The smartphone manufacturers have been "out of ideas" for years. Since the advent of around the 801 snapdragon (and others) every year we get faster, more cameras/megapixels, flashy colors and overly expensive phones. But, as long as consumers are ignorant enough to continue year after year of dumping good phones for new ones, you think the manufactuers will change?
The only innovation is making the phone thinner by gradually removing more and more space for a battery.
Surprised it's lasted this long. The reason we're not seeing "innovation" is because a smartphone is a smartphone is a smartphone. We're pretty much topped out on what the useful purpose a smartphone is for. Everything else is just maybe nice to have, but not absolutely necessary.
However, I'd like to see more advancement on the camera side. Like a real optical zoom in a reasonably sized package.
I can't wait for the innovation of the thicker phone. Give me a thicker phone- give me more bezel... if it means you can fit a battery in it that actually lasts a full 24 hours- give me a nice thick bezzelly phone WITH A REAL CHUNKING HUNKING POWERFUL BATTERY.
And hey, maybe my wake/sleep cycles will be better than the "Daylight" (6500K, bluer) colour balanced bulbs that everyone is using now.
If you really want to help your wake sleep cycle- you would have the 6500k bulbs where you spend your mornings (if indoors) and the lower K, yellower bulbs in your bedroom, and where you spend your evenings. If you use the same bulbs 24/7 you're not really having much impact on your wake/sleep cycle.
And yet at the same time facebook sends out hundreds of thousands of emails a day to people to get them to join facebook (which itself financially endangers and tricks people).
I was just in a business meeting which had a spreadsheet to assign people roles- and some guy named Khan was listed at the top. It took every bit of willpower not to yell "Khaaaaaaaannnnnn!" in the meeting.
If it breeds without mating, asexually, then humans can too and we no longer need families.
It's been possible for a long time for humans to not technically "mate" and still have offspring. (not really asexual, although we could probably do that too- but don't for ethics reasons). If a parent has a child- then guess what; that's a family. It is still a family even if it is two Mom's and no dads... or three moms... or four moms... or I don't know a mass lesbian orgy every night...
Sorry, I got distracted there... point being, you say that sex makes a family- I disagree, I think it's the people.
You could ask the dandelions in my yard if they think that any genetic issues are holding them back.
Dandelions (like this tick) do both. They can reproduce sexually or asexually- usually they do it asexually, but occasionally they don't; thus they are not ALL clones of each other- even if many are indeed clones. This means even if a virus wipes out a large number of them- the fact that genetic differences do exist out there, there might be some in the species that can resist the virus.
Until he realizes the females can reproduce asexually and don't really need him.
Assuming sex of the tick is determined genetically (and not by environmental factors like with some reptiles). The fact that males do indeed exist means that they can still reproduce sexually. If all reproduction was asexual then all ticks would be female.
It would be a deleterious to the species to waste offspring on producing males if the males did not mate- they would all be genetic dead ends.
Well I live in New Zealand, one of those countries which has this tick...
... and not this click-bait sensationalist crap?
If the tick is so harmless, why are so many educated people fleeing New Zealand to move to Australia every year? The doom-tick is causing people to flee in panic, you just lack the necessary fight-or-flight mechanism.
Is this every time the page is viewed- or every time a request is made to one of their servers? If I don't go to facebook (I don't have an account), but websites I click on send back data of my movement around the web to feed my shadow profile, is that counting a visit to facebook?
If so, it is no surprise that the top sites are mainly advertising websites. If I go to a forum and someone has embedded a you tube video, but I don't watch it, is that counted as a view?
Unless New York subways have gone downhill substantially in the last three years- you've got a system that people would kill to have in many other cities. I wish my town had a system that worked as well as NY's subways.
I only have internet from Spectrum and the service has been good so far. They upgraded internet speed twice...we are now at 200Mbps down. I ignored all of their bundling offers and now they try to get me to take TV for free. I ignored that as well.
Does you Spectrum internet not go out randomly between about 6pm and 9pm on weeknights? We get random outages that last from 10 mins to 2 or 3 hours during peak internet time when people are getting home form work with our Spectrum internet.
Comcast has competition in your area- you mention webpass and Google Fiber. Comcast has to provide a better service in your area because you have competition.
When google fiber moves into town, the other providers in that area drop their costs and improve their service.
When there is no competition in town they jack the prices up and don't maintain their network very well because- they know they've got you by the balls. Your positive experience with Comcast (and other people's negative experience) is proof that monopolies don't work.
The cable companies are under this false impression that it was a good idea to provide as many channels as possible. The only saving grace for them now is to offer Netflix-style on demand programming for all their content.
Funny how things come around. Netflix is under the impression that it's a good idea to produce as many possible series / movies as possible regardless of their quality.
