Star Trek Discovery is broadcast on the Space channel in Canada. Not sure how that deal was worked out. Isn't the first season on Netflix now?
Not in the US. In the US the only way to get Star Trek is via CBS's "All Access"- but who wants to pay an extra $5 a month just for one show?
In other countries it is available on Netflix (and as a result gets a larger market share of eyes). Only in the US is the consumer blocked from watching it.
For years, people screamed they wanted cable ala carte, they wanted to pick and choose what channels they get and now that future is here. This is the future we wanted. You can make good arguments about pricing but we got what we wished for.
It's kinda like a la carte but instead of picking "the history channel" and "discovery channel" you get to pick between:
"variety package 1", "variety package 2", and "variety package 3".
If you just want documentaries, or history stuff, there's no way to pick just the type of shows you want- you can only pick from variety packages of which only 2 or 3 shows you're interested in in each bucket.
No, you don't. I keep Hulu, Netflix, and Prime (and that's more for shipping than video) year round.
That's all I have, and honeslty it's more than I need. Prime we have because of the shipping otherwise wouldn't bother with it- it has the worst UI and worst selection. It's not worth getting Prime just for TV.
That leaves Hulu and Netflix. The wife can't live without Netflix and the kids can't live without Hulu. I watch a few shows from both but could do without either. So both Hulu and Netflix stay for now to keep the family happy.
Three streaming services is enough and where I'm stopping. I want to watch a couple of shows on CBS but I'm not going to pay extra for it- so screw All Access. I'd like to watch GOT but not paying extra for it- so screw HBO. Nothing I want to watch on Disney- it's just going to be a bunch of comic book crap and kids programs. Even if they get something I want- screw it, not paying extra.
Streaming service fatigue- I don't need or want more- I'm certainly not going to pay for more.
What other privacy destroying abuse of their data do they know already know about that will only surface in the weeks or months to come... or never?
I wonder this too- and suspect there are a lot of thing they know about that they're staying quiet on. They don't take privacy seriously, or have any sense of civic responsibility. They only let on that they've done something wrong or allowed something bad to happen as damage control.
Famous for being famous, like the Kardashians, or Zsa Zsa Gabor, or...a lot of "celebrities"?
The only thing I know about him is that he paid people to make Nazi salutes and read off anti-Semitic statements. For that reason alone he sounds like a real asshole.
Does someone say "You control too much, Standard oil, I mean Amazon".
It's not illegal to have your hand in many different businesses. They can't even be accused of being a monopoly. Walmart is a bigger retailer. They don't have more than 50% of the cloud market. Amazon Prime for TV is outshadowed by Netlix and Hulu. Their delivery service is smaller than both Fed Ex and Oops. When it comes to tablets Apple and Samsung sell more.
They have their hands in many pots but they're not the biggest player in any of them.
Sometimes spending the time to make something more efficient is inefficient. I'll happily admit that I have code out there that I know is not the most efficient, and I even know the ways to make it MORE efficient.
I write internal apps for a private business. If one of my webpages takes 10milliseconds longer to load than I could optimize it for... so be it... we're not talking about thousands of people hitting the site at the same time.
I have a long list of things to work on and I can crank out more pages doing some things "slightly inefficiently". It would be an inefficient use of my time to go around shaving 10 milliseconds here and there. Trying to make things slightly more efficient and load slightly quicker in some scenarios is a waste of time.
Makes sense - a bus gets typically 6 miles per diesel gallon, 5 for gasoline, compared to a car's average of 25 mpg, and the duty cycles of busses is typically 25% or more, vs consumer-owned cars that are typically around 5% utilization, so busses burn about 5x as many gallons per mile driven, and are driven about 5x as much of the day, so each bus converted to an EV would equate to 25 cars converts to EVs, so electrifying busses is a very efficient way to reduce gas consumption. And I bet fleet owners like it, too - EVs have much lower operating costs and lower maintenance costs, which are a big deal for fleets.
On the flip side, globally there are over 900 million cars on the road, vs perhaps 100 thousand busses, so there's a lot more fuel consumed by cars than busses, so while each car has less impact, they outnumber busses by 9,000:1, so converting all of them to EVs would have a lot more impact.
The problem is, whereas communities may be thoughtful and conscientious; individuals are selfish and less thoughtful. It's easier to get cities to flip to electric than people. It has to happen eventually, and the environment will be better for it- but people suck!
Honestly, there is a place for trolleybus and electric bus. This shouldn't be an either/or, this should be a "what works best in a given scenario".
