Yep. Turns out that a very good way to make a new vehicle is to just try it, see what goes wrong, and fix it. This means that failures should be expected: they're part of the process. That's how you learn.
IIRC the Shuttle had something like 2.5 million parts and each part probably has more than one failure mode. Even if SpaceX got it down to 1/10th the complexity fixing faults by trial and error ain't really happening, that'd take centuries. And that's only if you have the kind of problems where it consistently fails every time, if it's more like a dice roll it'll take forever to get anything reliable. This meme that failures are "expected" and a great "learning experience" is mostly hogwash. Those engineers had better get it 99.99% right the first time while the last 0.01% are mostly unknown unknowns nobody even imagined up front.
But the publicity and public outcry around a launch failure doesn't allow for the fact that failure is an important part of the process. So it's good to "preemptively" remind people of that beforehand.
Yes. But not because failures are the vehicle of progress but because there is only so much you can simulate, estimate and test before actually doing it. Every rocket needs a maiden flight. And that's when you find out that despite all your brilliant models, theories, proof-of-concepts, prototypes etc. don't 100% conform to reality. But you could have spent forever staring at the blueprints without finding it, more effort just wouldn't have gotten you any further. See: All the people who've tried to do the waterfall method "right" by creating the perfect spec.
Didn't you just explain it? Google is an ad/data mining company, getting Firefox's search traffic is far more important than what browser they use. Firefox is also as much an enemy of Apple and Microsoft, the two other mega-corporations it's mostly competing with. Mozilla may talk big but they can't kill the signal Google is paying for, so what harm can they really do? According to StatCounter's total figures with mobile Mozilla got about 6% market share, at $520 million that'd price the whole market at $8.7 billion. Considering that Google has >100 billion in revenue per year now I'd say they're profiting greatly. Besides Chrome is winning already, why try fighting dirty and look bad unless you have to? Particularly when it got near zero presence on the fastest growing platform, mobile.
If they are terminal and wish to pass, there will be plenty of opportunities to end their care. Case in point, this patient died later that night.
If you sign a DNR then death is obviously not what you're afraid of. It's being trapped in some sort of half-dead state where you may have extensive brain damage and experience prolonged pain and suffering without actually dying. And he could very well have gone into such a state where he'd be incapable of making that choice again. That's why DNR orders exist in the first place.
To determine whether or not this is a problem, we have to determine what percentage of articles are actually worth reading over the headlines. If the articles are typically just fleshing out the headline, without anything meaningful added, this is efficient, rational behavior.
While it's highly debatable whether the articles are worth reading too, please tell me what current news media you feel uses headlines that are meaningful and accurate. In my experience they are either bait missing some essential element to entice you to click through, sensationalist claims only barely implied by the facts or inflammatory quotes that come from someone with an ax to grind. At best they provide a position on some issue, in which case it becomes an opinion poll where you vote for or against. Whether this article contributes anything meaningful or relevant to the discussion isn't relevant as long as your drivel is rated higher than the opposition's drivel.
All other things being equal... but they never are. People look at the bottom line and dollars/hour actually worked, not how it's structured. More bonus pay = more flexibility for the airline to decide who, when and how much while the pilots think that even though the base pay sucks they get these sweet 200-250% gigs. Or they feel railroaded because they "have to" take those gigs to get a decent pay. Or that such high overtime lead to pilots taking flights they shouldn't, which can end badly for both sides. It puts more power in the hands of the employer and less for the union while the employees are probably mixed.
In reality though, I think they're painting themselves into the corner in order to proclaim both to the pilots that we can't pay more and to the customers that they've done what they can. If they actually wanted to I'm sure there's a clause in that agreement where they could agree with the union to temporarily lift that restriction due to exceptional circumstances. I mean if they really said "Okay, we've fucked up big. We're desperate for pilots and 150% is not enough, can we pretty please pay your members more just this once?" I don't really see the union turning them down.
It took a long time for us to pull ourselves out of that hole but now most people have slowly been pushed back in it.
Ask the people of Eastern Europe, China, India, South America and even though they still struggle also Africa if they'd like to turn back time 50 years. The biggest change technology has pushed on us has been globalism, where a ton of cheap workers flooded the market. Before there was like for every one rich American/Western European there were ten dirt poor people. If you looked at the wealth distribution of the world there was the first world, a big slump and then the third world. You could pay anyone from the third world a pittance and they'd do anything for the almighty dollar. Nice for us of course, but it wasn't going to last.
