And I hope that if someone orders 1,000 Baxters, the price will adjust. (How muich? Who knows. Instead of $30k is it $25k? Is it $20k with 6 years of software updates, but zero hardware warranty? Mass quantities of anything are a thing that is seldom quantified on a web site.)
Cuz, I mean: If I'm buying multiple hundreds of them, I'm going to have one or two in-house support people whose primary job it is to keep them running: The parts will wear out.
I didn't say it wouldn't be useful, or that it is an unfair price.
I only said that your figure was wrong. And the only reason I bothered with pointing it out is because your first figure was better than your second one.
From your own link: $25,000 buys a basic robot with arms that does nothing useful, with a 1-year warranty on the hardware and 1 year of software updates.
If you want it to grip something with those arms, that's another $1,750 per gripper (ie: per arm).
If you want it to lift something with vacuum, that's $1,750-$2,700.
If you want a set of wheels so you can move the thing around without a forklift, that's another $3,000.
If you want software updates after a year, or more than a year worth of warranty service, that costs some quantity of additional (though not unreasonable, to my mind) thousands of dollars.
Put a plug on one of the old and useless USB printer cables that we all have a million of, and use it to run your router and/or modem during a blackout.
Tie it to a solar panel to use as an emergency energy source in a blackout: Charge the battery during the day, charge the phone from the battery at night.
Power some crappy USB-operated speakers in when outside in the garden, as even crappy speakers are better than phone speakers and most of the inexpensive rechargable Bluetooth stuff is even worse.
Use it as a field supply for your next Arduino project.
Well, CRT face is (weakly) grounded, so e- kinetic energy can excite atom for subsequent photon emission, but its charge will happily leak into the ground.
There is no "ground" anywhere next to flying spacecraft!
There was no "ground" anywhere next to my computer when I had it running from a battery-powered inverter, but the CRT monitor worked fine in this arrangement and I don't glow in the dark.
Dolby does a lot of good research. That you throw them aside as a relic of the past, while at the same time discrediting them for some of the formats you praise (AAC is a thing in part due in part to Dolby's participation in creating the standard) simply shows that you have a myopic and illogical view of the world.
Add the error and difficulty of subtracting rider movement (remember, a phone's accelerometer is not something that is fixed to the chassis of the vehicle, but instead is something loosely carried by a squishy human being) and I'm going to say the answer is probably far closer to 0% than it is 92%.
And cheap USB2 keys that hold a couple hundred times as much data as a DVD don't exist. Nope, they do, and are far more convenient and resilient to damage than optical media.
A DVD is universal, and not going anywhere. It has well-established standards for dealing with audio, video, and just works.
If I hand someone a cheap USB2 key, I'm out a few dollars and the result -might- be that they get to view the thing I just handed them.
If I hand someone a DVD-R, I'm out a few pennies and the result -will- be that they get to view the thing I just handed them.
We, as a self-satisfied SUV driving culture want to preserve our status quo AND pat ourselves on the back. Are we another myopic death cult?
No. We're simply the top of the food chain. Everything else is, quite literally, beneath us, and has been for a most (all?) of recorded history.
Does the wolf care whether the rabbit he just killed was the last example? Nay, he simply fills his belly with it, finds something else to devour, and the Earth gives no shits.
For the poster it is free and for the reader it is free. Costs are paid for by advertisers.
Free? Sorta-kinda, in a very liberal sense of the word.
It's not free as in libre ("here's some stuff, do what you want with it"), and it's not free as in beer ("hey man, want a beer?").
It's "free" as a flyer stuck in your front door that says "Call this number to get a free 24-pack of Pepsi," and you call that number, and you get connected to a vacuum salesman who will deliver your "free" soda while he gives you a hard sell on a new sweeper that you didn't even know you needed. And when you try to take your "free" soda and block his advertising, he's already got his foot in your door. He's probably even started calling you names because he genuinely believes that you're stealing the "free" soda he delivered.
Same with a "free" energy review from some dude walking around the neighborhood with a clip board and a nametag on a lanyard. Or a "free" drawing for a vacation from some company that sells vinyl replacement windows.