An old established set of town that is stable (not growing/shrinking or changing much) a trolleybus might be ideal. It's a highly predictable route without much change in demand plus the aesthetic might be better in those locations; especially if tourists around. Tourists love the nostalgic feel of trolley buses.
Another ideal place for trolleys would be to link an airport with a train station or metro. A short static route that isn't going to change much.
Where electric buses might be superior to trolleys would be in growing cities, or cities that are undergoing rapid change. Suburbs, places with seasonal changes to transport needs, small towns or for longer commutes- perhaps even intra-city trips where there isn't rail links
Oh, and, no place in Britain is more than 70 miles from the coast line- so if desalination was used as a last resort for fresh water at least it wouldn't have far to travel. Britain is also fairly small geographically, so water from the North where it is abundant could be piped to the South which gets less rain but has higher population density.
Yes, there's plenty of water... As you point out- the island is surrounded by water... it's just an expensive supply of water to make drinkable. Britain won't run out of water... they just might run out of cheap drinking water.
Bruce Springsteen wrote 57channels way back. Seems little has changed, for me at least. Have Netflix, Amazon prime, and OTA with dvr (tivo) , and I barely watch an hour a day, and still find little content on the three sources.
Would love to hear from a subscriber what I'm missing (I'm not being snarky).
Yeah, we have Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Prime. I personally watch less than an hour a day on average- but my kids watch a lot and so does my wife. Hulu probably gets the most use followed by Netflix. We rarely watch anything on Amazon and would probably cut it, but we use it for the free shipping mainly anyway.
Oh no, I paid my property taxes in advance! What if my house washes away.
Your house is more likely than MoviePass to still be around in a year's time. Although, with that said, everyone expected them to go belly-up before year's end last year. In hindsight, I wish I had bought a Movie Pass a year ago seeing that they are still around today.
That will be awkward when the baby Mammoth is born and opens its eyes for the first time seeing it's stretched out momma and gets imprinted.
Mammoth will think it's a mouse and try mating with mice when it grows up. Hopefully the Mammoth is a girl, because I don't think a mammoth penis will fit in a female mouse.
If it lets through normal air flow, can it be used for engine exhausts?
* looks at aftermarket muffler industry *
Uh, it doesn't look like people want to actually quiet that product...
One of the articles I read said it doesn't allow sound through- by reflecting the sound back. So if the muffler isn't making sound on the outside- and the sound is reflected back- that means the sound will likely be louder to the people inside the car.
People tend to get more farsighted as they get older, so if you correct your nearsighted now, your farsightedness will be worse in the future. My dad, on the other hand, stopped wearing glasses to drive when he got old...
I had mild near-sightedness in my teens and 20's- but it corrected itself by my 30's. I have a really strong astigmatism develop though. Unfortunately this means I still can't see distances very well even though I'm actually close to 20-20 now otherwise without the astigmatism.
As bad as that is; it isn't the government, which was the focus of this, it is private enterprise. I definitely don't approve of private companies using facial recognition. ESPECIALLY, if they share it. If the information remains in house that isn't good, if they share it with one another, that's a whole other level of bad.
I can definitely see the appeal to stores of using this.
You mean that offer to pay for my taxes over Facebook using iTunes gift cards was a scam? It was recommended to me by my very trustworthy friend who happens to be Nigerian royalty.
Well, if he is Nigerian royalty you can probably trust him. There is no reason Nigerian royalty would lie to you.
As long as government facial recognition and tracking doesn't become normalized and spread to other place it may not be so bad.
Your naivete is quaint.
OK, so if this were limited to just airports and didn't spread, tell me why that would be so bad. I have questions about efficiency; but they're already tracking everyone that flies and everywhere they fly so it's not really eroding more privacy as long as it is JUST at the airports. Comparing your face to your name on your passport- how much different is that from tracking you anyway?
I do have concerns that it will start out here and then they'll decided to put it at bus stations, train stations, down town areas, shopping centers, interstates, etc- I truly doubt this is the last we'll see of this technology...... but if it truly stayed just at airports, how would that be so much worse than what's already in place? Go ahead and explain my "naivete".
Slashdot Mirror
Star Trek Discovery is broadcast on the Space channel in Canada. Not sure how that deal was worked out. Isn't the first season on Netflix now?
Not in the US. In the US the only way to get Star Trek is via CBS's "All Access"- but who wants to pay an extra $5 a month just for one show?
In other countries it is available on Netflix (and as a result gets a larger market share of eyes). Only in the US is the consumer blocked from watching it.
For years, people screamed they wanted cable ala carte, they wanted to pick and choose what channels they get and now that future is here. This is the future we wanted. You can make good arguments about pricing but we got what we wished for.