With increasing wages and automation it's not that cheap to outsource anymore. You don't get to just wave a dollar and they'll do anything for you. But it kinda works out because now we got automation churning out millions of pairs of shoes for us, we don't need kids working 12 hours a day in sweatshops. To be honest I think it's impressive that we've managed to do that transition to a global without a loss of median income instead of flat like the US has had. It means goods are still as cheap as they were before, without all the cheap workers to make them. Globally, manhours still get more expensive not cheaper. There's no oversupply where people desperately take jobs for shittier and shittier wages, not in general.
It's not going to be a good fit for you, but there's no need to exaggerate. Plowing your way through heavy snow/slush it could potentially get as bad as half, but ordinary cold winter conditions is more like a quarter. Superchargers don't appear by chasing leprechauns, either there is one between your work locations or there's not. Half an hour at a supercharger should give you ~170 miles and (310+170)*0.75 = 360 miles should make it just fine. And in the winter how fast are you going, 50 mph average? It's a thirty minute break on a six hour trip. Like you're going to rent a car for that, bullshit. If that's the car you have, you drive it and yeah it takes a little longer. If you do it often like you do, get an ICE. But you make it sound like a 300 mile range is a Nissan Leaf.
I am just as bad with my phone,if it goes past 50% I have to plug it in.
Well, a smartphone can end up spending quite a bit of battery even if you're not interacting with it. Particularly if you're doing something like GPS tracking, updates, cloud sync or whatever in the background or even just a faulty app causing 100% CPU load. An EV shouldn't really lose any significant amount of power on its own except for long time storage, as I understand it there's a roughly 1%/day vampire drain but for a commute or weekend trip it should be completely negligible and if it's plugged in there's no issue. But yeah I too want to have the range that I have a plan A and a plan B if the next charger is out of order or full or the road is closed and I have to take a big detour or something. I don't think I'd ever go under 20% unless something has already gone wrong or it's the last leg home.
Well I got to admit that Microsoft has for once been in tune with the times, with the cloud and Facebook and all that it's proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the average user doesn't care that he's being spied on. On mobile phones Android has 85% market share and most of those are loaded with services from Google who is the mother of all data mining companies. Not sure why I thought maybe this time it would be different when they didn't leave over Vista or Win8. I've been forced to upgrade my gaming computer to Win10 to play with my friends, the OS itself is stable and working great. I'd like a box with three features:
1. It runs Windows applications. 2. It gets security updates. 3. There are no other "features".
Basically I'd pay for an Enterprise LTSB license without the "Enterpricy" bits, like no joining a domain seems to be main home/pro differentiation. Even if I wanted to pay for it now, I couldn't without a volume license agreement. Right now my gaming PC is heading for a future as a Wintendo, unless Microsoft pulls a rabbit out of the hat. Everything else will stay on Win7 for as long as it can and then go Linux, I guess. Like you say, they've been way too successful to turn back now...
Not in this case. The "dynamic range" in HDR is the ratio of the highest and lowest value of the signal the display can produce. With a "dynamic" HDR there isn't a fixed ratio - it can be changed as conditions demand. There is repetition of a word, but without redundancy.
That doesn't really make any sense, the "dynamic" part is like dialing an area code first, before it was per stream now it's per frame but the net effect is a broader dynamic range. There's still a min and max value, but the granularity is relative to the base... if you're staring into the virtual sun there's no need for a zillion shades of almost black.
Well if you mean stories like novels not news stories, I agree. For any language the nuances and particularities will be lost in translation, even in human translations they sometimes have to explain some untranslateable words or concepts in a footnote. But I think they could do a lot better translating articles and blogs about subjects that address a broad audience and speak rather plainly in the native language. Often it still ends up being very awkward Yoda-isms and strange or incorrect choices of words, a machine translated NYT is not great. It's no more than okay-ish, often helped by people knowing a bit of English. Any truly foreign language like Russian, Chinese, Japanese etc. is still pretty bad and I'm assuming their experience with English is no better. And if you're translating from one minor language to the other it gets even crappier.
Just like Friendster, and MySpace, at some point it will fall out of favor. It's kinda like nightclubs. If it becomes too easy to get into it and starts being populated by blue-hairs and corporate shills, all the cool kids will move on and it will cease being the cool place to hang out. (...) All these social networking sites want to reach a place in the online landscape where they are not a fad, and become an institution of the online world (...). That has not happened yet.
Except the by far largest and still quickly growing social network is everything but cool. It's now the social network where you talk to your grandma and all the other not-so-hip people that you can't have hanging out at your cool place. I don't think you've understood how deeply entrenched Facebook has become as the least common denominator. And everything is being sucked down that gravity well, more and more doesn't have a web page or forum anymore - they have a Facebook group. If anything I think it's email that'll become a ghost town before they stop being a "fad".
US coins/bills that are lost are simply made again. You can't do that with bitcoin.
