Are you from the US? On trips there I've found everything seems to be over sweetened, even things like bread which doesn't need sweetening at all. It's not just sugar either, that high fructose corn syrup is getting into everything you eat.
You also have terrible coffee almost everywhere - well made, good coffee is difficult to find (found a couple of places in NYC & San Fran, and just the one in Hawai'i) .
For me, I've already had 2 unsweetened *instant* coffees and it's not yet 9am here. I'll be heading to the cafe soon for an espresso for my proper coffee for the day.
Patents give you a limited monopoly. It is not illegal to have a monopoly.
It is illegal to ABUSE a monopoly through market manipulation, exclusive distribution deals, coercive licensing, and predatory pricing.
Intel is second supplier, and going by the article would normally supply about half the modems for each iPhone model. That means Qualcomm (QC) does not have a monopoly. There's more details in the article about how QC (and other manufacturers do this too) price the cost of using their technology based on the pricing of the device to the end-user, which with Apple and their premium pricing, makes Apple pay more than other phone companies might. The cost to use QC tech seems to be applied the same however, so I don't see predatory pricing there - if Apple charged users less, the cost to use QC tech would be less Coercive licensing? Apple negotiated discounts on their costs, which meant exclusively using QC chips in certain iPhone models. Apple could have paid the normal rate for the QC tech and gone multi-supplier with Intel if they wanted to, but that was an Apple decision to take that deal.
And Marathon tried to push that middle ground in their direction a bit, just like every other industry in the country. What's the problem?
* Big Oil is shirking responsibility (and costs) for environmental sustainability -> taxpayers become responsible for cleaning up the mess.
* Marathon has the lobbyist funding to actually make a difference in their favor, taxpayers do not.
You don't want these everywhere - the primary goals of this battery is to cover power spike demand, so you may only need one per state.
Where it really 'makes' $$$ is that it reduces those times where conventional power generators kick back on delivering additional power until wholesale prices skyrocket - this is where they would usually make a killing. By meeting demand the battery reduces this wholesale power pricing jump.
I needed an XP device to setup some old ethernet over power devices this last week. Lucky I kept that tiny old Dell laptop with XP! Some complaints about the BIOS battery, but otherwise it worked perfectly.
You know what's worse? One of the recommendations from the committee that was looking at this encryption bill was that State law enforcement agencies be able to access encrypted communications, however State based independent commissions against corruption should be excluded.
EVs will need to have a full day of driving on a charge in order to be practical for most. No one wants to lose the ability to choose where they stop on a road trip and for how long.
Really? A full day of driving for the required range? When was the last time you drove for an entire day? How often do you drive for a full day? How often do 'most people' drive for a full day?
Casting my mind back, the last time I drove for 'a full day' was in 2000, when I was moving ~1000 miles away and drove my car rather than having it shipped. A full day's driving has occurred maybe a dozen or two times in 30 years of driving - I seriously doubt that 'most' people will need 500+miles of charge before an EV becomes practical.
Heck, 100 miles per charge would see me through ~99% of use cases, so make it 200 miles per charge and that's a lot of safety buffer.
Based on a statistically insignificant 2 mins of searching, Tesla seems to be the #1 EV manufacturer in the US, closely followed by GM and Toyota (though they both include hybrids). That's probably why Tesla is seen as a bog boy in car sales. The fact that they have maybe 1% of the car market (excluding SUVs and light trucks) doesn't really make it to the forefront of the conversation.
In publicity for EVs though Tesla is definitely #1
They're dominant because the licensing for Office 365 and Windows 365 (along with Enterprise Mobility Suite) are tailor made for large corporate / governments. The addition of M365 that consolidates these three products will make licence management simpler. The final hit is virtual Windows on Azure as a service so that 'Windows Everywhere' can become a reality.
Couple that with changes to enterprise agreements that require all servers to be maintained to get your platform discounts and on-prem entitlements, plus Per CPU to Per Core licence change means more $$$$ to MS.
Back on-topic, I think MS is using the customer channel of Win10 to QA the enterprise channel.
You owe your taxes in US$. Uncle Sam wants to see that amount show up in the IRS coffers, so he doesn't care whether it cost you 1,10,100, or 1000 BTC to get that amount there.
This highly aligns with those 70s Christian pamphlets/comics that described the mark of the beast - on your head or hand - that would be required for buying or selling.
Or, in this case, working.
1984 was meant to be fiction, so was Revelations...
This will lead to a database of copyrighted works that can be automatically attributed based on a scan of newly uploaded content.
