The licensing fees are built into the price of the phone as negotiated by the holder and the licensee. Why business does the reseller (Microsoft in this case) have to do with the inventors patent portfolio? Nothing. Any patent disputes are between Apple and Samsung. Microsoft is nothing more than a reseller/carrier with its own apps in this transaction.
But if you buy one, based on their recent history, you will have a hole in your pocket, and you... Hmm.... can't think of a good pun to tie fire sale into this one. Need more coffee..
But to be free, you have to take it from someone who owns it. Are you going to tell Musk he has to give people free rides in Telsas until they buy one? What about real-estate? What about air travel? Energy? All these commodities are owned by people, companies, and stock holders. How can you just take everything away from people who have spent lifetimes, generations carving out their place in the world and have worked hard at it?
Good times are here. Automation will only benefit the entire population, even though it hurts one particular segment or another. Lower wages, fewer employees = cheaper cost of goods sold or higher profits, and higher profits for publicly traded companies benefit a huge number of people, their pensions, and anyone who choses to enter the market in one of so many ways. Rising tides raise all ships.
Besides, what do you think automation does? It increases yield. Plain and simple. The more something is automated, the more the labor is displaced, the lower the cost, and the greater the yield. Never mind the increase in quality and consistency, the lower CO2 emissions... Ultimately this means more for everyone. Take trucking for example. Once big rigs are fully automated, what do you think that will do to the volume of cargo rolling down the highway? It will go up, and the cost per mile per ton will drop. Computers make more for less. This only works if more is consumed, which in economic terms, is the end goal anyway.
While I'm as libretarian as the next guy, and love "stick it to the man movements", in all fairness, these studios are trying to protect what's theirs. They are free to license the movies they make to whom they wish, in whatever manner they wish. You and I are also free to not consume their product, but it is their product. We may not agree to the regional releases, various licensing restrictions or media availability or delay dates, but stupid as we may believe their go-to-market strategy is it still is their right to execute it as they see fit. These sites are stealing the content and profiting from it; and that's just wrong.
What does that have to do with this? We're talking about traffic going through residential neighborhoods. I'm sorry to say it, but those residents don't have the slightest expectation of a private road. They didn't buy in gated community, or have private access roads, they bought in a neighborhood with "through streets", so the public (which pays for those roads btw) has a right to drive on them. If the streets experience higher than engineered use, then the city planners should take that into account and resurface the roads to a higher rating. Streets already have engineered maximums (like no truck over 6 tons), so as long as the drivers understand where their vehicles go and can't go, I see no problem here. This is a govt employee falling out of line with his work, which is to see where traffic is going, and make arrangements to accommodate.
Taxes are a cost, but that cost is passed on to the consumer. So upping corporate tax will only cause prices to rise, which then will cost more for the products you want the machines to make in the first place.
Taxes are a cost, but that cost is passed on to the consumer. So upping corporate tax will only cause prices to rise, which then will cost more for the products you want the machines to make in the first place.
What this article is suggesting is that eventually, you should be paid to be alive, having put no risk or labored no effort to justify the expense of keeping someone alive. That's the silliest notion if you follow through with that, logically. We have learned throughout the years that overpopulation is a problem on the environment and developing nations are shrinking their population, so why would you want to encourage people to have more and more children? If you pay some arbitrary value to keep someone alive, that arbitrary value will have some discretionary spending ability. So then a family of 9, where each member adds to the households total discretionary spending capacity will be better off than a family of 4. Want that new TV? Everyone chip in their 1/9 of uncle Sam's money. With no end in sight. If most people don't work anymore, why manufacture at all? What goods or services are manufacturers or "owners of production" trying to barter for? Does this sound like a winning proposition to you: "I'm going to take by force your $1,000.00. When you make $1,000.00 in product and sell it, I will give you back $1,000.00". Suddenly, it seems hardly worth being a manufacturer in a world where everyone else gets to live for free. Maybe communism fell for a reason? The real problem here is we have 7,000,000,000 people we really don't need anymore. Just like the transformation from an agrarian society, where you had massive households to ones where family sizes came down quite a bit in industrialized societies, we enter a period of time where family sizes and populations start to shrink. There will always be some jobs you can't automate, like actors, like politicians, creative fields, judges, etc... so there will be people around us doing work for a very long time. Just probably not as many.