Well there's no process to declare any particular coin/bill as lost and re-issue it, it's more like with gift cards. We can print a thousand IOUs and less than a thousand will ever be redeemed. Personally I hate that practice because it's like giving money, only really inconvenient money where you can pick anything in the store so it's not personal at all but not in that other store that sells it for less or of some other type you like better or something else entirely and it expires. Been there, done that because I didn't have anything I'd like to spend it on right then and there and when I did want/need to buy something I didn't remember I had the damn card. I guess the government is the same, a little extra "free money" they can print.
A natural consequence of ISPs trying to negotiate individual deals with content providers is that the content providers will ally to increase their bargaining power. I suspect the ISPs will be in for a rough surprise if say the top 20 content providers (YouTube, Netflix, Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, Instagram, Amazon, eBay, Wordpress etc.) join forces to "negotiate" because if one site is slow that site has a problem. If users feel all the big ticket sites on the Internet are slow, the ISP has a problem. The only question is if they'll let the smaller sites on board or whether they'd like to throw their weight around. I don't think this will be the goldmine for ISPs they seem to think it is.
Why don't they make a "reference" AMD laptop that shows how well it can do instead of relying on lame OEMs to make crippled versions?
Because sourcing everything, making a good design, getting a good ODM to do it, get it sold in retail and e-tail is a lot of time and effort and takes experience AMD doesn't currently have? I mean it would be nice, but they'd need the resources to invest and even with their great Q3 they still haven't broken even for the year (-$11m). If they would have to end up half-assing it with putting an AMD sticker on some premium components in a near-stock design it's better not to do it at all.
Aren't you just putting put a straw man and cutting it down? The first time I saw a stable Windows machine was when I ran Win2k RTM. The last time I saw an unstable Windows machine was like early Vista like 2007-ish, probably a bad driver. If there was a Windows version that promised:
1) Runs Windows applications including DirectX 2) At least 10 years of security patches (like XP and Win7) 3) No other "features" like telemetry etc.
I'd be ready to buy and so would a lot of other people, I imagine. As an OS, I don't really know what more you can ask. The problem are all the anti-features, I'm on my Win10 aka my gaming box right now. I'm cool with that, it's closed source software and I'm probably tracked to high heaven in-game too. If it's streaming or whatever that's okay too. I just wouldn't trust it with anything important or private, as far as I'm concerned whatever I do on Win10 is broadcast to Microsoft. Since they like to reset my preferences, I can't trust any setting I make to actually stick. And you got six months before they start nagging you again to upgrade to whatever new stunt Microsoft wants to pull.
To be honest, I don't really look forward to migrating back to Linux (yes, been there done that used it as my main desktop for 3.5 years), there was always some issues you'd fiddle with and I'd rather just pay someone money to get that polish and be done with it. I'm just going to do it anyway because of Win10, how much grief it gives me doesn't really matter. But apart from the fact that I fundamentally can't trust Microsoft it's a good OS.
The idea got nixed when somebody asked what happens if a woman gets assaulted?
Emergency buttons and a live 911 camera feed? With the ability to speak over the intercom to let them know the police is watching them right now and officers are on the way to the next stop. If they're smart they might release the fire alarm so the emergency exists must open, but still. Of course it wouldn't help if the one being assaulted is alone and nobody is there to push the button, but how is that different from a woman assaulted anywhere else? It's not like we can have stewards watching all women at all times in case something bad happens.
The good news is if you can build a robot to do that, it should be a no-brainer to get it to do laundry and garbage duties as well. Probably get it to cook too.
Well I'd like a chef bot. But something tells me that having a robot quality check that the ingredients that nothing is damaged or spoiled or has any foreign elements adds a whole other layer of complexity. The "base elements" like flour and sugar are pretty static but things like fish and meat, fruit and vegetables vary in size, shape and taste and the cooking needs to adapt but without a nose and taste buds it'll have a problem getting feedback. Nothing that is totally unsolvable but I'd think even big industrial food production has people actually tasting a sample of each batch in case of equipment malfunction, blockages, leaks and whatnot leading to failed product. It'd be tough to miniaturize all that for home use.
I think this has already been shown this is purely a psychological effect, i.e. the type of alcohol affects your mood in precisely the way you expect it to. A scientific study of the actual "real" effects would have done a proper double blind test and given the participants alcohol (or not) without being told what it was exactly instead of filling out a survey form.
Pretty hard to not let them know what kind of alcohol it is if they're to drink it. But I imagine if you gave it as a suppository or something there would be no difference at all. I doubt it's any more physical than listening to blues music and feeling blue. Alcohol by itself has a physical effect though, which is essentially to lower inhibitions to everything. The rest might as much be a choice of beverage as anything, if you're opening a bottle of wine on a date and guzzling beer with the guys it's the context that decide that you're romantic with wine and macho with beer not the actual alcohol. And since we're naturally associative that flavor of alcohol then induces the same thoughts also in other contexts.
