's list prices on BGA processors because nobody knows what they actually sell for. Maybe that's the price for start-ups that want to buy a tray but I think Lenovo, HP and Dell pay far less the same way list price and OEM price for Windows is very different. I have seen laptop models for sale where the CPU would be a ridiculous share of the total if those prices were actually true.
Slashdot Mirror
because they suck at their jobs worse than a porn star on a Bang bros set!
In other words they suck worse than a professional expert on sucking? That wasn't a very successful insult... suck more perhaps.
not artificial if you get money for it, with which to buy things. doesn't matter how pointless you might think a job is, only how much the person paying your believes it is.
Well there's a fundamental difference to a private company hiring you because they think you're doing a useful job and a public company hiring you to do busywork to pretend like you're not unemployed.
There's no reason a computer couldn't be trained on the many scores that Goldsmith wrote before he passed away, and then use AI to produce something that has unique elements but uses the same style as he did.
Unfortunately no, the computer doesn't understand what does and doesn't work together. Some people like salty popcorn and some sweet, but very few like half-salty, half-sweet popcorn or pepper popcorn. At best you'd get some kind of clustering where you get classic, middle-of-the-road recipes like lamb with rosemary and thyme. At the core of most the recent advances is self-learning, but it depends on some kind of evaluation of the final result. Like are you winning at Go, beating people at poker, reaching a higher score, completing a lap faster... if the computer can't tell if the music it produced is good or not it's just dumb processing. Unless it's got some amazing model to say what "sounds good" to a human, which would be a bigger thing than the algorithm.
According to the article, there are 37 exceptions out of 230 languages. Tea, with its two principal words, is actually above the average compared to a typical word for something that was unknown to the world at large until early modern times.
Well, tea was considerably earlier. Quoting a few Wiki snippets: "As prices continued to drop, tea became increasingly popular, and by 1750 had become the British national drink." vs "Prices of aluminium dropped, and aluminium had become widely used in jewelry, many everyday items, eyeglass frames, and optical instruments by the early 1890s." so it's early 18th century vs late 19th century. Late 19th century would be around the time you started having rapid long-distance communication via telegraph and telephone. Literacy, letters and newspapers were far more widespread so it'd be much more useful to have a common, global term than in centuries past. Post-radio and post-Internet even more so, unless you absolutely want your own word for cultural identity or language purity.
Chinese government only has access to those servers now, and you can opt-out like you always could of iCloud services - the iPhone is not tied to it in any way other than user convenience.
For now..... until the Chinese government starts looking into the people who have an iPhone and don't use iCloud and tie that or active use into the loyalty score somehow. As far as I know you can only turn it off, you can't fake using it. That's really the end game here, make most people give up their privacy without anything seemingly bad happening so the remainder stand out in a crowd. I mean 99% of what goes on at Facebook is meaningless drivel, the question is who's not on Facebook and what's not being posted to Facebook.
Down side is that for those who already feel like voting is like busy homework, this will add to the load.
If they think picking red or blue every few years is too much effort, maybe they're better off staying home. And honestly that could actually bring people out to vote primarily on a particular issue they care about rather than vote for Hillary vs Trump. Because I can see how neither would be particularly appealing....
What if a gorilla walks across the road in front of you?
You know, I've never been in that situation. Probably never will, unless I go driving in Africa or one escapes from a zoo somewhere. I kinda assume that I'd hit the brakes like if it was a elk or bear or bison or elephant or giraffe or gazelle or any other large animal on the road ahead of me, more on instinct than anything else. That's roughly what I do with cattle and sheep, anyway. Which is why I'm not really all that concerned, because the situation and response is so generic and pretty much universal.
If there is a concern it's when the car should do some kind of action that's against the norm, but contextually right. Like say there's a steep hill ahead of me, down the hill comes a big truck at high speed blinking the lights and sounding the horn. If you stand still you get flattened by 50 tons of truck ramming/crushing you. I'd violate pretty much any traffic law, go off-road or even cause a minor accident to dodge a fatal one. I don't see a computer going to those extremes, even if it'll prevent most "mundane" accidents.
Wow! It's like somehow I was in the immediate vicinity of a responsible adult at all times and my parents knew my safety was ok. Mind-blowing isn't it?