If there is no match to existing works, the new content becomes part of the copyright database with the uploader as the defacto copyright holder, transferable if needed.
If a copyright owner disputes ownership of content they will need to upload their own content to potentially replace whatever was flagged as the original, which will propagate the change down to all related work, and update any monetisation chains in the process.
Failure to upload original content would cancel any changes.
The little blinking LED light was really just a hacky workaround for the proper implementation, but you seem a little stuck on keeping the hacky workaround.
Only until a nice replacement comes along worth my $$$. I don't feel the need to upgrade my tech until it becomes annoying, and phones became fast enough for most things several years ago. Your point that AMOLED screens are now using the screen space next to the notch for notifications, well that will be much more useful to me than a couple of LEDs. I will do some investigation.
Dumb: a big display you have to open to the phone to see.
Obvious: a big display on the outside.
Lemme just check - does the folding screen use gorilla glass or other non-easily scratched material? Answer - not likely (yet anyway). So that means the folding screen is going to be a lot less tough than our current Gorilla Glass models.
Dumb: having your fragile, expensive folding screen on both exterior sides and one edge of your phone, where it will encounter significant friction exposure when carried or placed on a surface
Obvious: protecting the folding screen internally
On my phone that 'dead space' has LED indicators on one side that tell me if I need to bother looking at / turning on my screen to follow up on something. To me that's much more valuable than a little bit of extra notched real estate when I am using the phone.
You get this when you don't have good information management processes & known+published knowledge repositories - normally because you're too small to have enough people to work on these things.
I took photos underwater in my pool when I got my Samsung S5 several years back. It was probably underwater for 15 mins or so. That phone (with a replacement battery) is still running fine. The SD slot is next to the SIM card slot, both of which (plus battery) is located behind the back cover.
Great! Let's tax Sergey Brin and Larry Page on their share of Google income.
I know you're being sarcastic but we do. When Google pays a dividend (if they do), Sergey and Larry get a huge chunk of that and pay income tax. What people don't like is that if Google keeps the money (to pay future dividends, to have an acquisition war chest, whatever), I'm proposing they don't get taxed on that. Current policy is that income gets taxed now, not when it's paid out as dividends.
I wasn't being sarcastic - my country doesn't tax either of these 2 gents as they are not citizens nor taxpayers. All their dividends are untaxed, and a % of those divdends are made in my country, where the local subsidiary pays little to no tax via legal loopholes.
What about all those other countries where they sucked in all their revenue?
I don't have a solid answer for that, other than companies tend to sell their shares world wide so their income will get somewhat distributed. They'll also hire workers all over the world. It won't exactly match where their income comes from and where their customers are. At some point, I kinda give up trying to get everything to match perfectly.
Right now the vast majority of revenue made in a country is unavailable for taxing by that country - this needs to be wound back so that companies help pay for the infrastructure that supports their paying customers.
Because there are genderist laws which give preferences to women and minorities. Without sexist and racist laws the definitions don't matter at all.
This is where the problem starts - preferential treatment between genders / sexes.
But frankly, that is the definition. I have nothing against whatever flavor of man or woman you are. And if want to take some crazy pills or undergo whatever cosmetic surgery you choose that is on you. But a man doesn't magically become a woman by appearing as one or vice versa.
It shouldn't matter at all what they were/are/want to be. What happens in the future if you are able to freely (with some downtime) swap between sexes?
How is this any different than if someone thought they were a cat or dog?
I can guarantee that if/when gene writing allows people to chose to have animal attributes writing into their genes, it will be done. There will need to be legislation about what defines a human vs an animal, as the reverse would probably also happen.
Not making the point you think you are. CO2 levels started to move in about 1900. You point out that temperatures in the Alps have been going up for 200 years prior.
Bzzzt, wrong interpretation.
Temperatures in the Alps have risen about 2.5 degrees Celsius since the 1700ies
The temp has risen by 2.5 degrees C between when they started recording it in the 1700s and now. There was no delineation as to how much of that occurred before the industrial revolution and how much after - that was your own datapoint. Heck, it could have dropped by 10C until 1999 and then bounced up by 12.5C, and his statement would still be correct.
The "legalities" Reckhorn mentioned have to do with what's known as "director and operator insurance (or D&O insurance)." According to The Verge, citing two former employees, "D&O is a type of liability insurance that protects a company's directors and operators from legal retribution in the event of a lawsuit."