And all of this is perfectly understandable. Would you call in an outside dev team, explain requirements, and then have to wait for an acceptable product to be produced, when you could do it yourself quickly? This is inevitable unless considerable effort is expended by the organization to identify and pull these business functions into formal, administered, monitored systems.
Also important is that once it's moved outside Excel they often lose transparancy and flexiblity. They can't step-by-step it through the cells, they can't easily simulate it on a set of test data, they can't try tweaking a formula and see how it turns out unless somebody did a lot of work to enable that. Getting the initial version out of Excel is only half the fun, it's making the result maintainable that's the challenge. We experienced somewhat the same here migrating from SPSS syntax to SQL, people that used to be very hands-on suddenly felt it was a black box they didn't really understand and couldn't trace through the process.
The whole situation sucks. ISPs, greedy companies, and oppressive governments are destroying the Internet for everyone, everywhere, not just here in the U.S.. It may not be possible to save it, and it may never be possible to create a viable alternative to it.
Thanks for your concern but speak for yourself. In most countries where Internet access is not so 0wned by cable networks ISPs keeps delivering faster and better. Here in Norway national statistics say mean speed is up 50% to 67 Mbps and the median speed up 26% to 34 Mbps in the last year, about 90% now have 8+ Mbps. About 41% of all broadband is now fiber and climbing by about 5%/year. For capability 80% can get 100+ Mbps and 51% can get fiber.
Really if any ISP tried double dipping here I think the content creators would scream bloody murder. In a decade or two I don't think bits and bytes will matter, the cost will almost all be in the fiber line and the traffic itself costs almost nothing. It's the same with mobile traffic, it's gone from ~10PB to ~100PB in five years and the revenue has increased by 15% so meaning the price per traffic unit has dropped massively. Any other network I'd rather try building virtually on top of the one I have.
Well, If you feel that left-right is the collectivist-individualist axis I'd say the Nazis were still waaay on the left. Just the Aryans though, not the riff-raff but it was a massive appeal to do what's good for Germany and participate in all sorts of rallies, events and organizations and worship of a common culture. If you think it's the workers-capital axis then no, essentially all the war material came from traditional industry with not a hint of Marxism. It was more like they would both serve the Nazi regime though, if Hitler needed a Volkswagen - literally: people's car - he'd get that, it was hardly free capitalism and it was not like the money was running the show. So socially I'd say far outer left, economically fairly conservative with some pretty big social programs - to the left of the US but maybe on par with say modern Europe.
No idea why this troll is at +3, maybe the/. echo chamber have heard this crap so many times they believe it. Read the headlines for Market Share Analysis: Server Operating Systems, Worldwide, 2016 with highlights like "Linux (Server) Is the Fastest-Growing OS Segment" and "Red Hat Became the Second-Largest OS Vendor Through Linux (Server) Growth and Geographical Expansion". The major players are Windows, z/OS, HP-UX and Solaris with Canonical getting a honorable mention. BSD is not on anybody's radar except the systemd trolls.
As for the desktop Linux has never had any significant market share so you can't lose what you never had. But by just about any possible metric BSD is worse, so the same ~1% that's been running it for the last 15 years because it's the only semi-usable open source desktop will continue to do so. As for mobile that's almost entirely up to Google, but they got a winning team with the Linux kernel here. Maybe Fuchsia is an interesting technology testbed but I fail to see the business case for switching. It's well hidden but eh, less hidden than the BSD heritage in iOS/macOS. As far as I know the Darwin kernel isn't usable anywhere else, while Google's kernel is just a few patches from mainline.
We're really getting into the territory where it is legitimate to ask, how did people so gullible acquire anything of value in the first place?
They sucker in a few that are always looking to make lots of fast money through professional appearances and fancy business plans. Then you make those people pimp the system to their friends, that's what sells most people. A bunch of my friends got ripped off in some MLM scam some years back, it'd entered my clique of friends through one person who then became two, those two convinced a third and... the more friends are in on it, the harder it gets to say you're all wrong. Hell, even afterwards some simply tried to say it was just a risk investment and they lost.
Humans are terrible at backing out of a bad idea when they've first committed to it, try watching newbies in poker that fall in love with their hand. Not betting a poor hand is easy. Betting a good hand that turns bad then fold, that's hard. It's why some projects run into ridiculous overruns, it's always 10-20% more to finish and those add up to double or triple the initial budget. It's how the Nigerian prince scams work, as long as people feel there's the small chance that those millions of dollars are right around the corner or over the next hilltop they'll put in a few more dollars and then a few more and then even more.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep. Turns out that a very good way to make a new vehicle is to just try it, see what goes wrong, and fix it. This means that failures should be expected: they're part of the process. That's how you learn.
