People tend to romanticize "Mom & Pop" stores. But having worked in a Mom & Pop grocery store growing up, I'm under no such illusions. The people I worked for were just as greedy and treated their workers just as shitty as Walmart or any of the big box stores. There is nothing inherently noble or morally superior about being a small business on Main Street. It just means you're small, and also on Main Street.
I've been noticing that Amazon has been spreading out physical presence in a lot of states in recent years, and in the process cutting deals with those states to suspend sales taxes specifically on them (though a few states wouldn't play ball). So it makes sense to me why they might actually support this. As a big employer in a lot of states, Amazon can continue to create and extend special deals to exempt themselves at the state level, while sticking competing online retailers who don't have so much local presence with a new tax burden. Plus, it also standardizes the now chaotic process a little more at the federal level.
He's not breaking up with RIM. He just thought that he and RIM should take a break and maybe not move so fast, you know. He still loves RIM and all, he's just not *IN* love with RIM. And that other company is just a friend.
No, they said "worked out," as in drove it around and counted the laps (which you can see in the show).
Do you seriously think that all these reputable reviewers are actively conspiring against Tesla (on two separate continents, no less), as you would have to believe to think that they're all just faking it? Or alternatively that maybe, just maybe, Tesla isn't delivering on the actual mileage that they've been promising?
No, they ABSOLUTELY DID NOT. The only thing they said was staged were a couple of shots for dramatic effect. The BBC stood by the review, re-airing it in full and even successfully defending it in two separate lawsuits.
That's exactly the kind of unmitigated bullshit that Elon Musk has been spreading for years, and is spreading now about this NYTimes reviewer.
There is also a loud and large lobby of pro-wind, pro-solar and pro-electric car types out there furiously personally attacking anyone daring to give a bad review to any electric car. And Elon Musk is leading the charge (no pun intended). He did the same thing with Top Gear when they gave an earlier model a bad review. Basically, if you give a Tesla a bad review, you can expect to get immediately and heavily personally attacked by the the Tesla CEO and everyone out there who thinks that the all-electric car is the solution to all our problems.
I wouldn't review a Tesla if they paid me. I would as soon write a book criticizing Scientology.
Re:Google just fell prey to a common phenomenon
on
When Google Got Flu Wrong
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
It's only a problem when it causes people to panic (like yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, then defending yourself with "Well, it got them to think about fire safety, didn't it?"). If it just causes Cleatus Dipshit to wash his hands more and cover his goddamn mouth when he sneezes, I'm okay with it. If it causes people to sell their houses and empty their bank accounts to buy underground bunkers and canned goods, then we have a problem.
Of course, there is also the issue of fraud when it comes to public grant money. I don't like the idea of a scientists who are knowingly exaggerating their findings taking grant money away from those who aren't.
Modern epidemics and pandemics are almost ALWAYS overestimated by those predicting them. In part, this is because those predicting them often have a vested interest in making them sound a scarier than they actually are. So you get a lot of this "The sky is falling! Weessa all gonna die! Give me more research money!" screaming from epidemiologists and those in related fields.
My bet is that they'll throw the "security" card, as in "The reason we have to restrict our users to our walled garden is to protect against malware and cyberwarfare."
TwiT has its own full studio now too. I generally prefer it to Revision3 (less all over the map and more consistent in their weekly programming). But the two are closely aligned, so to each his own. I do love me some Techzilla.
Every time some school teachers or government workers in the U.S. want the latest tech toy, they pull that same "It will save money, improve efficiency, improve the quality of our work" shit too. I've yet to see it ever do ANY of those things. Not even once.
At least private industry can just say "We're giving it to our workers as a personal perk" and be honest about it.
Comcast already killed off what little was left of TechTV on G4. Now it's going to be the "Esquire Channel" is some shit like that. All the good tech shows are online-only now.
When I was a kid, we all thought that moonbases and Mars were just around the corner. And we thought that the Space Shuttle was going to live up to its initial promise of being a truly "Take off and land, then take off again" spaceship (not a super-expensive splashdown pod with a cargo bay and wheels). When I became an adult and really started to appreciate the politics and science, I realized that these were far from just around the corner, and how much of the initial incredible progress that NASA made was driven exclusively by the Cold War.
Now I know that the modern NASA is little more than a jobs and graft program for Congress and contractors, and how promises of Moon and Mars from modern Presidents are just political bullshit that they know no one will ever hold them accountable for.
At my university, the CS department are, counter-intuitively, some of the most reluctant to use our online capabilities and classroom presentation tech. I'd say about half of the CS profs still want everything handed in hard-copy and don't even post their syllabi online. And we have a pretty robust system for online content too, if a prof chooses to actually use it. But many don't want to even touch it.
You would think programmers would be more comfortable with computers.
Slashdot Mirror
People tend to romanticize "Mom & Pop" stores. But having worked in a Mom & Pop grocery store growing up, I'm under no such illusions. The people I worked for were just as greedy and treated their workers just as shitty as Walmart or any of the big box stores. There is nothing inherently noble or morally superior about being a small business on Main Street. It just means you're small, and also on Main Street.
Justin Bieber has a lot of fanboy webpages too. That doesn't make him a great singer.