Thanks for the reference. Isn't local interstellar medium unnaturally devoid of hydrogen due to the relatively strong gravitational pull of the sun. Once you get out far away from most stars, the density evens out? Guess my knowledge is outdated.
I don't see why we would have to send a manned probe. Men require life support, space to live, extreme limits in G forces, extreme radiation shielding, protection from the elements (think running into debris at relativistic speeds), and probably a means to establish a colony on the other side, all of which assumes there is something suitable on the other side to establish a colony on.
Instead we could send a robotic explore there in say 80 years (spending half the time speeding up to light-speed, half the time decelerating back down), with sufficient instrumentation and propultion to navigate the remote star system. It would essentially spend the majority of its time in hibernation except for the engines. I remember watching a Carl Sagan documentary where he postulated that going fast enough, you could pick up fuel on the way. Going fast enough, you run across enough lose hydrogen in deep space to build a small pressure on the front of the craft. IF you could set up some sort of collector and compressor on board, you could then use the collected hydrogen as propellant sending out the back end. This would reduce the size of the craft, so all you would need is a high-output nuclear power generator to drive the ions out for 80+ years. Once it gets there, take a bunch of pics, collect data from small daughter probes launched onto suitable surfaces, and relay that information back to earth, 40 years after arrival. Thats what a mission to one of these solar systems will look like. Were talking a 500 year span of missions by the time we can send humans.
1st. You learn something else. This means their technology gets a lower market share, and less development mindshare. You learn something else (or become more fluent in other languages). This,means they have a less compelling product to sell that is slightly less a case of "everyone knows Java". This is especially true when it comes to new developers. When you go to get a job in enterprise, using something else means Java won't be their pic for licensing.
2nd. The language gets less use and therefore less bugs are discovered, less optimization as real-world issues get passed back to the developers. Using Java less means Oracle has a less valuable language.
There is nothing President Trump can do that some media out there won't paint as badly for him as fast as possible. If Trump had personally financed a subsidiary, the NYT would still find some dog shit to smear him with. Where's the bright side of media? The puff pieces they put out that at least give Americans hope their country is still the greatest place to live? These Media wars are so bad, it's like watching that scene in The Godfather when Michael says "We have reporters on payroll, we can paint this cop as a crooked cop". Here, it's the parties that are the rackets, and Trump is just the next cop on the street.
But they didn't say they were going to "normal levels". They said they were going to cut ALL emissions. They better stop breathing if they want to meet that goal, since CO2 is a green house gas they are emitting.
That would be a terrible move on Apple's part. They would squander a fortune to buy a company, and then implode that company's primary source of revenue. Intel focuses heavily on server chips, components like network interface cards for datacenter applications, and motherboard chipsets, built-in graphics, etc... . However, they are not the only game in town. This wouldn't damage so much the PC industry and prop up Apple, so much as hand a huge segment of the market over to AMD. Then, intel would be worth peanuts.
I doubt most people know what it actually takes to design and manufacture a CPU like an i7. There is huge investments in R&D, and then even bigger investments in the foundries to make said chip. It would significantly increase the cost of a CPU to something like $4000/pop if the only customers were about 20,000,000 Macs a year. Even if Apple managed to double their sales as being the only "Intel computer" available, their margins would topple and the stock would crash.
I usually have a/trash directory in my Linux servers, I have moved the rm command to "removed" and wrote a sweet script named rm which moves files/folders to/trash. Then a cron job "removes" files and folders from trash after 48 hours. Works awesome unless I'm space-bound, and I usually am not. Saved my ass more than once!
Install ZFS on your Linux box. It rebuilds only the used potion in a drive. I'm sure there are Windows options available too, but I'm familiar with them. Oh, and always use double parity. Single parity puts your data at risk during rebuilds because of the increased workload during repair.