IIRC the Shuttle had something like 2.5 million parts and each part probably has more than one failure mode. Even if SpaceX got it down to 1/10th the complexity fixing faults by trial and error ain't really happening, that'd take centuries. And that's only if you have the kind of problems where it consistently fails every time, if it's more like a dice roll it'll take forever to get anything reliable. This meme that failures are "expected" and a great "learning experience" is mostly hogwash. Those engineers had better get it 99.99% right the first time while the last 0.01% are mostly unknown unknowns nobody even imagined up front.
But the publicity and public outcry around a launch failure doesn't allow for the fact that failure is an important part of the process. So it's good to "preemptively" remind people of that beforehand.
Yes. But not because failures are the vehicle of progress but because there is only so much you can simulate, estimate and test before actually doing it. Every rocket needs a maiden flight. And that's when you find out that despite all your brilliant models, theories, proof-of-concepts, prototypes etc. don't 100% conform to reality. But you could have spent forever staring at the blueprints without finding it, more effort just wouldn't have gotten you any further. See: All the people who've tried to do the waterfall method "right" by creating the perfect spec.
Didn't you just explain it? Google is an ad/data mining company, getting Firefox's search traffic is far more important than what browser they use. Firefox is also as much an enemy of Apple and Microsoft, the two other mega-corporations it's mostly competing with. Mozilla may talk big but they can't kill the signal Google is paying for, so what harm can they really do? According to StatCounter's total figures with mobile Mozilla got about 6% market share, at $520 million that'd price the whole market at $8.7 billion. Considering that Google has >100 billion in revenue per year now I'd say they're profiting greatly. Besides Chrome is winning already, why try fighting dirty and look bad unless you have to? Particularly when it got near zero presence on the fastest growing platform, mobile.
If they are terminal and wish to pass, there will be plenty of opportunities to end their care. Case in point, this patient died later that night.
If you sign a DNR then death is obviously not what you're afraid of. It's being trapped in some sort of half-dead state where you may have extensive brain damage and experience prolonged pain and suffering without actually dying. And he could very well have gone into such a state where he'd be incapable of making that choice again. That's why DNR orders exist in the first place.
To determine whether or not this is a problem, we have to determine what percentage of articles are actually worth reading over the headlines. If the articles are typically just fleshing out the headline, without anything meaningful added, this is efficient, rational behavior.
While it's highly debatable whether the articles are worth reading too, please tell me what current news media you feel uses headlines that are meaningful and accurate. In my experience they are either bait missing some essential element to entice you to click through, sensationalist claims only barely implied by the facts or inflammatory quotes that come from someone with an ax to grind. At best they provide a position on some issue, in which case it becomes an opinion poll where you vote for or against. Whether this article contributes anything meaningful or relevant to the discussion isn't relevant as long as your drivel is rated higher than the opposition's drivel.
All other things being equal... but they never are. People look at the bottom line and dollars/hour actually worked, not how it's structured. More bonus pay = more flexibility for the airline to decide who, when and how much while the pilots think that even though the base pay sucks they get these sweet 200-250% gigs. Or they feel railroaded because they "have to" take those gigs to get a decent pay. Or that such high overtime lead to pilots taking flights they shouldn't, which can end badly for both sides. It puts more power in the hands of the employer and less for the union while the employees are probably mixed.
In reality though, I think they're painting themselves into the corner in order to proclaim both to the pilots that we can't pay more and to the customers that they've done what they can. If they actually wanted to I'm sure there's a clause in that agreement where they could agree with the union to temporarily lift that restriction due to exceptional circumstances. I mean if they really said "Okay, we've fucked up big. We're desperate for pilots and 150% is not enough, can we pretty please pay your members more just this once?" I don't really see the union turning them down.
It took a long time for us to pull ourselves out of that hole but now most people have slowly been pushed back in it.
Ask the people of Eastern Europe, China, India, South America and even though they still struggle also Africa if they'd like to turn back time 50 years. The biggest change technology has pushed on us has been globalism, where a ton of cheap workers flooded the market. Before there was like for every one rich American/Western European there were ten dirt poor people. If you looked at the wealth distribution of the world there was the first world, a big slump and then the third world. You could pay anyone from the third world a pittance and they'd do anything for the almighty dollar. Nice for us of course, but it wasn't going to last.
With increasing wages and automation it's not that cheap to outsource anymore. You don't get to just wave a dollar and they'll do anything for you. But it kinda works out because now we got automation churning out millions of pairs of shoes for us, we don't need kids working 12 hours a day in sweatshops. To be honest I think it's impressive that we've managed to do that transition to a global without a loss of median income instead of flat like the US has had. It means goods are still as cheap as they were before, without all the cheap workers to make them. Globally, manhours still get more expensive not cheaper. There's no oversupply where people desperately take jobs for shittier and shittier wages, not in general.
