You can use a lot of the PowerVR tiling stuff, certainly. And the technology to make a modern GPU is going to be in a pool of licensable IP.
Still, PowerVR might conceivably have some useful power saving technologies that the others simply don't care about on account of not requiring absolute minimal power levels. This is entirely speculation of course.
Or on the other hand they write their shows then take it around and try to sell it
The story is not about such writers. It's about the unionised contractors negotiating for more favourable terms; because this is how this particular job works.
No. The writers write the shows. The producers produce the shows. The producer's job includes defining what the series actually is. What it's called, what it's about, who the main characters are. The writers write down the actual words the actors say.
If a writer doesn't want to write an episode of a TV show then they have that choice, of course, but they'll end up being paid nothing at all. If they're writing an episode of, say, the new Twin Peaks series, they can't decide to write an episode of a completely different show with a completely different premise.
This does seem to be talking about Netflix as well. Writers don't care whether the show is streamed, broadcast, or sold on DVD, except in that this will affect the royalties they receive.
I like the shorter seasons. US shows seem to drag a bit mid-season. British shows with about 6 episodes per series end too quickly. The 10-13 episode seasons Netflix does seem a good length.
I'm sure this makes cable TV less value for money. But I think most people consider that to be slowly dying in favour of online services.
Which would mean they'd have to leave the pound and put real border control on the UK border.
In practice, joining the Euro can be delayed indefinitely. This is why Sweden still uses the Krona. Border control can probably be negotiated on a practicality basis.
So we take power away from those who "wield the power", and come up with a better means. Eliminating the idea of private ownership of shared resources such as land could severely reduce their power. Probably not what you mean, but allowing people to monopolise a limited resource allows disproportionate influence. The idea that there are people with a surplus while others lack food, shelter and healthcare indicates that we have a screwed up idea of property rights.
The other thing we need to fix is the system of government. Relying on elected representatives is okay but far from perfect. Direct democracy seems to work worse in practice, not allowing any scope for compromise. But there's probably a better system.
It's nice having a purpose, and earning a living. But do we really want to engage such a large chunk of our workforce on mindless repetitive tasks that a robot can do better? This seems to be putting way too much value on work for work's sake, rather than the end result.
The problem is, people do need purpose. And we don't have a new purpose for these displaced workers. Technology is moving faster than society's ability to adapt to it. The solution is not to force technology to slow down, but to find ways to fill the void more quickly. We need a society where the essentials (food, shelter, healthcare) are taken care of, where people can choose to do what they want with their life rather than what they have to.
Doesn't matter. They're mainstream now. This is not going to drive away the 27 million people who watch Justin Bieber's channel. They can survive entirely on the hugely popular channels.
I have a projector. When I watch a movie at home the screen is filling as much of my vision as a pretty large movie theater.
That's nice. I don't. I know exactly one person who does.
I also honestly have MUCH better sound, and that is with a middle of the range receiver with cheap speakers (but there are five of them plus a subwoofer).
Me too, although that puts me in a minority. I think my upstairs neighbours would get upset if I cranked it up to the level of bass I can physically feel; like I get in a cinema.
Sure. This is great for those who have a projector and a surround sound setup. And who absolutely have to see the latest movies. But then I can see pretty much anything older than 3 months for a fraction of the cost.
Do they care whether you use it? They get the money and the "subscriber". I have no idea how more subscribers really helps them - seems this would give more leverage to the networks - but presumably it does.
"Up to" doesn't mean mandatory. This is a maximum sentence. The maximum penalty for murder is death. Some states have a minimum of life without parole.
Sorry - to clarify - it seems less clear cut if just the widget is patented rather than the means of making a widget. Unless the cartridge does maker something patentable.
You really just need a keyboard and mouse. At that point it's a functional PC with programming languages, and several utilities. Much more than the C64 had.
The expense of a CRAM can probably be justified. You're probably going to be spending more than the drone is worth shooting it down, but not multiple orders of magnitude more. On the plus side, you get the operation flexibility of the CRAM. If drone approaches are rare, costs can be swallowed.
Slashdot Mirror
You can use a lot of the PowerVR tiling stuff, certainly. And the technology to make a modern GPU is going to be in a pool of licensable IP.
Still, PowerVR might conceivably have some useful power saving technologies that the others simply don't care about on account of not requiring absolute minimal power levels. This is entirely speculation of course.
Nope. Both are fine. The insistence on fewer in that caseis one of those prescriptive grammar rules that has stuck around because of grammar pedants.