I don't see any reason why you shouldn't use the word freely -- English is flexible -- but that doesn't mean that such usage is not complete and utter bullshit.
I used to look after the POS machines for small chain of retail establishments.
The reason that an e-mail client was on the POS machines was because the boss was cheap, and having separate machines for internal business and external transactions seemed expensive to him, even when business halts because some bored lackey decided that they needed the latest "OMG PONIES!!" screensaver on the fucking cash register.
The reason that web browsers were on the POS machines was because Verizon are a bunch of fucks who couldn't be bothered to write a local client, but were perfectly content to always have a dependency on (old) Java and (old) Internet Explorer under (old) Windows.
The reason that the the POS machines ran as Administrator was because my counterparts who were also charged with looking after said machines couldn't be bothered to get anything to work with regular user accounts, and would actively sabotage my efforts to improve security.
The reasons that I no longer concern myself with the retail operations of that company are detailed above.
Yes, it's always better to buy a corpse of a company after the engineers have burned their notes and thrown their desk chairs through the window on their way downtown to mortgage their car and sign up for food stamps, than to buy a company that is not yet a corpse and still has productive and creative people.
The gold standard, IIRC, was for apps to get launched and be able to do something in 2 seconds or less under Dalvik in common use.
You're waiting between 300 and 600 seconds, one time, and still waiting for apps to launch (which I'm sure is not instantaneous with ART, no matter your hardware).
My daily-driver is a Galaxy S5. It is, by most measures, a rather fast phone in terms of internal storage speed and CPU grunt. I don't notice much (any, really) difference in loading apps between 4.4.4 (Dalvik) and 5.0 (ART) on this device. But I do notice the "Android is upgrading...." process taking much longer with ART than Dalvik when tinkering, as I also did when experimenting with ART on the Bionic before Lollipop made ART a default thing and the Bionic was my daily.
Also, too: You seem to dismiss the notion that Dalvik is not exactly JIT: It is absolutely JIT on first load, and then largely-compiled apps get stored in the (not-accidentally-named) Dalvik cache for quick loading later.
I'm not sure that we, given our combined experiences, can say which one is better. It'd be awesome if I could find a Google study of actual performance instead a Google proclamation of things to come, but they're Google and therefore always in a forward-thinking perpetual beta with no rearview mirror: Whatsa behind me, is not important.
I'm currently toying with ROMs on an old Motorola Bionic, which serves as the central music player for the stereo in my garage.
I've waited minutes for ART to do its thing on a singular package, but I've never waited minutes for Dalvik to launch the same thing thing on a properly-working device using Dalvik.
They are therefore not the same process. You might think that they should be, and I might agree that I think that they should be, but they're simply not -- or at least, the ART compilation process always takes longer than the Dalvik JIT process.
(Also, you sound a lot like the folks responding to those who question memory management on Android: "It's taken care of automatically," they say. "You can't do anything to improve it," they further proclaim. But there's a dozen or so tweakable parameters, and nobody can tell me that they're perfect for my usage out-of-the-box than anyone can tell me that my "swappiness" parameter on a Linux box is sane, out-of-the-box, for what I'm doing with it. It may be a reasonable default, or it may not be. But toeing the line unquestionably on the published Truth Of The Matter, and Accepting that Truth for What Is is a foolhardy thing to be doing. It may also be the fact that this same Bionic had a long string of bad Dalvik VM parameters that lasted for months or years, resulting in general sluggishness and frustration, though the 12.x Lollipop-based line seems better for reasons I haven't yet bothered to investigate.)
The issue is not, AFAICT, that the pictures may have been used for a yearbook: I'll sign up for that being fair use any day of the week. (I mean, sheesh: Where's the fight there, on either side?)
The issue is that the principal threatened a student with a bogus raft full of bullshit (including "reporting to the IRS") over a display of some 4,000 pictures he'd taken of school activities using school equipment, and subsequently displayed on a non-school website.
Similarly, if I create a chalk drawing of a foot or a bicep or a car tire in art class, using school materials and equipment time and instruction, I expect that this drawing will be mine at the end of the day.
If someone wants to use a copy of it for their own work, that's a slightly different matter.... but it will always remain mine unless otherwise and explicitly negotiated and agreed upon.