It's not going to be a good fit for you, but there's no need to exaggerate. Plowing your way through heavy snow/slush it could potentially get as bad as half, but ordinary cold winter conditions is more like a quarter. Superchargers don't appear by chasing leprechauns, either there is one between your work locations or there's not. Half an hour at a supercharger should give you ~170 miles and (310+170)*0.75 = 360 miles should make it just fine. And in the winter how fast are you going, 50 mph average? It's a thirty minute break on a six hour trip. Like you're going to rent a car for that, bullshit. If that's the car you have, you drive it and yeah it takes a little longer. If you do it often like you do, get an ICE. But you make it sound like a 300 mile range is a Nissan Leaf.
I am just as bad with my phone,if it goes past 50% I have to plug it in.
Well, a smartphone can end up spending quite a bit of battery even if you're not interacting with it. Particularly if you're doing something like GPS tracking, updates, cloud sync or whatever in the background or even just a faulty app causing 100% CPU load. An EV shouldn't really lose any significant amount of power on its own except for long time storage, as I understand it there's a roughly 1%/day vampire drain but for a commute or weekend trip it should be completely negligible and if it's plugged in there's no issue. But yeah I too want to have the range that I have a plan A and a plan B if the next charger is out of order or full or the road is closed and I have to take a big detour or something. I don't think I'd ever go under 20% unless something has already gone wrong or it's the last leg home.
Well I got to admit that Microsoft has for once been in tune with the times, with the cloud and Facebook and all that it's proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the average user doesn't care that he's being spied on. On mobile phones Android has 85% market share and most of those are loaded with services from Google who is the mother of all data mining companies. Not sure why I thought maybe this time it would be different when they didn't leave over Vista or Win8. I've been forced to upgrade my gaming computer to Win10 to play with my friends, the OS itself is stable and working great. I'd like a box with three features:
1. It runs Windows applications.
2. It gets security updates.
3. There are no other "features".
Basically I'd pay for an Enterprise LTSB license without the "Enterpricy" bits, like no joining a domain seems to be main home/pro differentiation. Even if I wanted to pay for it now, I couldn't without a volume license agreement. Right now my gaming PC is heading for a future as a Wintendo, unless Microsoft pulls a rabbit out of the hat. Everything else will stay on Win7 for as long as it can and then go Linux, I guess. Like you say, they've been way too successful to turn back now...
Not in this case. The "dynamic range" in HDR is the ratio of the highest and lowest value of the signal the display can produce. With a "dynamic" HDR there isn't a fixed ratio - it can be changed as conditions demand. There is repetition of a word, but without redundancy.
That doesn't really make any sense, the "dynamic" part is like dialing an area code first, before it was per stream now it's per frame but the net effect is a broader dynamic range. There's still a min and max value, but the granularity is relative to the base... if you're staring into the virtual sun there's no need for a zillion shades of almost black.
Well if you mean stories like novels not news stories, I agree. For any language the nuances and particularities will be lost in translation, even in human translations they sometimes have to explain some untranslateable words or concepts in a footnote. But I think they could do a lot better translating articles and blogs about subjects that address a broad audience and speak rather plainly in the native language. Often it still ends up being very awkward Yoda-isms and strange or incorrect choices of words, a machine translated NYT is not great. It's no more than okay-ish, often helped by people knowing a bit of English. Any truly foreign language like Russian, Chinese, Japanese etc. is still pretty bad and I'm assuming their experience with English is no better. And if you're translating from one minor language to the other it gets even crappier.
Oh crap, it just hit me, are we all about to die?
On a geological time scale, we're all about to die momentarily.
Just like Friendster, and MySpace, at some point it will fall out of favor. It's kinda like nightclubs. If it becomes too easy to get into it and starts being populated by blue-hairs and corporate shills, all the cool kids will move on and it will cease being the cool place to hang out. (...) All these social networking sites want to reach a place in the online landscape where they are not a fad, and become an institution of the online world (...). That has not happened yet.
Except the by far largest and still quickly growing social network is everything but cool. It's now the social network where you talk to your grandma and all the other not-so-hip people that you can't have hanging out at your cool place. I don't think you've understood how deeply entrenched Facebook has become as the least common denominator. And everything is being sucked down that gravity well, more and more doesn't have a web page or forum anymore - they have a Facebook group. If anything I think it's email that'll become a ghost town before they stop being a "fad".
US coins/bills that are lost are simply made again. You can't do that with bitcoin.