Here's oxford dictionaries blog to clarify
The story is not about such writers. It's about the unionised contractors negotiating for more favourable terms; because this is how this particular job works.
No. The writers write the shows. The producers produce the shows. The producer's job includes defining what the series actually is. What it's called, what it's about, who the main characters are. The writers write down the actual words the actors say.
If a writer doesn't want to write an episode of a TV show then they have that choice, of course, but they'll end up being paid nothing at all. If they're writing an episode of, say, the new Twin Peaks series, they can't decide to write an episode of a completely different show with a completely different premise.
This does seem to be talking about Netflix as well. Writers don't care whether the show is streamed, broadcast, or sold on DVD, except in that this will affect the royalties they receive.
I like the shorter seasons. US shows seem to drag a bit mid-season. British shows with about 6 episodes per series end too quickly. The 10-13 episode seasons Netflix does seem a good length.
I'm sure this makes cable TV less value for money. But I think most people consider that to be slowly dying in favour of online services.
You seem to be mixing up the job of writers and producers.
How did you do this though? Was there perhaps a suggestion that you could get more money elsewhere?
Ultimately, the strongest card in the employee's negotiation is the threat to stop working for the employer. Unions do this collectively.
@this @allows @very @long @tweets, @but @certain @users @with @very @common @names @are @going @to @get @annoyed @at @all @the @notifications @they @get @if @people @use @this @hack.
In practice, joining the Euro can be delayed indefinitely. This is why Sweden still uses the Krona. Border control can probably be negotiated on a practicality basis.
So we take power away from those who "wield the power", and come up with a better means. Eliminating the idea of private ownership of shared resources such as land could severely reduce their power. Probably not what you mean, but allowing people to monopolise a limited resource allows disproportionate influence. The idea that there are people with a surplus while others lack food, shelter and healthcare indicates that we have a screwed up idea of property rights.
The other thing we need to fix is the system of government. Relying on elected representatives is okay but far from perfect. Direct democracy seems to work worse in practice, not allowing any scope for compromise. But there's probably a better system.
It's nice having a purpose, and earning a living. But do we really want to engage such a large chunk of our workforce on mindless repetitive tasks that a robot can do better? This seems to be putting way too much value on work for work's sake, rather than the end result.
The problem is, people do need purpose. And we don't have a new purpose for these displaced workers. Technology is moving faster than society's ability to adapt to it. The solution is not to force technology to slow down, but to find ways to fill the void more quickly. We need a society where the essentials (food, shelter, healthcare) are taken care of, where people can choose to do what they want with their life rather than what they have to.
Is "themself" a word, or should we use "themselves" still?
Will it come with a Dai-X?
Doesn't matter. They're mainstream now. This is not going to drive away the 27 million people who watch Justin Bieber's channel. They can survive entirely on the hugely popular channels.
It makes no difference what it costs them. The unit cost to them is negligible. The price they charge is the one that maximises profit.
If you're willing to pay $30, unless twice as many people will pay, why would they charge less? To make less money?
That's nice. I don't. I know exactly one person who does.
Me too, although that puts me in a minority. I think my upstairs neighbours would get upset if I cranked it up to the level of bass I can physically feel; like I get in a cinema.
Sure. This is great for those who have a projector and a surround sound setup. And who absolutely have to see the latest movies. But then I can see pretty much anything older than 3 months for a fraction of the cost.
Do they care whether you use it? They get the money and the "subscriber". I have no idea how more subscribers really helps them - seems this would give more leverage to the networks - but presumably it does.
"Up to" doesn't mean mandatory. This is a maximum sentence. The maximum penalty for murder is death. Some states have a minimum of life without parole.
Sorry - to clarify - it seems less clear cut if just the widget is patented rather than the means of making a widget. Unless the cartridge does maker something patentable.
Thanks. I can see how the decision makes sense based on that, although it does seem less clear cut if the device is patented.
Would be nice to have a summary of what Lexmark were doing and how they're actually applying patent law to do so.
The C64 had no display. Didn't have a mouse either, and the Pi doesn't actually need one to be usable. Nor did it have ethernet or USB.
You really just need a keyboard and mouse. At that point it's a functional PC with programming languages, and several utilities. Much more than the C64 had.
The expense of a CRAM can probably be justified. You're probably going to be spending more than the drone is worth shooting it down, but not multiple orders of magnitude more. On the plus side, you get the operation flexibility of the CRAM. If drone approaches are rare, costs can be swallowed.