You must have been a dull kid. Me and my buddies, we were on our own a lot. Not neglect-like a lot, but shooting hoops at the local basketball court. Or going up to the nearby lake. Or collecting list golf balls at the local golf court and selling them back to golfers. Or walking my buddy's dogs. Or playing in the woods. We had a wrist watch and a time to be back. And we were back on time, because otherwise they'd really worry. And that was probably more control than my grandparents had over their kids. If your metric is safety and control, there's no doubt my parents had less. If there was a genuine emergency we didn't have a cell phone, not to call mum and dad, not to call 911, nothing. You could of course imagine all sorts of terrible things happening to us, but none of them did.
What it did learn us was independence and responsibility. Of course the governing theory today is that you should fake it and secretly know where they are and what they're doing anyway while pretending not to. To me it seems like a scary proposition, because once you're caught doing it you've violated the trust you pretended to give and said I don't really trust you anyway. I know this happened with my mom and some money that disappeared from my wallet, I knew where it went because I repaid a friend for something, candy or whatever but clearly she didn't know that. She clearly knew I had less money today than yesterday though. And I was like WTF mom you're rifling through my pockets now? Maybe with age I can see that as an attempt at parenting but back then I didn't see it as anything but betrayal.
... Sit in big city rush hour traffic for hours?
So what do you do today if your car has some sort of mechanical failure? Sensors and processing is for the most part passive units, they'll probably have quite high durability and uptime. With some redundancy and error correction they'll probably not be significantly worse off than human-driven cars. A bigger concern is that the sensors are fine, but the AI doesn't understand where to go. But I imagine there'll be some form of remote driving capability built in to resolve that, assuming you're in good range of a cell network.
Not just the GPU.... SSD prices have been flat for like ~2 years. RAM prices are actually way up. I think for the first time in history you don't get a significantly better PC by waiting. It's not like last year's Ferrari is this year's BMW and next year's Kia anymore. I have a GTX 1080 TI, bought at roughly MSRP at launch because apparently it wasn't a very good mining card and for some reason the most expensive card I've ever bought is the one to stay the best in value. I'm just really sad that I didn't take the opportunity a while ago and bought 4x16GB RAM. Right now I see some of the value RAM has literally tripled in price. The CPU market is a little better but only because Ryzen has been pretty disruptive. But even there the poewr/watt, power/$ don't change as much as they used to. Basically it's becoming a normal market where the car from 10 years ago is roughly as fast in practice as the one you buy today.
"Thank you" doesn't cost you a dime, there is absolutely no drawback at all whatsoever to say "thank you". I fail to see the problem.
Who said it was? In any case these things are highly temporary, I'm pretty sure many start with "Siri, please remind me to buy milk tomorrow" but drop it after a little while. You might have said "Thank you" and "Have a nice day" to the bank teller but nobody talks to the ATM. Neither will they talk to the pizza bot after a little adjustment. People just feel they should say something, same way these people feel it should respond. In fact, hearing the exact same impersonal "You're welcome" recording 2-3 times in a row would probably kill it as fast as not saying anything at all.
Landing on Mars is more challenging than on the moon. High gravity and a thin atmosphere means you need a heat shield to deorbit, but you still can't ltouch down using parachutes.
Technically it's more challenging, but the result is considerably cheaper in terms of delta-v. Compared to a hypothetical Mars without atmosphere the heat shield and parachutes pay off well. Though parachutes are most viable for small payloads anyway, for large payloads you pretty much have to land propulsively. Yes, you can airdrop even a light tank here on Earth but not coming in hot and fast from space. Fortunately we have this guy with some experience in that area, landing rockets in a much denser atmosphere than Mars... too bad he's not working a Mars mission or anything like that.
Former, withdrawn charges shouldn't be grounds for arrest.
I think you're wrong, secondary crimes related to your arrest and incarceration should not automatically be expunged simply because the arrest or conviction was in error, invalid or dropped. Resisting arrest, causing a car chase, jail break, contempt of court, parole violation, skipping bail... attempting to evade the justice system should be a crime, even if you are innocent. If you try to escape jail and kill a prison guard it's still murder even if the rape case you originally served time for is later cleared by DNA evidence, it doesn't magically turn into a kidnapping where killing the kidnappers to escape is okay. It's just not how it works or how it should work.