That may be so, but you can't expect a corporation like Microsoft to be caught between US warranty laws and EU privacy laws. Somewhere the system has to accommodate the diverse laws in place, and jurisdiction is the solution to that problem
The DOJ is butt-hurt. But too bad. The US can't just decide that their warrants are valid EVERYWHERE, just because a company operates in the US as well. What happens when China wants data stored by Boeing in the US, because Boeing has offices in China, and there is a law-suit? There is a reason why the laws are written like this. If the drug traffickers data was so instrumental to the case, and the justification for the warrant is so compelling, then the US attorney should contact authorities in Ireland and seek the Irish courts to issue a warrant to MS.
If there is anything fishy, they won't go that route, and if there isn't, an extra set of judicial eyes on the facts of the case can't hurt.
People keep making this argument about the analogy between Tesla's feature and the autopilot feature of airplanes, but how many normal people know an airplane's autopilot works?
That doesn't matter. The car specifically tells you to pay attention. So even if your perception was "The one time I flew, I didn't see a pilot or hear an announcement." You are still told that you have to maintain control of your car. Warning label argument still applies.
It's a pointless comparison unless it's a widely known fact among the general public, which I'd argue it is not.
But the general public doesn't matter. Its the segment of the public that can afford $80,000 on a car. I'd make the argument they tend to fly quite a bit and notice the $150,000/year employee the airlines keep on staff who sit at the front.
I'll bet most people have the same mis-impression of an airline's autopilot feature.
They have that warning label again, and anyone who has purchased one of these vehicles knows pretty fast the features and limits of its "autopilot".
Even so, I think we're just in a collective learning curve regarding semi-autonomous vehicles. Eventually, the cars will become fully autonomous anyhow, so I'm not terrible concerned. The fact that collisions are down by 40% validates what many of us long believed, which is that computers are going to be much safer drivers than humans. And this is just a very early and flawed first iteration of the technology to come.
But I'm willing to bet 100% of Tesla owners have flown SOMEWHERE before, where an AutoPilot was used, but never without a PILOT. The fact that it's industry jargon doesn't matter. It's becoming closer and closer to our natural understanding every day. The vehicle warns you anyhow, and even if you thought "well there wasn't a pilot in the airplane who flew me to LAX last time I traveled, this car must be able to run sans-driver!", the car tells you strait up that you must keep at attention.
If a car tells you "5 star safety rating!" and you elect not to strap the car seat in properly *despite* all the warning labels and instructions, does that mean you can sue the auto manufacturer, or fault them because "5 star means perfect"? No. Of course not. Implying otherwise is obtuse.
Slashdot Mirror
The licensing fees are built into the price of the phone as negotiated by the holder and the licensee. Why business does the reseller (Microsoft in this case) have to do with the inventors patent portfolio? Nothing. Any patent disputes are between Apple and Samsung. Microsoft is nothing more than a reseller /carrier with its own apps in this transaction.
Lack of sleep, or exercise. Well played.
But if you buy one, based on their recent history, you will have a hole in your pocket, and you ... Hmm.... can't think of a good pun to tie fire sale into this one. Need more coffee..
But to be free, you have to take it from someone who owns it. Are you going to tell Musk he has to give people free rides in Telsas until they buy one? What about real-estate? What about air travel? Energy? All these commodities are owned by people, companies, and stock holders. How can you just take everything away from people who have spent lifetimes, generations carving out their place in the world and have worked hard at it?
Good times are here. Automation will only benefit the entire population, even though it hurts one particular segment or another. Lower wages, fewer employees = cheaper cost of goods sold or higher profits, and higher profits for publicly traded companies benefit a huge number of people, their pensions, and anyone who choses to enter the market in one of so many ways. Rising tides raise all ships.
Besides, what do you think automation does? It increases yield. Plain and simple. The more something is automated, the more the labor is displaced, the lower the cost, and the greater the yield. Never mind the increase in quality and consistency, the lower CO2 emissions... Ultimately this means more for everyone. Take trucking for example. Once big rigs are fully automated, what do you think that will do to the volume of cargo rolling down the highway? It will go up, and the cost per mile per ton will drop. Computers make more for less. This only works if more is consumed, which in economic terms, is the end goal anyway.
While I'm as libretarian as the next guy, and love "stick it to the man movements", in all fairness, these studios are trying to protect what's theirs. They are free to license the movies they make to whom they wish, in whatever manner they wish. You and I are also free to not consume their product, but it is their product. We may not agree to the regional releases, various licensing restrictions or media availability or delay dates, but stupid as we may believe their go-to-market strategy is it still is their right to execute it as they see fit. These sites are stealing the content and profiting from it; and that's just wrong.
