"Meanwhile, the poor Babel fish, by effectively removing all barriers to communication between different races and cultures, has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation."
What about the executives jobs, what exactly do they do again that machines can't replace them too? I mean, it's not like a machine can't order machines to take over jobs.
A Tesla Model S has a 90 kilowatt hour battery life for it's 275 mile range. A kilowatt hour is a thousand watts, and let's assume you're going 60mph. For argument, and maths, sake we'll assume you're going above efficiency and say you'll get 240 miles out of that. That's 4 hours, so 22.5 kilowatts an hour. That's a powerdraw of 22 thousand watts in 1 hour. The new self driving chip announced by Nvidia only draws 500 watts, that's 500 watts in an hour. Or better yet, here's the empirical evidence of Tesla owners discussing their average watts/min usage: https://forums.tesla.com/forum...
Even there with more efficiency, the new Nvidia chip uses in an hour less energy than the car itself uses in 2 minutes. This article is absolute bullshit, they had 1 damned thing their job required and they didn't do it. Self driving electric cars are perfectly mathematically sounds.
If Google could make a proper app ecosystem for Chromebooks, like native apps, I could see them as the permanent of Microsoft in any remaining consumer space. Not that this would be the best for anyone, Google is evil as hell. But at this point I'd take evil as hell over slothful and expensive. I can go out and get an I-Pad pro that's as fast as a good windows laptop, with a much better screen, for $200+ less than the windows laptop. Or an awesome, convertible tablet like Chromebook for $400 less than the equivalent Windows laptop.
If either had even close to the same app ecosystem I'd do so instantly. Or if Linux did (and had the price of a Chromebook/etc.) same thing there. As it is I like to play games and end up using Lightroom, Photoshop, and etc. a lot. But damn am I tired of vastly overpaying for what feels like ever worse tech.
So any/.er knows battery "breakthroughs" are once a month or more on average (or so it seems). But most, or so far one supposes all, of them have major problems. A battery needs to hit high power density, IE how much power it can deliver over time. High energy density/specific energy, IE how much energy it can store per liter and per kilogram. It needs to be able to last over a long amount of charge/discharge cycles, because if your battery loses too much energy/shorts/explodes after a few charges then it's useless. And it needs to be cheap to make.
Well, surprise, but somehow this one seems to be the announcement that, could, hit all of those points. The reported numbers are several times the current best for li-on power density, energy density (assumedly for both volume and weight), lasts a lot of charge and discharge cycles, and doesn't require some exotic rare earth material to make. Assuming the actual creation process isn't exotic or complex, IE can be economically scaled, this could actually be the coming of the affordable electric car/smartphone battery that actually lasts all day/etc. that's been promised for a while now. Here's fuckin hoping.
All hail the mighty corporate overlords. Bow before your nobility peasants! Scrape and bow before your betters, and pray they are generous enough to leave you what little pittance you deserve.
The Samsung Galaxy Note costs $1,000+ for a while now. No one bats an eye, to borrow a relevant phrase from The Dark Knight. Earlier this year there was a $1,200 pre-order for a smartphone, site unseen. No giant reaction there. But, to continue the relevant phrase, nobody panics when things go according to plan. As soon as something doesn't, like the i-phone costing more, everybody loses their minds! Or rather has a stupid opinion piece. But that's all this is, something not going according to plan, there's no other story here.
The “notch” on the new iPhone X is not just strange, interesting, or even odd — it is bad. It is bad design, and as a result, bad for the user experience.
This is the first sentence in this piece. Complaining about a stupid little band thing in the new iphone. It doesn't explain why it's bad, it just states it's bad and says its unnecessary and could've been different. To the same end as this writer, I dub this piece of writing to be bad and unnecessary. It could've been different. Instead it's irritating and annoying. Justification? What the hell is that, I have declared something and once I have done so it is truth written plain! Away with you peasant, you and your "logical reasoning supporting a thesis" and other such notions. I've not the time for such things.
So, it's Star Trek. But Original Trek instead of TNG, since by your description the Captain doesn't Picard the fuck out and sit there playing a flute while all the other officers get bodyshielded by red shirts. Kirk all the way! Guess I'll give it a watch.
The difference between men and women, genetically, comes down to the SRY gene and a few missing ones that makes the difference between the sex chrosome (X or Y). Meaning the difference would either have to be that the SRY gene somehow also causes mutations in sperm versus eggs, or more likely eggs are less likely to mutate than sperm are. Which is understandable, men's reproductive area, as such, is more exposed to radiation than women's (water does wonders for blocking ionizing radiation). Meaning sperm are more likely to get hit and mutate. And/Or sperm production cycles are more messy and take less time to correctly copy all genetic code.