Where is the line between having a spirited discussion on how an administrator can lack common sense...and providing their contact details (regardless of how public they may be) to a public forum?
I believe such a line is defined in post #49746421.
Either way, it already was public information. There is no such thing as information being more public or less public -- it either is public information, or it is not.
That already-public information might be more-popularized in one instant than it was in the last instant doesn't seem to matter much.
Right. I know this. It's also available from that main site, directly, via anonymous FTP....which, AFAICT, is still something that Windows browsers transparently support just as they always have.
So it's better to compile things millions* of times (once for each low-speed, battery-powered, handheld device), than it is to compile things hundreds** of times on a distributed and efficient server farm that certainly has a few clock cycles to spare.
Am I with you so far? Are you with me?
Good.
Can we compute the increased carbon emissions of this, including wear-and-tear due to increased battery aging and decreased lifespan (which more and more means death to the entire device)? Man-hours wasted staring, waiting for devices to compile their own apps?
Because if we did, we'd end up with a small number for each individual user. But when we multiply out by millions, very small numbers turn into very real numbers consisting of man-days, man-months, and man-years.
For the sake of pulling numbers out of our ass, suppose that there are a million Lollipop users. If each user has a minute of their life wasted waiting for ART to compile stuff (which is a low number), then we're at 1.9 man-years wasted because targeting a hundred platforms is hard, and stuff.
Before long, we'll be at a point where entire human lifetimes have been wasted waiting for ART to make things fast, because -- somehow -- keeping track of architectures and compiler flags is something that Google can't be bothered to do (even though they already know, by way of licensing, all that is needed to know for devices participating in their OEM Play ecosystem).
*: That's obvious; Lollipop/ART, while not hugely common in the installed base, is still quite a hot item on devices that support it/it supports (chicken, meet egg). Millions seems appropriate. **: A quick Google search tells me that in August of 2014, there were over 18,000 distinct Android device types, but the number of them running Lollipop is at best in the hundreds.
Slashdot Mirror
What about the other caps? Those of the power supply, those of ancillary equipment (video card, sound card, whatever else you have plugged in)?
A bad cap anywhere can cause enough of a glitch in the works that something unexpected happens, and things freeze up.
I'm all for automation.
And I hope that if someone orders 1,000 Baxters, the price will adjust. (How muich? Who knows. Instead of $30k is it $25k? Is it $20k with 6 years of software updates, but zero hardware warranty? Mass quantities of anything are a thing that is seldom quantified on a web site.)
Cuz, I mean: If I'm buying multiple hundreds of them, I'm going to have one or two in-house support people whose primary job it is to keep them running: The parts will wear out.
I didn't say it wouldn't be useful, or that it is an unfair price.
I only said that your figure was wrong. And the only reason I bothered with pointing it out is because your first figure was better than your second one.
There was no other implication.
From your own link: $25,000 buys a basic robot with arms that does nothing useful, with a 1-year warranty on the hardware and 1 year of software updates.
If you want it to grip something with those arms, that's another $1,750 per gripper (ie: per arm).
If you want it to lift something with vacuum, that's $1,750-$2,700.
If you want a set of wheels so you can move the thing around without a forklift, that's another $3,000.
If you want software updates after a year, or more than a year worth of warranty service, that costs some quantity of additional (though not unreasonable, to my mind) thousands of dollars.
At any rate, it's a lot closer to $30k than $25k.
Put a plug on one of the old and useless USB printer cables that we all have a million of, and use it to run your router and/or modem during a blackout.
Tie it to a solar panel to use as an emergency energy source in a blackout: Charge the battery during the day, charge the phone from the battery at night.
Power some crappy USB-operated speakers in when outside in the garden, as even crappy speakers are better than phone speakers and most of the inexpensive rechargable Bluetooth stuff is even worse.
Use it as a field supply for your next Arduino project.
etc.
There was no "ground" anywhere next to my computer when I had it running from a battery-powered inverter, but the CRT monitor worked fine in this arrangement and I don't glow in the dark.