For those who do: http://zfsonlinux.org/
What does that have to do with this? We're talking about traffic going through residential neighborhoods. I'm sorry to say it, but those residents don't have the slightest expectation of a private road. They didn't buy in gated community, or have private access roads, they bought in a neighborhood with "through streets", so the public (which pays for those roads btw) has a right to drive on them. If the streets experience higher than engineered use, then the city planners should take that into account and resurface the roads to a higher rating. Streets already have engineered maximums (like no truck over 6 tons), so as long as the drivers understand where their vehicles go and can't go, I see no problem here. This is a govt employee falling out of line with his work, which is to see where traffic is going, and make arrangements to accommodate.
Taxes are a cost, but that cost is passed on to the consumer. So upping corporate tax will only cause prices to rise, which then will cost more for the products you want the machines to make in the first place.
Taxes are a cost, but that cost is passed on to the consumer. So upping corporate tax will only cause prices to rise, which then will cost more for the products you want the machines to make in the first place.
What this article is suggesting is that eventually, you should be paid to be alive, having put no risk or labored no effort to justify the expense of keeping someone alive. That's the silliest notion if you follow through with that, logically. We have learned throughout the years that overpopulation is a problem on the environment and developing nations are shrinking their population, so why would you want to encourage people to have more and more children? If you pay some arbitrary value to keep someone alive, that arbitrary value will have some discretionary spending ability. So then a family of 9, where each member adds to the households total discretionary spending capacity will be better off than a family of 4. Want that new TV? Everyone chip in their 1/9 of uncle Sam's money. With no end in sight. If most people don't work anymore, why manufacture at all? What goods or services are manufacturers or "owners of production" trying to barter for? Does this sound like a winning proposition to you: "I'm going to take by force your $1,000.00. When you make $1,000.00 in product and sell it, I will give you back $1,000.00".
Suddenly, it seems hardly worth being a manufacturer in a world where everyone else gets to live for free. Maybe communism fell for a reason? The real problem here is we have 7,000,000,000 people we really don't need anymore. Just like the transformation from an agrarian society, where you had massive households to ones where family sizes came down quite a bit in industrialized societies, we enter a period of time where family sizes and populations start to shrink. There will always be some jobs you can't automate, like actors, like politicians, creative fields, judges, etc... so there will be people around us doing work for a very long time. Just probably not as many.
Thanks for the reference. Isn't local interstellar medium unnaturally devoid of hydrogen due to the relatively strong gravitational pull of the sun. Once you get out far away from most stars, the density evens out? Guess my knowledge is outdated.
I don't see why we would have to send a manned probe. Men require life support, space to live, extreme limits in G forces, extreme radiation shielding, protection from the elements (think running into debris at relativistic speeds), and probably a means to establish a colony on the other side, all of which assumes there is something suitable on the other side to establish a colony on.
Instead we could send a robotic explore there in say 80 years (spending half the time speeding up to light-speed, half the time decelerating back down), with sufficient instrumentation and propultion to navigate the remote star system. It would essentially spend the majority of its time in hibernation except for the engines. I remember watching a Carl Sagan documentary where he postulated that going fast enough, you could pick up fuel on the way. Going fast enough, you run across enough lose hydrogen in deep space to build a small pressure on the front of the craft. IF you could set up some sort of collector and compressor on board, you could then use the collected hydrogen as propellant sending out the back end. This would reduce the size of the craft, so all you would need is a high-output nuclear power generator to drive the ions out for 80+ years. Once it gets there, take a bunch of pics, collect data from small daughter probes launched onto suitable surfaces, and relay that information back to earth, 40 years after arrival. Thats what a mission to one of these solar systems will look like. Were talking a 500 year span of missions by the time we can send humans.
This will just lead to browsers muting sound by default
By not using java you hurt Oracle in two ways.
,means they have a less compelling product to sell that is slightly less a case of "everyone knows Java". This is especially true when it comes to new developers. When you go to get a job in enterprise, using something else means Java won't be their pic for licensing.