Actually that last one makes sense as well. Millions of sperm, quantity over quality, coming at (usually) one egg a month. IE it's all the sperm's fault. Sperm causes mutants! Down with the sperm! Let's start some bizarre ultra feminist dystopia where sperm is considered evil.
Why does every post even remotely involving China somehow end up mentioning "Well in China they..." As if China is some monumental homogenous blob that devours all life. One that somehow involves no individual or companies whatsoever but is instead the subject of an Apple commercial about 1984 from 1984. In fact where are any of the companies mentioned here? Last I looked investors didn't actually invent new things, engineers did, working at actual companies. Companies with names, and products, and timelines.
Certainly it is, it cherry picked the one example it could find supporting its clickbaity headline and then congratulated itself on all the clicks, and subsequent advertising money, it got itself for doing so. Proctor and Gamble just cut back to the advertising space it found most effective, it didn't stop it all together. Nor did the company in question suggest it was going to stop advertising all together. The general consensus of the conference was that online advertising should be more targeted than the weird blanket coverage many companies do now.
That's an article that might be worth writing, reading, and posting to/.
Instead what we get is clickbait bullshit that implies Apple, the most valuable publicly traded company in the world and one that doesn't do online advertisement, is worthless along with any number of other things, just to be even more clickbaity.
So just turn off bluetooth forever and keep it off? I've got a wireless mouse but that's all I use bluetooth for. I suppose the most vulnerable devices would be phones in close proximity, a densely populated city or something.
In this thread/. "nuclear experts" will decry just how costly all this solar stuff is and how great and awesome and cheap nuclear power is.
All that on a story about how a multi billion dollar energy company couldn't get a nuclear power plant off the ground even after $800 million dollars. I'm sure all Duke needed to do was consult such expert/. in order to save their project.
Doesn't matter, legally speaking. They are, in effect, altering the performance with neither permission to alter the performance nor are they transforming the performance enough to constitute fair use. That it's a technical loophole through which they are altering the performance was, in this case, deemed not protectable. They are, in effect, selling a different version of a product than the one the customer has legal access to.
Imagine if someone tried selling the movie where the prequels were recut into a single movie. Even if the sale was restricted to people that owned all 3 prequels, it would still obviously be copyright infringement. Well, legally speaking it's the same thing here.
The cost of Fukushima alone is 187 billion dollars US. Where's that factor into the tired "Nuclear power forever!" rhetoric? Or the fact that one of the only remaining power companies with nuclear ambitions in the US has gone bankrupt for cost overruns. Or the fact that solar power can still improve dramatically for cost, and should able to beat the, entirely theoretical, ROI on nuclear within a decade. While the new "safe" nuclear power plants won't be even theoretically ready until then; and would actually be up and running years after that. Not too mention all the hundreds of millions needed in R&D for them could easily be spent elsewhere.
"Nuclear!" is just a fantasy people with a bad case of Dunning-Kruger effect concerning energy utilities yell to make themselves feel superior.
It's an exaggeration, probably one that shouldn't have been made, demonstrating the return on investment for continuing tired franchises and crap adaptations is shrinking compared to the heights hit in recent years. The party involved with neverending sequels of decade plus year old franchises and superheroes movies is finally winding down it seems. And considering it can take years to get big budgets movies from concept to box office it means Hollywood will need to start taking notice ASAP.
Oddly enough this was predicted by Neal Stephenson in "The Diamond Age." Where only the educated could read, while the poor still had access to technology but ironically enough not education, and so ended up using a simple pictograph system of information. That tech can spread faster than education is a sad prediction to come true.
Step 1: Don't use your standard work or personal computer, in non incgonito or otherwise browser history tracking mode, to Google, with your google account signed in, phrases such as "Insider trading", "how sec detect unusual trade", or however it is you googled this article to begin with... you dumbass.
Huh? Ok, salvage identical, makes sense with the display controllers. Still no better for miners unless they can pick it up cheaper, but makes sense from the AIB point of view.
This is pure marketing on the part of ASUS, all they did was cut out all the display ports and call it "Mining oriented!" It doesn't really do anything beyond a normal GTX 1060.
It should be noted that AIBs have almost no control over GPUs, they are there to slap branding on it and take over warranty duties. They're a bit like car dealerships, in that they're middle men and I'm not sure why they exist anymore. Which isn't to say AMD and Nvidia won't be putting out newer GPU types that'd get more out of AI/Sim/Mining etc. eventually. Just that they haven't yet, and so any claim that an AIB has is bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
"Meanwhile, the poor Babel fish, by effectively removing all barriers to communication between different races and cultures, has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation."
What about the executives jobs, what exactly do they do again that machines can't replace them too? I mean, it's not like a machine can't order machines to take over jobs.