Well there's no process to declare any particular coin/bill as lost and re-issue it, it's more like with gift cards. We can print a thousand IOUs and less than a thousand will ever be redeemed. Personally I hate that practice because it's like giving money, only really inconvenient money where you can pick anything in the store so it's not personal at all but not in that other store that sells it for less or of some other type you like better or something else entirely and it expires. Been there, done that because I didn't have anything I'd like to spend it on right then and there and when I did want/need to buy something I didn't remember I had the damn card. I guess the government is the same, a little extra "free money" they can print.
A natural consequence of ISPs trying to negotiate individual deals with content providers is that the content providers will ally to increase their bargaining power. I suspect the ISPs will be in for a rough surprise if say the top 20 content providers (YouTube, Netflix, Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, Instagram, Amazon, eBay, Wordpress etc.) join forces to "negotiate" because if one site is slow that site has a problem. If users feel all the big ticket sites on the Internet are slow, the ISP has a problem. The only question is if they'll let the smaller sites on board or whether they'd like to throw their weight around. I don't think this will be the goldmine for ISPs they seem to think it is.
Why don't they make a "reference" AMD laptop that shows how well it can do instead of relying on lame OEMs to make crippled versions?
Because sourcing everything, making a good design, getting a good ODM to do it, get it sold in retail and e-tail is a lot of time and effort and takes experience AMD doesn't currently have? I mean it would be nice, but they'd need the resources to invest and even with their great Q3 they still haven't broken even for the year (-$11m). If they would have to end up half-assing it with putting an AMD sticker on some premium components in a near-stock design it's better not to do it at all.
Aren't you just putting put a straw man and cutting it down? The first time I saw a stable Windows machine was when I ran Win2k RTM. The last time I saw an unstable Windows machine was like early Vista like 2007-ish, probably a bad driver. If there was a Windows version that promised:
1) Runs Windows applications including DirectX
2) At least 10 years of security patches (like XP and Win7)
3) No other "features" like telemetry etc.
I'd be ready to buy and so would a lot of other people, I imagine. As an OS, I don't really know what more you can ask. The problem are all the anti-features, I'm on my Win10 aka my gaming box right now. I'm cool with that, it's closed source software and I'm probably tracked to high heaven in-game too. If it's streaming or whatever that's okay too. I just wouldn't trust it with anything important or private, as far as I'm concerned whatever I do on Win10 is broadcast to Microsoft. Since they like to reset my preferences, I can't trust any setting I make to actually stick. And you got six months before they start nagging you again to upgrade to whatever new stunt Microsoft wants to pull.
To be honest, I don't really look forward to migrating back to Linux (yes, been there done that used it as my main desktop for 3.5 years), there was always some issues you'd fiddle with and I'd rather just pay someone money to get that polish and be done with it. I'm just going to do it anyway because of Win10, how much grief it gives me doesn't really matter. But apart from the fact that I fundamentally can't trust Microsoft it's a good OS.
The idea got nixed when somebody asked what happens if a woman gets assaulted?
Emergency buttons and a live 911 camera feed? With the ability to speak over the intercom to let them know the police is watching them right now and officers are on the way to the next stop. If they're smart they might release the fire alarm so the emergency exists must open, but still. Of course it wouldn't help if the one being assaulted is alone and nobody is there to push the button, but how is that different from a woman assaulted anywhere else? It's not like we can have stewards watching all women at all times in case something bad happens.
The good news is if you can build a robot to do that, it should be a no-brainer to get it to do laundry and garbage duties as well. Probably get it to cook too.
Well I'd like a chef bot. But something tells me that having a robot quality check that the ingredients that nothing is damaged or spoiled or has any foreign elements adds a whole other layer of complexity. The "base elements" like flour and sugar are pretty static but things like fish and meat, fruit and vegetables vary in size, shape and taste and the cooking needs to adapt but without a nose and taste buds it'll have a problem getting feedback. Nothing that is totally unsolvable but I'd think even big industrial food production has people actually tasting a sample of each batch in case of equipment malfunction, blockages, leaks and whatnot leading to failed product. It'd be tough to miniaturize all that for home use.
I think this has already been shown this is purely a psychological effect, i.e. the type of alcohol affects your mood in precisely the way you expect it to. A scientific study of the actual "real" effects would have done a proper double blind test and given the participants alcohol (or not) without being told what it was exactly instead of filling out a survey form.
Pretty hard to not let them know what kind of alcohol it is if they're to drink it. But I imagine if you gave it as a suppository or something there would be no difference at all. I doubt it's any more physical than listening to blues music and feeling blue. Alcohol by itself has a physical effect though, which is essentially to lower inhibitions to everything. The rest might as much be a choice of beverage as anything, if you're opening a bottle of wine on a date and guzzling beer with the guys it's the context that decide that you're romantic with wine and macho with beer not the actual alcohol. And since we're naturally associative that flavor of alcohol then induces the same thoughts also in other contexts.