Learning a third language is easier when you know a second language. Hungarian kids somehow learn Esperanto and then English like 40% faster if they learn English only to the same eventual English fluency. Go figure.
Well Hungarian is not part of the Indo-European language family meaning English is as foreign to them as Chinese or Japanese. Esperanto is a good mix of Germanic, Romance and Slavic but all firmly rooted in the Indo-European tree. And to learn a second language you need to learn about and be able to map between different language constructs. You might say you go from one to two languages but you go from zero to one translations and then it's easier to add more. So easier yeah, is it worth the detour if the goal is to learn English? Probably not. Same way it's easier to pick up an OOP-based Programming language if you know another, but it's not worth learning C# if the goal is to learn Java or Swift.
Except after rebooting, panic lock, or 48 hours the PIN is required to unlock the phone first. If you think someone is gonna take your phone for bad purposes, shut it down or panic lock it quick. Then the facial/fingerprint recognition is useless.
Or just disable the damn thing if you believe there's any reason the police would want to go on a fishing expedition using your phone. You don't have to use it...
The Villages referred to in this article is in Florida. It says so right in the summary. The rest of your comment is correct. The Villages is not populated by poor retirees.
Apparently they have many different locations called "The Villages", even in the summary they mention "the smaller San Jose Development".
Most senior citizens donâ(TM)t have copious amounts of spare cash - so this first really needs to filter down to the low end of the automotive market.
But you don't need "most", you need a market that has moderate wealth and who'd desperately like to get back to the freedom of having a car. I think my parents would be a good case, they lost their driver's licenses involuntarily - okay my mom gave hers up, but only because it was obvious she wasn't fit to drive anymore - and they have a down paid house and comfortable economy. They could take taxis and occasionally they do but it's to them different, it's like not their car, driven by a stranger and for some things like going to their cabin it feels awkwardly expensive even though that's more psychological. I mean let's say they'd probably have a $30k car each if they could drive, together plus extra "I want it" factor... I think they'd pay $100k for a self-driving car.
Not that this sounds like anything like that, it's a slow-moving ride with a safety driver meaning it's basically just testing of the kind Google has been doing for many years. This seems to be more of a novelty, but I guess they're hoping to be bought by someone trying to jump on the SDC bandwagon. I'd be very surprised if this is the path to market dominance. But they, the more the merrier I just wish they'd get there... they've barely started to put the safety driver in the back seat, much less kick him out entirely.
It's more like you took over a franchise restaurant but it still has the same name and the same product it's just "under new management". For many people it's still "the place that was full of rat turds", to be honest I don't quite understand the value of tarnished brands but it seems the whole marketing world disagrees with my valuation so maybe they're on to something. I'd probably say okay let's take the system, users, code and all that but let's make a brand do-over, this is not SourceForge anymore it's a new service run by different people and we'll treat you better. I mean kudos for wanting to "restore" the SourceForge name to honor but I'm not sure it was worth saving. But hey it's your money I'm just playing armchair quarterback here.
Or, maybe it's the 10 years of advancing robotics and automation technology that has lowered the pricepoint to one that is acceptable. A decade is a long stretch for tech, and the price per performance is steadily dropping.
Which is probably why this is a red herring to stop workers from demanding higher wages rather the robots being ready. I expect the time between a robot is a $20/hr equivalent boondoggle because of all the customer frustration / stoppages / maintenance / babysitting / quality assurance etc. and a $5/hr burger making monster is actually going to be quite short. They want to get to the latter no matter if the workers are paid $7.25 or $10 or $11 or $15 bucks an hour. But if you can keep workers from charging more because they think it'll save them from the robots...
And in a free market, exactly what is supposed to happen when the price of food is higher than one's salary?
If there really was people starving to death there'd be a famine declared and the UN, Red Cross etc. would bring emergency aid. But I guess that was mostly hyperbole?
Allowing a random coffee shop to be your ISP is never going to be high security. But I think "Hey wait, why are there two CoffeeShop SSIDs?" is probably going to be an improvement. That could actually be a router feature, like if it detects another access point trying to send with the same SSID it'd send the manager some kind of alert. I think you'd pretty soon discover who's doing it...