I've been noticing that Amazon has been spreading out physical presence in a lot of states in recent years, and in the process cutting deals with those states to suspend sales taxes specifically on them (though a few states wouldn't play ball). So it makes sense to me why they might actually support this. As a big employer in a lot of states, Amazon can continue to create and extend special deals to exempt themselves at the state level, while sticking competing online retailers who don't have so much local presence with a new tax burden. Plus, it also standardizes the now chaotic process a little more at the federal level.
He's not breaking up with RIM. He just thought that he and RIM should take a break and maybe not move so fast, you know. He still loves RIM and all, he's just not *IN* love with RIM. And that other company is just a friend.
No, they said "worked out," as in drove it around and counted the laps (which you can see in the show).
Do you seriously think that all these reputable reviewers are actively conspiring against Tesla (on two separate continents, no less), as you would have to believe to think that they're all just faking it? Or alternatively that maybe, just maybe, Tesla isn't delivering on the actual mileage that they've been promising?
Top Gear admitted the whole thing was staged.
No, they ABSOLUTELY DID NOT. The only thing they said was staged were a couple of shots for dramatic effect. The BBC stood by the review, re-airing it in full and even successfully defending it in two separate lawsuits.
That's exactly the kind of unmitigated bullshit that Elon Musk has been spreading for years, and is spreading now about this NYTimes reviewer.
No, it's about a CEO who is trying to bully reviewers of his company's products with public attacks and lawsuits.
There is also a loud and large lobby of pro-wind, pro-solar and pro-electric car types out there furiously personally attacking anyone daring to give a bad review to any electric car. And Elon Musk is leading the charge (no pun intended). He did the same thing with Top Gear when they gave an earlier model a bad review. Basically, if you give a Tesla a bad review, you can expect to get immediately and heavily personally attacked by the the Tesla CEO and everyone out there who thinks that the all-electric car is the solution to all our problems.
I wouldn't review a Tesla if they paid me. I would as soon write a book criticizing Scientology.
It's only a problem when it causes people to panic (like yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, then defending yourself with "Well, it got them to think about fire safety, didn't it?"). If it just causes Cleatus Dipshit to wash his hands more and cover his goddamn mouth when he sneezes, I'm okay with it. If it causes people to sell their houses and empty their bank accounts to buy underground bunkers and canned goods, then we have a problem.
Of course, there is also the issue of fraud when it comes to public grant money. I don't like the idea of a scientists who are knowingly exaggerating their findings taking grant money away from those who aren't.
Modern epidemics and pandemics are almost ALWAYS overestimated by those predicting them. In part, this is because those predicting them often have a vested interest in making them sound a scarier than they actually are. So you get a lot of this "The sky is falling! Weessa all gonna die! Give me more research money!" screaming from epidemiologists and those in related fields.
Me: Siri, what time is it?
Siri: Okay, I'm playing Morris Day and the Time, Jungle Love...
Me: No, what TIME IS IT?
Siri: The time in London is now 9:03 p.m.
then invent some BS reason for it
My bet is that they'll throw the "security" card, as in "The reason we have to restrict our users to our walled garden is to protect against malware and cyberwarfare."
Just think of how much more efficient if will be when you only need to direct your rage and hatred at a handful of companies.
Hell, I already do that now with MS, Sony, and Apple.
TwiT has its own full studio now too. I generally prefer it to Revision3 (less all over the map and more consistent in their weekly programming). But the two are closely aligned, so to each his own. I do love me some Techzilla.
Even Comcast doesn't have the balls to kill off the affiliate system. That ancient system would probably survive a nuclear holocaust.
An HDTV doesn't do you a whole lot of good if you can't afford to pay rent.
So, security through obscurity?
Every time some school teachers or government workers in the U.S. want the latest tech toy, they pull that same "It will save money, improve efficiency, improve the quality of our work" shit too. I've yet to see it ever do ANY of those things. Not even once.
At least private industry can just say "We're giving it to our workers as a personal perk" and be honest about it.
Comcast already killed off what little was left of TechTV on G4. Now it's going to be the "Esquire Channel" is some shit like that. All the good tech shows are online-only now.
Pretty soon a handful of companies will own every old media outlet out there. Well, at least we still have the internet.
My ISP? Oh, it's Comcas.....oh shit.
There are people worth more than 21 million on Youtube in theoretical dollars. Maybe one of them can just buy Office from MS outright.
It worked in the 60s, and I see no reason it wouldn't work today.
The 60's had a Cold War space race and booming U.S. economy.
When I was a kid, we all thought that moonbases and Mars were just around the corner. And we thought that the Space Shuttle was going to live up to its initial promise of being a truly "Take off and land, then take off again" spaceship (not a super-expensive splashdown pod with a cargo bay and wheels). When I became an adult and really started to appreciate the politics and science, I realized that these were far from just around the corner, and how much of the initial incredible progress that NASA made was driven exclusively by the Cold War.
Now I know that the modern NASA is little more than a jobs and graft program for Congress and contractors, and how promises of Moon and Mars from modern Presidents are just political bullshit that they know no one will ever hold them accountable for.
At my university, the CS department are, counter-intuitively, some of the most reluctant to use our online capabilities and classroom presentation tech. I'd say about half of the CS profs still want everything handed in hard-copy and don't even post their syllabi online. And we have a pretty robust system for online content too, if a prof chooses to actually use it. But many don't want to even touch it.
You would think programmers would be more comfortable with computers.
The STEM graduates would have created low paying jobs and boosted company profits.
FTFY