A Tesla Model S has a 90 kilowatt hour battery life for it's 275 mile range. A kilowatt hour is a thousand watts, and let's assume you're going 60mph. For argument, and maths, sake we'll assume you're going above efficiency and say you'll get 240 miles out of that. That's 4 hours, so 22.5 kilowatts an hour. That's a powerdraw of 22 thousand watts in 1 hour. The new self driving chip announced by Nvidia only draws 500 watts, that's 500 watts in an hour. Or better yet, here's the empirical evidence of Tesla owners discussing their average watts/min usage: https://forums.tesla.com/forum...
Even there with more efficiency, the new Nvidia chip uses in an hour less energy than the car itself uses in 2 minutes. This article is absolute bullshit, they had 1 damned thing their job required and they didn't do it. Self driving electric cars are perfectly mathematically sounds.
If Google could make a proper app ecosystem for Chromebooks, like native apps, I could see them as the permanent of Microsoft in any remaining consumer space. Not that this would be the best for anyone, Google is evil as hell. But at this point I'd take evil as hell over slothful and expensive. I can go out and get an I-Pad pro that's as fast as a good windows laptop, with a much better screen, for $200+ less than the windows laptop. Or an awesome, convertible tablet like Chromebook for $400 less than the equivalent Windows laptop.
If either had even close to the same app ecosystem I'd do so instantly. Or if Linux did (and had the price of a Chromebook/etc.) same thing there. As it is I like to play games and end up using Lightroom, Photoshop, and etc. a lot. But damn am I tired of vastly overpaying for what feels like ever worse tech.
So any /.er knows battery "breakthroughs" are once a month or more on average (or so it seems). But most, or so far one supposes all, of them have major problems. A battery needs to hit high power density, IE how much power it can deliver over time. High energy density/specific energy, IE how much energy it can store per liter and per kilogram. It needs to be able to last over a long amount of charge/discharge cycles, because if your battery loses too much energy/shorts/explodes after a few charges then it's useless. And it needs to be cheap to make.
Well, surprise, but somehow this one seems to be the announcement that, could, hit all of those points. The reported numbers are several times the current best for li-on power density, energy density (assumedly for both volume and weight), lasts a lot of charge and discharge cycles, and doesn't require some exotic rare earth material to make. Assuming the actual creation process isn't exotic or complex, IE can be economically scaled, this could actually be the coming of the affordable electric car/smartphone battery that actually lasts all day/etc. that's been promised for a while now. Here's fuckin hoping.
All hail the mighty corporate overlords. Bow before your nobility peasants! Scrape and bow before your betters, and pray they are generous enough to leave you what little pittance you deserve.
The Samsung Galaxy Note costs $1,000+ for a while now. No one bats an eye, to borrow a relevant phrase from The Dark Knight. Earlier this year there was a $1,200 pre-order for a smartphone, site unseen. No giant reaction there. But, to continue the relevant phrase, nobody panics when things go according to plan. As soon as something doesn't, like the i-phone costing more, everybody loses their minds! Or rather has a stupid opinion piece. But that's all this is, something not going according to plan, there's no other story here.
The “notch” on the new iPhone X is not just strange, interesting, or even odd — it is bad. It is bad design, and as a result, bad for the user experience.
This is the first sentence in this piece. Complaining about a stupid little band thing in the new iphone. It doesn't explain why it's bad, it just states it's bad and says its unnecessary and could've been different. To the same end as this writer, I dub this piece of writing to be bad and unnecessary. It could've been different. Instead it's irritating and annoying. Justification? What the hell is that, I have declared something and once I have done so it is truth written plain! Away with you peasant, you and your "logical reasoning supporting a thesis" and other such notions. I've not the time for such things.
Of course, 2 months ago the same feat was published in Nature from a doctor in Oregon. https://www.nature.com/news/cr...
So, it's Star Trek. But Original Trek instead of TNG, since by your description the Captain doesn't Picard the fuck out and sit there playing a flute while all the other officers get bodyshielded by red shirts. Kirk all the way! Guess I'll give it a watch.
The difference between men and women, genetically, comes down to the SRY gene and a few missing ones that makes the difference between the sex chrosome (X or Y). Meaning the difference would either have to be that the SRY gene somehow also causes mutations in sperm versus eggs, or more likely eggs are less likely to mutate than sperm are. Which is understandable, men's reproductive area, as such, is more exposed to radiation than women's (water does wonders for blocking ionizing radiation). Meaning sperm are more likely to get hit and mutate. And/Or sperm production cycles are more messy and take less time to correctly copy all genetic code.