Having read it, the only difference I can see is that my summary of it is shorter and more direct.
Your summary: Google should avoid hiring women because they may be less apt at X.
His argument: Due to biological differences Google won't find equally many women to do X.
Let me try to make the argument even blunter, imagine you want employees that are over six feet tall for some reason. There are obviously women taller than that and men shorter than that, but you will find the pool is highly skewed against men. What he's saying is that great, you can hire every woman over six feet tall you can find, but you can't expect them to be half the employees because they're not half the workforce and everybody wants those that tick the diversity boxes.
The only way you can force an artificial balance in an unbalanced pool is to pay them more so all the tall women come work for you while everyone else is skewed even more or lower demands so that women actually don't have to be so tall as men. Either way they get special treatment for their diversity, not their actual work output. And that this is unfair both to the women who did pass the same qualifications as everyone else and the men who got bumped down the list.
Of course he wasn't talking about something as unalterable as height, he was talking about qualified tech workers. And that if Google wants more women in tech, they should spend their money on bringing up more qualified female candidates not make special rules for females. And his theory was that you still wouldn't get equal representation because men and women think differently and have different interests and values and that Google shouldn't begin with the answer being 50:50 and construe that everything that's not must be the result of gender discrimination of some form.
Of course this offended a bunch of SJW activists that think sex is a social construct and that boys would play with dolls and wear pink tutus while girls would play with cars and toy soldiers if nobody boxed them into gender roles. There's no doubt that in many companies and workplaces there has been a lot of resistance and bigotry against those that go against traditional gender roles and I hope we'll get past that as individuals. But seemingly no matter how far equality goes there still seem to be rather large statistical differences in the career paths we choose.
but most people figure out after filming a ski run or two that they aren't Shane McConkey (RIP) and won't be filming much of interest. Then, the gopro goes in the drawer, never to be used again.
Uhm, have you ever looked at a normal person's social media feed? Objectively it's full of everyday people doing everyday things. Lots of people have an action camera and make pretty mundane clips to say "Hey, I'm skiing in the Alps" not "Watch me do a triple backflip" using it more or less like a dash cam. Their problem is that the market is pretty saturated and there's very little reason to upgrade your camera, it's about form factor, robustness, weather sealing and mounting accessories. It's more about having a camera running when something cool/unexpected happens than than the actual camera quality. And if you don't need it anymore there's always someone willing to buy it second hand, they just don't exit the market very often.
Fair enough. But then the people who get cheap CPUs are selling them in enormous volumes. All that's happening is that if you commit to buying 10,000 CPUs you pay a lot less than someone who only wants to buy one. Also soldered CPUs tend to be cheaper than socketed ones.
All good points, but I think you're far more dependent on the whole ecosystem to get at that profit. Not just the things AMD controls but third party chips, OS support, put in a premium model with good screen, design, keyboard, ergonomics and so on. They're quite typecast as the "value" brand and I think OEMs would have to work pretty hard to make it sell. Whereas with desktop and server components it's a lot easier to sell on benchmarks, you deliver the FPS? It's a good gaming card. Stick it in the box of your choice, use the monitor and accessories you want.
It's also the part of the market most threatened by a disruptive change like Apple making an ARM-based Mac, success of ARM-based Win10 laptops or ARM-based Chromebook or just the evolution of smartphone/tablet/docking solutions to reduce future demand. I think AMD can make a lot more money being the alternative to Intel/nVidia than getting into that crossfire. They kinda already did when they got out of the "big CPU" game in 2012 and continued with their APUs, it was not a success. And they kinda need to keep up with graphics in order to remain the preferred console partner.
Don't knock low power mobile. A lot more people buy laptops with integrated graphics than a typical gaming rig. And Intel are making pretty good money in that market - look at the prices on these chips. It's $300 to $500 for an i7.
I wouldn't trust Intel's list prices on BGA processors because nobody knows what they actually sell for. Maybe that's the price for start-ups that want to buy a tray but I think Lenovo, HP and Dell pay far less the same way list price and OEM price for Windows is very different. I have seen laptop models for sale where the CPU would be a ridiculous share of the total if those prices were actually true.