They're doing that because they're victims of their own success. Netflix became big- so the TV networks all wanted in- bang there was Hulu as competition and NBC, etc started pulling content off Netflix. Amazon Video started up and started signing exclusive rights with other show. Then CBS want their own special place to compete with Netflix- and their shows disappeared. Now Disney and Marvel are pulling content off Netflix. BBC did so a while ago for most of their shows for their own streaming service.
People have stopped sharing with Netflix because they saw how successful Netflix was, and wanted a piece of the pie with their own mini-Netflix sites. So Netflix suddenly had to make their own crappy shows to fill in for all the shows being lost to other streaming sites.
The cable companies are under this false impression that it was a good idea to provide as many channels as possible. My biggest issue with TV now when I go somewhere that has cable, is it takes me a while to even find one of the channels I might want to watch. Maybe their idea what to increase the odds that a show you like is currently airing on one of the 800 channels, but in an age of on demand programming, this strategy is insufficient. The only saving grace for them now is to offer Netflix-style on demand programming for all their content.
It's been a long time since I had cable TV- but when I had it, my family would only watch at most 5 channels on a regular basis. I don't think this is unusual either. I dropped in the early 2000's though when everything became reality. Once upon a time I liked history channel... nope- now the Hitler and reality TV channel. Once upon a time I liked Discovery and TLC... nope now the reality TV Channels... All the good channels died when reality TV took off.
Spectrum is always down in my area too! When you live in an area with precisely 1 fast broadband provider (which is common across the US); and you cut cable TV only to find a few years later you're now paying the same for internet that you once paid for cable- because they use internet consumers to subsidise their cable TV customers... yeah, I hate my cable company ISP. I hate monopolies in general because they can do precisely this... abuse the consumer.
Slashdot Mirror
The smartphone manufacturers have been "out of ideas" for years.
Since the advent of around the 801 snapdragon (and others) every
year we get faster, more cameras/megapixels, flashy colors and overly
expensive phones.
But, as long as consumers are ignorant enough to continue year after
year of dumping good phones for new ones, you think the manufactuers
will change?
The only innovation is making the phone thinner by gradually removing more and more space for a battery.
Surprised it's lasted this long. The reason we're not seeing "innovation" is because a smartphone is a smartphone is a smartphone. We're pretty much topped out on what the useful purpose a smartphone is for. Everything else is just maybe nice to have, but not absolutely necessary.
However, I'd like to see more advancement on the camera side. Like a real optical zoom in a reasonably sized package.
I can't wait for the innovation of the thicker phone. Give me a thicker phone- give me more bezel... if it means you can fit a battery in it that actually lasts a full 24 hours- give me a nice thick bezzelly phone WITH A REAL CHUNKING HUNKING POWERFUL BATTERY.
That's the innovation I want.
, which is a form of color blindness, and cannot see blue, and cannot be affected by that. Take that, normies :)
Actually, the blue light is still going to damage your eyes- you just don't see the danger.
And hey, maybe my wake/sleep cycles will be better than the "Daylight" (6500K, bluer) colour balanced bulbs that everyone is using now.
If you really want to help your wake sleep cycle- you would have the 6500k bulbs where you spend your mornings (if indoors) and the lower K, yellower bulbs in your bedroom, and where you spend your evenings. If you use the same bulbs 24/7 you're not really having much impact on your wake/sleep cycle.
And yet at the same time facebook sends out hundreds of thousands of emails a day to people to get them to join facebook (which itself financially endangers and tricks people).
I was just in a business meeting which had a spreadsheet to assign people roles- and some guy named Khan was listed at the top. It took every bit of willpower not to yell "Khaaaaaaaannnnnn!" in the meeting.
You mean, if the US doesn't do this, that means China will refrain from doing it?
Yeah, didn't think so.
They haven't yet but it was inevitable it would start eventually. I just wish it could have happened after my natural lifetime.
The only plus side from this is it may lead to technology to colonise beyond Earth... that's the only plus side I see.
I'm fine with all countries having space forces.. as long as they operate far from earth... and all other forms of military are disbanded.
If it breeds without mating, asexually, then humans can too and we no longer need families.
It's been possible for a long time for humans to not technically "mate" and still have offspring. (not really asexual, although we could probably do that too- but don't for ethics reasons). If a parent has a child- then guess what; that's a family. It is still a family even if it is two Mom's and no dads... or three moms... or four moms... or I don't know a mass lesbian orgy every night...
Sorry, I got distracted there... point being, you say that sex makes a family- I disagree, I think it's the people.
You could ask the dandelions in my yard if they think that any genetic issues are holding them back.