It's kinda like a la carte but instead of picking "the history channel" and "discovery channel" you get to pick between:
"variety package 1", "variety package 2", and "variety package 3".
If you just want documentaries, or history stuff, there's no way to pick just the type of shows you want- you can only pick from variety packages of which only 2 or 3 shows you're interested in in each bucket.
No one wanted what we have now.
No, you don't. I keep Hulu, Netflix, and Prime (and that's more for shipping than video) year round.
That's all I have, and honeslty it's more than I need. Prime we have because of the shipping otherwise wouldn't bother with it- it has the worst UI and worst selection. It's not worth getting Prime just for TV.
That leaves Hulu and Netflix. The wife can't live without Netflix and the kids can't live without Hulu. I watch a few shows from both but could do without either. So both Hulu and Netflix stay for now to keep the family happy.
Three streaming services is enough and where I'm stopping. I want to watch a couple of shows on CBS but I'm not going to pay extra for it- so screw All Access. I'd like to watch GOT but not paying extra for it- so screw HBO. Nothing I want to watch on Disney- it's just going to be a bunch of comic book crap and kids programs. Even if they get something I want- screw it, not paying extra.
Streaming service fatigue- I don't need or want more- I'm certainly not going to pay for more.
Don't become too dependent on any Google product because they could yank it at any time.
What other privacy destroying abuse of their data do they know already know about that will only surface in the weeks or months to come ... or never?
I wonder this too- and suspect there are a lot of thing they know about that they're staying quiet on. They don't take privacy seriously, or have any sense of civic responsibility. They only let on that they've done something wrong or allowed something bad to happen as damage control.
Famous for being famous, like the Kardashians, or Zsa Zsa Gabor, or...a lot of "celebrities"?
The only thing I know about him is that he paid people to make Nazi salutes and read off anti-Semitic statements. For that reason alone he sounds like a real asshole.
Does someone say "You control too much, Standard oil, I mean Amazon".
It's not illegal to have your hand in many different businesses. They can't even be accused of being a monopoly. Walmart is a bigger retailer. They don't have more than 50% of the cloud market. Amazon Prime for TV is outshadowed by Netlix and Hulu. Their delivery service is smaller than both Fed Ex and Oops. When it comes to tablets Apple and Samsung sell more.
They have their hands in many pots but they're not the biggest player in any of them.
Sometimes spending the time to make something more efficient is inefficient. I'll happily admit that I have code out there that I know is not the most efficient, and I even know the ways to make it MORE efficient.
I write internal apps for a private business. If one of my webpages takes 10milliseconds longer to load than I could optimize it for... so be it... we're not talking about thousands of people hitting the site at the same time.
I have a long list of things to work on and I can crank out more pages doing some things "slightly inefficiently". It would be an inefficient use of my time to go around shaving 10 milliseconds here and there. Trying to make things slightly more efficient and load slightly quicker in some scenarios is a waste of time.
Makes sense - a bus gets typically 6 miles per diesel gallon, 5 for gasoline, compared to a car's average of 25 mpg, and the duty cycles of busses is typically 25% or more, vs consumer-owned cars that are typically around 5% utilization, so busses burn about 5x as many gallons per mile driven, and are driven about 5x as much of the day, so each bus converted to an EV would equate to 25 cars converts to EVs, so electrifying busses is a very efficient way to reduce gas consumption. And I bet fleet owners like it, too - EVs have much lower operating costs and lower maintenance costs, which are a big deal for fleets.
On the flip side, globally there are over 900 million cars on the road, vs perhaps 100 thousand busses, so there's a lot more fuel consumed by cars than busses, so while each car has less impact, they outnumber busses by 9,000:1, so converting all of them to EVs would have a lot more impact.
The problem is, whereas communities may be thoughtful and conscientious; individuals are selfish and less thoughtful. It's easier to get cities to flip to electric than people. It has to happen eventually, and the environment will be better for it- but people suck!
Ours don't. They stop in front of a coffee shop on their route and keep going. Do go back to the depot would be a long trip for one break.
I hope they at least go inside to pee... and don't pee in front of the coffee shop. That would be rude.
Honestly, there is a place for trolleybus and electric bus. This shouldn't be an either/or, this should be a "what works best in a given scenario".
An old established set of town that is stable (not growing/shrinking or changing much) a trolleybus might be ideal. It's a highly predictable route without much change in demand plus the aesthetic might be better in those locations; especially if tourists around. Tourists love the nostalgic feel of trolley buses.