And all of this is perfectly understandable. Would you call in an outside dev team, explain requirements, and then have to wait for an acceptable product to be produced, when you could do it yourself quickly? This is inevitable unless considerable effort is expended by the organization to identify and pull these business functions into formal, administered, monitored systems.
Also important is that once it's moved outside Excel they often lose transparancy and flexiblity. They can't step-by-step it through the cells, they can't easily simulate it on a set of test data, they can't try tweaking a formula and see how it turns out unless somebody did a lot of work to enable that. Getting the initial version out of Excel is only half the fun, it's making the result maintainable that's the challenge. We experienced somewhat the same here migrating from SPSS syntax to SQL, people that used to be very hands-on suddenly felt it was a black box they didn't really understand and couldn't trace through the process.
The whole situation sucks. ISPs, greedy companies, and oppressive governments are destroying the Internet for everyone, everywhere, not just here in the U.S.. It may not be possible to save it, and it may never be possible to create a viable alternative to it.
Thanks for your concern but speak for yourself. In most countries where Internet access is not so 0wned by cable networks ISPs keeps delivering faster and better. Here in Norway national statistics say mean speed is up 50% to 67 Mbps and the median speed up 26% to 34 Mbps in the last year, about 90% now have 8+ Mbps. About 41% of all broadband is now fiber and climbing by about 5%/year. For capability 80% can get 100+ Mbps and 51% can get fiber.
Really if any ISP tried double dipping here I think the content creators would scream bloody murder. In a decade or two I don't think bits and bytes will matter, the cost will almost all be in the fiber line and the traffic itself costs almost nothing. It's the same with mobile traffic, it's gone from ~10PB to ~100PB in five years and the revenue has increased by 15% so meaning the price per traffic unit has dropped massively. Any other network I'd rather try building virtually on top of the one I have.
Well, If you feel that left-right is the collectivist-individualist axis I'd say the Nazis were still waaay on the left. Just the Aryans though, not the riff-raff but it was a massive appeal to do what's good for Germany and participate in all sorts of rallies, events and organizations and worship of a common culture. If you think it's the workers-capital axis then no, essentially all the war material came from traditional industry with not a hint of Marxism. It was more like they would both serve the Nazi regime though, if Hitler needed a Volkswagen - literally: people's car - he'd get that, it was hardly free capitalism and it was not like the money was running the show. So socially I'd say far outer left, economically fairly conservative with some pretty big social programs - to the left of the US but maybe on par with say modern Europe.
No idea why this troll is at +3, maybe the /. echo chamber have heard this crap so many times they believe it. Read the headlines for Market Share Analysis: Server Operating Systems, Worldwide, 2016 with highlights like "Linux (Server) Is the Fastest-Growing OS Segment" and "Red Hat Became the Second-Largest OS Vendor Through Linux (Server) Growth and Geographical Expansion". The major players are Windows, z/OS, HP-UX and Solaris with Canonical getting a honorable mention. BSD is not on anybody's radar except the systemd trolls.
As for the desktop Linux has never had any significant market share so you can't lose what you never had. But by just about any possible metric BSD is worse, so the same ~1% that's been running it for the last 15 years because it's the only semi-usable open source desktop will continue to do so. As for mobile that's almost entirely up to Google, but they got a winning team with the Linux kernel here. Maybe Fuchsia is an interesting technology testbed but I fail to see the business case for switching. It's well hidden but eh, less hidden than the BSD heritage in iOS/macOS. As far as I know the Darwin kernel isn't usable anywhere else, while Google's kernel is just a few patches from mainline.
We're really getting into the territory where it is legitimate to ask, how did people so gullible acquire anything of value in the first place?
They sucker in a few that are always looking to make lots of fast money through professional appearances and fancy business plans. Then you make those people pimp the system to their friends, that's what sells most people. A bunch of my friends got ripped off in some MLM scam some years back, it'd entered my clique of friends through one person who then became two, those two convinced a third and... the more friends are in on it, the harder it gets to say you're all wrong. Hell, even afterwards some simply tried to say it was just a risk investment and they lost.
Humans are terrible at backing out of a bad idea when they've first committed to it, try watching newbies in poker that fall in love with their hand. Not betting a poor hand is easy. Betting a good hand that turns bad then fold, that's hard. It's why some projects run into ridiculous overruns, it's always 10-20% more to finish and those add up to double or triple the initial budget. It's how the Nigerian prince scams work, as long as people feel there's the small chance that those millions of dollars are right around the corner or over the next hilltop they'll put in a few more dollars and then a few more and then even more.