I'm betting that they could no longer get this type of insurance, so they're leaving before they get personally sued. I sure wouldn't want to stay and be potentially personally liable for anything that the company gets sued for.
When you run cost+X% and the cost goes down, so does your overall profit.
We experienced the exact same thing in Australia - huge amounts of $$ spent on the distribution network, and with Cost+% the owners were able to justify the increased charges to consumers.
Subsequently the cost for electricity ranges from 27 to 42 cents per kwh, depending on the state.
Slashdot Mirror
You also have terrible coffee almost everywhere - well made, good coffee is difficult to find (found a couple of places in NYC & San Fran, and just the one in Hawai'i) .
For me, I've already had 2 unsweetened *instant* coffees and it's not yet 9am here. I'll be heading to the cafe soon for an espresso for my proper coffee for the day.
Patents give you a limited monopoly. It is not illegal to have a monopoly.
It is illegal to ABUSE a monopoly through market manipulation, exclusive distribution deals, coercive licensing, and predatory pricing.
Intel is second supplier, and going by the article would normally supply about half the modems for each iPhone model. That means Qualcomm (QC) does not have a monopoly.
There's more details in the article about how QC (and other manufacturers do this too) price the cost of using their technology based on the pricing of the device to the end-user, which with Apple and their premium pricing, makes Apple pay more than other phone companies might. The cost to use QC tech seems to be applied the same however, so I don't see predatory pricing there - if Apple charged users less, the cost to use QC tech would be less
Coercive licensing? Apple negotiated discounts on their costs, which meant exclusively using QC chips in certain iPhone models. Apple could have paid the normal rate for the QC tech and gone multi-supplier with Intel if they wanted to, but that was an Apple decision to take that deal.
Be interesting how this plays out.
And Marathon tried to push that middle ground in their direction a bit, just like every other industry in the country. What's the problem?
* Big Oil is shirking responsibility (and costs) for environmental sustainability -> taxpayers become responsible for cleaning up the mess.
* Marathon has the lobbyist funding to actually make a difference in their favor, taxpayers do not.
Where it really 'makes' $$$ is that it reduces those times where conventional power generators kick back on delivering additional power until wholesale prices skyrocket - this is where they would usually make a killing. By meeting demand the battery reduces this wholesale power pricing jump.
I needed an XP device to setup some old ethernet over power devices this last week. Lucky I kept that tiny old Dell laptop with XP! Some complaints about the BIOS battery, but otherwise it worked perfectly.
What a crock.
EVs will need to have a full day of driving on a charge in order to be practical for most. No one wants to lose the ability to choose where they stop on a road trip and for how long.
Really? A full day of driving for the required range? When was the last time you drove for an entire day? How often do you drive for a full day? How often do 'most people' drive for a full day?
Casting my mind back, the last time I drove for 'a full day' was in 2000, when I was moving ~1000 miles away and drove my car rather than having it shipped. A full day's driving has occurred maybe a dozen or two times in 30 years of driving - I seriously doubt that 'most' people will need 500+miles of charge before an EV becomes practical.
Heck, 100 miles per charge would see me through ~99% of use cases, so make it 200 miles per charge and that's a lot of safety buffer.
IBM isn't at the forefront of this action so of course they will be backing anything that takes down their competitors a notch or ten.
The fact that they have maybe 1% of the car market (excluding SUVs and light trucks) doesn't really make it to the forefront of the conversation.
In publicity for EVs though Tesla is definitely #1
Couple that with changes to enterprise agreements that require all servers to be maintained to get your platform discounts and on-prem entitlements, plus Per CPU to Per Core licence change means more $$$$ to MS.
Back on-topic, I think MS is using the customer channel of Win10 to QA the enterprise channel.
You owe your taxes in US$. Uncle Sam wants to see that amount show up in the IRS coffers, so he doesn't care whether it cost you 1,10,100, or 1000 BTC to get that amount there.
Or, in this case, working.
1984 was meant to be fiction, so was Revelations...
More likely to force US agencies to spend more money attempting to defeat the advertised capability.
If there is no match to existing works, the new content becomes part of the copyright database with the uploader as the defacto copyright holder, transferable if needed.
If a copyright owner disputes ownership of content they will need to upload their own content to potentially replace whatever was flagged as the original, which will propagate the change down to all related work, and update any monetisation chains in the process.
Failure to upload original content would cancel any changes.
The little blinking LED light was really just a hacky workaround for the proper implementation, but you seem a little stuck on keeping the hacky workaround.