Dandelions (like this tick) do both. They can reproduce sexually or asexually- usually they do it asexually, but occasionally they don't; thus they are not ALL clones of each other- even if many are indeed clones. This means even if a virus wipes out a large number of them- the fact that genetic differences do exist out there, there might be some in the species that can resist the virus.
Ooops- I should pay more attention- you're talking about man.
One man should last several meals assuming you prepare the meat correctly.
I know. And yet, for some odd reason it's still illegal to hunt them down for fun, profit and food.
Effin' liberals and their bleeding heart politics.
How many ticks would it take to fill the belly of an average Appalachian man of the woods?
Until he realizes the females can reproduce asexually and don't really need him.
Assuming sex of the tick is determined genetically (and not by environmental factors like with some reptiles). The fact that males do indeed exist means that they can still reproduce sexually. If all reproduction was asexual then all ticks would be female.
It would be a deleterious to the species to waste offspring on producing males if the males did not mate- they would all be genetic dead ends.
Well I live in New Zealand, one of those countries which has this tick...
If the tick is so harmless, why are so many educated people fleeing New Zealand to move to Australia every year? The doom-tick is causing people to flee in panic, you just lack the necessary fight-or-flight mechanism.
Whoever modded you up should be killed.
Interesting suggested use of the death penalty. Are you from Texas?
What does views mean:
Is this every time the page is viewed- or every time a request is made to one of their servers? If I don't go to facebook (I don't have an account), but websites I click on send back data of my movement around the web to feed my shadow profile, is that counting a visit to facebook?
If so, it is no surprise that the top sites are mainly advertising websites. If I go to a forum and someone has embedded a you tube video, but I don't watch it, is that counted as a view?
Unless New York subways have gone downhill substantially in the last three years- you've got a system that people would kill to have in many other cities. I wish my town had a system that worked as well as NY's subways.
Where do you live that they have over 100 channels free via antenna? At best we get 3 or 4.
I only have internet from Spectrum and the service has been good so far. They upgraded internet speed twice...we are now at 200Mbps down. I ignored all of their bundling offers and now they try to get me to take TV for free. I ignored that as well.
Does you Spectrum internet not go out randomly between about 6pm and 9pm on weeknights? We get random outages that last from 10 mins to 2 or 3 hours during peak internet time when people are getting home form work with our Spectrum internet.
Comcast has competition in your area- you mention webpass and Google Fiber. Comcast has to provide a better service in your area because you have competition.
When google fiber moves into town, the other providers in that area drop their costs and improve their service.
When there is no competition in town they jack the prices up and don't maintain their network very well because- they know they've got you by the balls. Your positive experience with Comcast (and other people's negative experience) is proof that monopolies don't work.
The cable companies are under this false impression that it was a good idea to provide as many channels as possible. The only saving grace for them now is to offer Netflix-style on demand programming for all their content.
Funny how things come around. Netflix is under the impression that it's a good idea to produce as many possible series / movies as possible regardless of their quality.
They're doing that because they're victims of their own success. Netflix became big- so the TV networks all wanted in- bang there was Hulu as competition and NBC, etc started pulling content off Netflix. Amazon Video started up and started signing exclusive rights with other show. Then CBS want their own special place to compete with Netflix- and their shows disappeared. Now Disney and Marvel are pulling content off Netflix. BBC did so a while ago for most of their shows for their own streaming service.
People have stopped sharing with Netflix because they saw how successful Netflix was, and wanted a piece of the pie with their own mini-Netflix sites. So Netflix suddenly had to make their own crappy shows to fill in for all the shows being lost to other streaming sites.
The cable companies are under this false impression that it was a good idea to provide as many channels as possible. My biggest issue with TV now when I go somewhere that has cable, is it takes me a while to even find one of the channels I might want to watch. Maybe their idea what to increase the odds that a show you like is currently airing on one of the 800 channels, but in an age of on demand programming, this strategy is insufficient. The only saving grace for them now is to offer Netflix-style on demand programming for all their content.
It's been a long time since I had cable TV- but when I had it, my family would only watch at most 5 channels on a regular basis. I don't think this is unusual either. I dropped in the early 2000's though when everything became reality. Once upon a time I liked history channel... nope- now the Hitler and reality TV channel. Once upon a time I liked Discovery and TLC... nope now the reality TV Channels... All the good channels died when reality TV took off.
Spectrum is always down in my area too! When you live in an area with precisely 1 fast broadband provider (which is common across the US); and you cut cable TV only to find a few years later you're now paying the same for internet that you once paid for cable- because they use internet consumers to subsidise their cable TV customers... yeah, I hate my cable company ISP. I hate monopolies in general because they can do precisely this... abuse the consumer.
Counting keystrokes is a silly idea!!!!!!!!!! Really it is !!!!!!!!! That could never be abused!!!!!!!! No way to pad that!!!!!!!!