Actually that last one makes sense as well. Millions of sperm, quantity over quality, coming at (usually) one egg a month. IE it's all the sperm's fault. Sperm causes mutants! Down with the sperm! Let's start some bizarre ultra feminist dystopia where sperm is considered evil.
Why does every post even remotely involving China somehow end up mentioning "Well in China they..." As if China is some monumental homogenous blob that devours all life. One that somehow involves no individual or companies whatsoever but is instead the subject of an Apple commercial about 1984 from 1984. In fact where are any of the companies mentioned here? Last I looked investors didn't actually invent new things, engineers did, working at actual companies. Companies with names, and products, and timelines.
Certainly it is, it cherry picked the one example it could find supporting its clickbaity headline and then congratulated itself on all the clicks, and subsequent advertising money, it got itself for doing so. Proctor and Gamble just cut back to the advertising space it found most effective, it didn't stop it all together. Nor did the company in question suggest it was going to stop advertising all together. The general consensus of the conference was that online advertising should be more targeted than the weird blanket coverage many companies do now.
/.
That's an article that might be worth writing, reading, and posting to
Instead what we get is clickbait bullshit that implies Apple, the most valuable publicly traded company in the world and one that doesn't do online advertisement, is worthless along with any number of other things, just to be even more clickbaity.
Wisconsin lawmakers sue, claiming Foxconn did not hold up incentive package deal from 3 yeas ago...
So just turn off bluetooth forever and keep it off? I've got a wireless mouse but that's all I use bluetooth for. I suppose the most vulnerable devices would be phones in close proximity, a densely populated city or something.
In this thread /. "nuclear experts" will decry just how costly all this solar stuff is and how great and awesome and cheap nuclear power is.
/. in order to save their project.
All that on a story about how a multi billion dollar energy company couldn't get a nuclear power plant off the ground even after $800 million dollars. I'm sure all Duke needed to do was consult such expert
Doesn't matter, legally speaking. They are, in effect, altering the performance with neither permission to alter the performance nor are they transforming the performance enough to constitute fair use. That it's a technical loophole through which they are altering the performance was, in this case, deemed not protectable. They are, in effect, selling a different version of a product than the one the customer has legal access to.
Imagine if someone tried selling the movie where the prequels were recut into a single movie. Even if the sale was restricted to people that owned all 3 prequels, it would still obviously be copyright infringement. Well, legally speaking it's the same thing here.
The cost of Fukushima alone is 187 billion dollars US. Where's that factor into the tired "Nuclear power forever!" rhetoric? Or the fact that one of the only remaining power companies with nuclear ambitions in the US has gone bankrupt for cost overruns. Or the fact that solar power can still improve dramatically for cost, and should able to beat the, entirely theoretical, ROI on nuclear within a decade. While the new "safe" nuclear power plants won't be even theoretically ready until then; and would actually be up and running years after that. Not too mention all the hundreds of millions needed in R&D for them could easily be spent elsewhere.
"Nuclear!" is just a fantasy people with a bad case of Dunning-Kruger effect concerning energy utilities yell to make themselves feel superior.
It's an exaggeration, probably one that shouldn't have been made, demonstrating the return on investment for continuing tired franchises and crap adaptations is shrinking compared to the heights hit in recent years. The party involved with neverending sequels of decade plus year old franchises and superheroes movies is finally winding down it seems. And considering it can take years to get big budgets movies from concept to box office it means Hollywood will need to start taking notice ASAP.
Oddly enough this was predicted by Neal Stephenson in "The Diamond Age." Where only the educated could read, while the poor still had access to technology but ironically enough not education, and so ended up using a simple pictograph system of information. That tech can spread faster than education is a sad prediction to come true.
Not so far as I can tell. Something about tying an onion to your belt because that was they style at the time...
Step 1: Don't use your standard work or personal computer, in non incgonito or otherwise browser history tracking mode, to Google, with your google account signed in, phrases such as "Insider trading", "how sec detect unusual trade", or however it is you googled this article to begin with... you dumbass.
"I'm OLD and have NEVER USED A VR HEADSET! Get off my lawn, damned kids" - Random old /.er
Huh? Ok, salvage identical, makes sense with the display controllers. Still no better for miners unless they can pick it up cheaper, but makes sense from the AIB point of view.
This is pure marketing on the part of ASUS, all they did was cut out all the display ports and call it "Mining oriented!" It doesn't really do anything beyond a normal GTX 1060. It should be noted that AIBs have almost no control over GPUs, they are there to slap branding on it and take over warranty duties. They're a bit like car dealerships, in that they're middle men and I'm not sure why they exist anymore. Which isn't to say AMD and Nvidia won't be putting out newer GPU types that'd get more out of AI/Sim/Mining etc. eventually. Just that they haven't yet, and so any claim that an AIB has is bullshit.