Only until a nice replacement comes along worth my $$$. I don't feel the need to upgrade my tech until it becomes annoying, and phones became fast enough for most things several years ago. Your point that AMOLED screens are now using the screen space next to the notch for notifications, well that will be much more useful to me than a couple of LEDs. I will do some investigation.
Dumb: a big display you have to open to the phone to see.
Obvious: a big display on the outside.
Lemme just check - does the folding screen use gorilla glass or other non-easily scratched material?
Answer - not likely (yet anyway).
So that means the folding screen is going to be a lot less tough than our current Gorilla Glass models.
Dumb: having your fragile, expensive folding screen on both exterior sides and one edge of your phone, where it will encounter significant friction exposure when carried or placed on a surface
Obvious: protecting the folding screen internally
On my phone that 'dead space' has LED indicators on one side that tell me if I need to bother looking at / turning on my screen to follow up on something. To me that's much more valuable than a little bit of extra notched real estate when I am using the phone.
You get this when you don't have good information management processes & known+published knowledge repositories - normally because you're too small to have enough people to work on these things.
I took photos underwater in my pool when I got my Samsung S5 several years back. It was probably underwater for 15 mins or so. That phone (with a replacement battery) is still running fine. The SD slot is next to the SIM card slot, both of which (plus battery) is located behind the back cover.
Great! Let's tax Sergey Brin and Larry Page on their share of Google income.
I know you're being sarcastic but we do. When Google pays a dividend (if they do), Sergey and Larry get a huge chunk of that and pay income tax. What people don't like is that if Google keeps the money (to pay future dividends, to have an acquisition war chest, whatever), I'm proposing they don't get taxed on that. Current policy is that income gets taxed now, not when it's paid out as dividends.
I wasn't being sarcastic - my country doesn't tax either of these 2 gents as they are not citizens nor taxpayers. All their dividends are untaxed, and a % of those divdends are made in my country, where the local subsidiary pays little to no tax via legal loopholes.
What about all those other countries where they sucked in all their revenue?
I don't have a solid answer for that, other than companies tend to sell their shares world wide so their income will get somewhat distributed. They'll also hire workers all over the world. It won't exactly match where their income comes from and where their customers are. At some point, I kinda give up trying to get everything to match perfectly.
Right now the vast majority of revenue made in a country is unavailable for taxing by that country - this needs to be wound back so that companies help pay for the infrastructure that supports their paying customers.
Because there are genderist laws which give preferences to women and minorities. Without sexist and racist laws the definitions don't matter at all.
This is where the problem starts - preferential treatment between genders / sexes.
But frankly, that is the definition. I have nothing against whatever flavor of man or woman you are. And if want to take some crazy pills or undergo whatever cosmetic surgery you choose that is on you. But a man doesn't magically become a woman by appearing as one or vice versa.
It shouldn't matter at all what they were/are/want to be. What happens in the future if you are able to freely (with some downtime) swap between sexes?
How is this any different than if someone thought they were a cat or dog?
I can guarantee that if/when gene writing allows people to chose to have animal attributes writing into their genes, it will be done. There will need to be legislation about what defines a human vs an animal, as the reverse would probably also happen.
the restaurant experience is still much better than being at home.
Try that same experience with young children, and I guarantee you will rethink that statement.
Before kids, yes you are right on the money.
Not making the point you think you are. CO2 levels started to move in about 1900. You point out that temperatures in the Alps have been going up for 200 years prior.
Bzzzt, wrong interpretation.
Temperatures in the Alps have risen about 2.5 degrees Celsius since the 1700ies
The temp has risen by 2.5 degrees C between when they started recording it in the 1700s and now. There was no delineation as to how much of that occurred before the industrial revolution and how much after - that was your own datapoint. Heck, it could have dropped by 10C until 1999 and then bounced up by 12.5C, and his statement would still be correct.
The "legalities" Reckhorn mentioned have to do with what's known as "director and operator insurance (or D&O insurance)." According to The Verge, citing two former employees, "D&O is a type of liability insurance that protects a company's directors and operators from legal retribution in the event of a lawsuit."
I'm betting that they could no longer get this type of insurance, so they're leaving before they get personally sued. I sure wouldn't want to stay and be potentially personally liable for anything that the company gets sued for.
We experienced the exact same thing in Australia - huge amounts of $$ spent on the distribution network, and with Cost+% the owners were able to justify the increased charges to consumers.
Subsequently the cost for electricity ranges from 27 to 42 cents per kwh, depending on the state.