Dolby does a lot of good research. That you throw them aside as a relic of the past, while at the same time discrediting them for some of the formats you praise (AAC is a thing in part due in part to Dolby's participation in creating the standard) simply shows that you have a myopic and illogical view of the world.
Add the error and difficulty of subtracting rider movement (remember, a phone's accelerometer is not something that is fixed to the chassis of the vehicle, but instead is something loosely carried by a squishy human being) and I'm going to say the answer is probably far closer to 0% than it is 92%.
A DVD is universal, and not going anywhere. It has well-established standards for dealing with audio, video, and just works.
If I hand someone a cheap USB2 key, I'm out a few dollars and the result -might- be that they get to view the thing I just handed them.
If I hand someone a DVD-R, I'm out a few pennies and the result -will- be that they get to view the thing I just handed them.
No. We're simply the top of the food chain. Everything else is, quite literally, beneath us, and has been for a most (all?) of recorded history.
Does the wolf care whether the rabbit he just killed was the last example? Nay, he simply fills his belly with it, finds something else to devour, and the Earth gives no shits.
Free? Sorta-kinda, in a very liberal sense of the word.
It's not free as in libre ("here's some stuff, do what you want with it"), and it's not free as in beer ("hey man, want a beer?").
It's "free" as a flyer stuck in your front door that says "Call this number to get a free 24-pack of Pepsi," and you call that number, and you get connected to a vacuum salesman who will deliver your "free" soda while he gives you a hard sell on a new sweeper that you didn't even know you needed. And when you try to take your "free" soda and block his advertising, he's already got his foot in your door. He's probably even started calling you names because he genuinely believes that you're stealing the "free" soda he delivered.
Same with a "free" energy review from some dude walking around the neighborhood with a clip board and a nametag on a lanyard. Or a "free" drawing for a vacation from some company that sells vinyl replacement windows.
I don't see any reason why you shouldn't use the word freely -- English is flexible -- but that doesn't mean that such usage is not complete and utter bullshit.
I used to look after the POS machines for small chain of retail establishments.
The reason that an e-mail client was on the POS machines was because the boss was cheap, and having separate machines for internal business and external transactions seemed expensive to him, even when business halts because some bored lackey decided that they needed the latest "OMG PONIES!!" screensaver on the fucking cash register.
The reason that web browsers were on the POS machines was because Verizon are a bunch of fucks who couldn't be bothered to write a local client, but were perfectly content to always have a dependency on (old) Java and (old) Internet Explorer under (old) Windows.
The reason that the the POS machines ran as Administrator was because my counterparts who were also charged with looking after said machines couldn't be bothered to get anything to work with regular user accounts, and would actively sabotage my efforts to improve security.
The reasons that I no longer concern myself with the retail operations of that company are detailed above.
But there's still more than two players, which makes it not a duality.
A non-paywalled link (you'll need to scroll down to find the article).
You're welcome!
Yes, it's always better to buy a corpse of a company after the engineers have burned their notes and thrown their desk chairs through the window on their way downtown to mortgage their car and sign up for food stamps, than to buy a company that is not yet a corpse and still has productive and creative people.
The gold standard, IIRC, was for apps to get launched and be able to do something in 2 seconds or less under Dalvik in common use.
You're waiting between 300 and 600 seconds, one time, and still waiting for apps to launch (which I'm sure is not instantaneous with ART, no matter your hardware).
My daily-driver is a Galaxy S5. It is, by most measures, a rather fast phone in terms of internal storage speed and CPU grunt. I don't notice much (any, really) difference in loading apps between 4.4.4 (Dalvik) and 5.0 (ART) on this device. But I do notice the "Android is upgrading...." process taking much longer with ART than Dalvik when tinkering, as I also did when experimenting with ART on the Bionic before Lollipop made ART a default thing and the Bionic was my daily.
Also, too: You seem to dismiss the notion that Dalvik is not exactly JIT: It is absolutely JIT on first load, and then largely-compiled apps get stored in the (not-accidentally-named) Dalvik cache for quick loading later.
I'm not sure that we, given our combined experiences, can say which one is better. It'd be awesome if I could find a Google study of actual performance instead a Google proclamation of things to come, but they're Google and therefore always in a forward-thinking perpetual beta with no rearview mirror: Whatsa behind me, is not important.