Another ideal place for trolleys would be to link an airport with a train station or metro. A short static route that isn't going to change much.
Where electric buses might be superior to trolleys would be in growing cities, or cities that are undergoing rapid change. Suburbs, places with seasonal changes to transport needs, small towns or for longer commutes- perhaps even intra-city trips where there isn't rail links
Oh, and, no place in Britain is more than 70 miles from the coast line- so if desalination was used as a last resort for fresh water at least it wouldn't have far to travel. Britain is also fairly small geographically, so water from the North where it is abundant could be piped to the South which gets less rain but has higher population density.
Yes, there's plenty of water... As you point out- the island is surrounded by water... it's just an expensive supply of water to make drinkable. Britain won't run out of water... they just might run out of cheap drinking water.
"We need water wastage to be as socially unacceptable as blowing smoke in the face of a baby or throwing your plastic bags into the sea,"
At least I'm socially acceptable.
I only blow smoke in plastic bags and throw babies into the sea!
Bruce Springsteen wrote 57channels way back. Seems little has changed, for me at least. Have Netflix, Amazon prime, and OTA with dvr (tivo) , and I barely watch an hour a day, and still find little content on the three sources.
Would love to hear from a subscriber what I'm missing (I'm not being snarky).
Yeah, we have Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Prime. I personally watch less than an hour a day on average- but my kids watch a lot and so does my wife. Hulu probably gets the most use followed by Netflix. We rarely watch anything on Amazon and would probably cut it, but we use it for the free shipping mainly anyway.
Oh no, I paid my property taxes in advance! What if my house washes away.
Your house is more likely than MoviePass to still be around in a year's time. Although, with that said, everyone expected them to go belly-up before year's end last year. In hindsight, I wish I had bought a Movie Pass a year ago seeing that they are still around today.
You can reawaken me after 28000 years.
You think 28,000 years is long enough- but when you awake they'll still be singing "baby shark" and you'll immediately go back to sleep again.
Next Step: Mouse pregnant with mammoth embryo.
That will be awkward when the baby Mammoth is born and opens its eyes for the first time seeing it's stretched out momma and gets imprinted.
Mammoth will think it's a mouse and try mating with mice when it grows up. Hopefully the Mammoth is a girl, because I don't think a mammoth penis will fit in a female mouse.
If it lets through normal air flow, can it be used for engine exhausts?
* looks at aftermarket muffler industry *
Uh, it doesn't look like people want to actually quiet that product...
One of the articles I read said it doesn't allow sound through- by reflecting the sound back. So if the muffler isn't making sound on the outside- and the sound is reflected back- that means the sound will likely be louder to the people inside the car.
People tend to get more farsighted as they get older, so if you correct your nearsighted now, your farsightedness will be worse in the future. My dad, on the other hand, stopped wearing glasses to drive when he got old...
I had mild near-sightedness in my teens and 20's- but it corrected itself by my 30's. I have a really strong astigmatism develop though. Unfortunately this means I still can't see distances very well even though I'm actually close to 20-20 now otherwise without the astigmatism.
It does - head on over to Nashville and visit Dr Wang.
Isn't he a urologist?
. Is the swamp half empty or half full? Hard to say.
The swamp was partially drained- and then topped back up with radioactive sludge.
You Americans (and Brits I might add) are already done like dinner.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/priv...
As bad as that is; it isn't the government, which was the focus of this, it is private enterprise. I definitely don't approve of private companies using facial recognition. ESPECIALLY, if they share it. If the information remains in house that isn't good, if they share it with one another, that's a whole other level of bad.
I can definitely see the appeal to stores of using this.
You mean that offer to pay for my taxes over Facebook using iTunes gift cards was a scam? It was recommended to me by my very trustworthy friend who happens to be Nigerian royalty.
Well, if he is Nigerian royalty you can probably trust him. There is no reason Nigerian royalty would lie to you.
As long as government facial recognition and tracking doesn't become normalized and spread to other place it may not be so bad.
Your naivete is quaint.
OK, so if this were limited to just airports and didn't spread, tell me why that would be so bad. I have questions about efficiency; but they're already tracking everyone that flies and everywhere they fly so it's not really eroding more privacy as long as it is JUST at the airports. Comparing your face to your name on your passport- how much different is that from tracking you anyway?
I do have concerns that it will start out here and then they'll decided to put it at bus stations, train stations, down town areas, shopping centers, interstates, etc- I truly doubt this is the last we'll see of this technology... ... but if it truly stayed just at airports, how would that be so much worse than what's already in place? Go ahead and explain my "naivete".