I did know that. I just didn't spell it out. (How do you propose to know what I know, anyway? Preposterous!)
Look, do you want PuTTY binaries directly from the official site, or not? Because that's the problem being discussed.
Or at least it was until you showed up.
You say that, but...
I'm currently toying with ROMs on an old Motorola Bionic, which serves as the central music player for the stereo in my garage.
I've waited minutes for ART to do its thing on a singular package, but I've never waited minutes for Dalvik to launch the same thing thing on a properly-working device using Dalvik.
They are therefore not the same process. You might think that they should be, and I might agree that I think that they should be, but they're simply not -- or at least, the ART compilation process always takes longer than the Dalvik JIT process.
(Also, you sound a lot like the folks responding to those who question memory management on Android: "It's taken care of automatically," they say. "You can't do anything to improve it," they further proclaim. But there's a dozen or so tweakable parameters, and nobody can tell me that they're perfect for my usage out-of-the-box than anyone can tell me that my "swappiness" parameter on a Linux box is sane, out-of-the-box, for what I'm doing with it. It may be a reasonable default, or it may not be. But toeing the line unquestionably on the published Truth Of The Matter, and Accepting that Truth for What Is is a foolhardy thing to be doing. It may also be the fact that this same Bionic had a long string of bad Dalvik VM parameters that lasted for months or years, resulting in general sluggishness and frustration, though the 12.x Lollipop-based line seems better for reasons I haven't yet bothered to investigate.)
The issue is not, AFAICT, that the pictures may have been used for a yearbook: I'll sign up for that being fair use any day of the week. (I mean, sheesh: Where's the fight there, on either side?)
The issue is that the principal threatened a student with a bogus raft full of bullshit (including "reporting to the IRS") over a display of some 4,000 pictures he'd taken of school activities using school equipment, and subsequently displayed on a non-school website.
Similarly, if I create a chalk drawing of a foot or a bicep or a car tire in art class, using school materials and equipment time and instruction, I expect that this drawing will be mine at the end of the day.
If someone wants to use a copy of it for their own work, that's a slightly different matter.... but it will always remain mine unless otherwise and explicitly negotiated and agreed upon.
I believe such a line is defined in post #49746421.
Either way, it already was public information. There is no such thing as information being more public or less public -- it either is public information, or it is not.
That already-public information might be more-popularized in one instant than it was in the last instant doesn't seem to matter much.
Right. I know this. It's also available from that main site, directly, via anonymous FTP....which, AFAICT, is still something that Windows browsers transparently support just as they always have.
So it's better to compile things millions* of times (once for each low-speed, battery-powered, handheld device), than it is to compile things hundreds** of times on a distributed and efficient server farm that certainly has a few clock cycles to spare.
Am I with you so far? Are you with me?
Good.
Can we compute the increased carbon emissions of this, including wear-and-tear due to increased battery aging and decreased lifespan (which more and more means death to the entire device)? Man-hours wasted staring, waiting for devices to compile their own apps?
Because if we did, we'd end up with a small number for each individual user. But when we multiply out by millions, very small numbers turn into very real numbers consisting of man-days, man-months, and man-years.
For the sake of pulling numbers out of our ass, suppose that there are a million Lollipop users. If each user has a minute of their life wasted waiting for ART to compile stuff (which is a low number), then we're at 1.9 man-years wasted because targeting a hundred platforms is hard, and stuff.
Before long, we'll be at a point where entire human lifetimes have been wasted waiting for ART to make things fast, because -- somehow -- keeping track of architectures and compiler flags is something that Google can't be bothered to do (even though they already know, by way of licensing, all that is needed to know for devices participating in their OEM Play ecosystem).
*: That's obvious; Lollipop/ART, while not hugely common in the installed base, is still quite a hot item on devices that support it/it supports (chicken, meet egg). Millions seems appropriate.
**: A quick Google search tells me that in August of 2014, there were over 18,000 distinct Android device types, but the number of them running Lollipop is at best in the hundreds.
That you're both pedantic and wrong?
You, sir, win the award for Conceded Asshole of the Day.