1st. You learn something else. This means their technology gets a lower market share, and less development mindshare. You learn something else (or become more fluent in other languages). This
2nd. The language gets less use and therefore less bugs are discovered, less optimization as real-world issues get passed back to the developers. Using Java less means Oracle has a less valuable language.
There is nothing President Trump can do that some media out there won't paint as badly for him as fast as possible. If Trump had personally financed a subsidiary, the NYT would still find some dog shit to smear him with. Where's the bright side of media? The puff pieces they put out that at least give Americans hope their country is still the greatest place to live? These Media wars are so bad, it's like watching that scene in The Godfather when Michael says "We have reporters on payroll, we can paint this cop as a crooked cop". Here, it's the parties that are the rackets, and Trump is just the next cop on the street.
But they didn't say they were going to "normal levels". They said they were going to cut ALL emissions. They better stop breathing if they want to meet that goal, since CO2 is a green house gas they are emitting.
That would be a terrible move on Apple's part. They would squander a fortune to buy a company, and then implode that company's primary source of revenue. Intel focuses heavily on server chips, components like network interface cards for datacenter applications, and motherboard chipsets, built-in graphics, etc... . However, they are not the only game in town. This wouldn't damage so much the PC industry and prop up Apple, so much as hand a huge segment of the market over to AMD. Then, intel would be worth peanuts.
I doubt most people know what it actually takes to design and manufacture a CPU like an i7. There is huge investments in R&D, and then even bigger investments in the foundries to make said chip. It would significantly increase the cost of a CPU to something like $4000/pop if the only customers were about 20,000,000 Macs a year. Even if Apple managed to double their sales as being the only "Intel computer" available, their margins would topple and the stock would crash.
I usually have a /trash directory in my Linux servers, I have moved the rm command to "removed" and wrote a sweet script named rm which moves files/folders to /trash. Then a cron job "removes" files and folders from trash after 48 hours. Works awesome unless I'm space-bound, and I usually am not. Saved my ass more than once!
malware follows marketshare. Keep F-Droid quiet if you want it to stay that way.
Install ZFS on your Linux box. It rebuilds only the used potion in a drive. I'm sure there are Windows options available too, but I'm familiar with them. Oh, and always use double parity. Single parity puts your data at risk during rebuilds because of the increased workload during repair.
That may be so, but you can't expect a corporation like Microsoft to be caught between US warranty laws and EU privacy laws. Somewhere the system has to accommodate the diverse laws in place, and jurisdiction is the solution to that problem
The DOJ is butt-hurt. But too bad. The US can't just decide that their warrants are valid EVERYWHERE, just because a company operates in the US as well. What happens when China wants data stored by Boeing in the US, because Boeing has offices in China, and there is a law-suit? There is a reason why the laws are written like this. If the drug traffickers data was so instrumental to the case, and the justification for the warrant is so compelling, then the US attorney should contact authorities in Ireland and seek the Irish courts to issue a warrant to MS.
If there is anything fishy, they won't go that route, and if there isn't, an extra set of judicial eyes on the facts of the case can't hurt.
wget
People keep making this argument about the analogy between Tesla's feature and the autopilot feature of airplanes, but how many normal people know an airplane's autopilot works?
That doesn't matter. The car specifically tells you to pay attention. So even if your perception was "The one time I flew, I didn't see a pilot or hear an announcement." You are still told that you have to maintain control of your car. Warning label argument still applies.
It's a pointless comparison unless it's a widely known fact among the general public, which I'd argue it is not.
But the general public doesn't matter. Its the segment of the public that can afford $80,000 on a car. I'd make the argument they tend to fly quite a bit and notice the $150,000/year employee the airlines keep on staff who sit at the front.
I'll bet most people have the same mis-impression of an airline's autopilot feature.
They have that warning label again, and anyone who has purchased one of these vehicles knows pretty fast the features and limits of its "autopilot".
Even so, I think we're just in a collective learning curve regarding semi-autonomous vehicles. Eventually, the cars will become fully autonomous anyhow, so I'm not terrible concerned. The fact that collisions are down by 40% validates what many of us long believed, which is that computers are going to be much safer drivers than humans. And this is just a very early and flawed first iteration of the technology to come.
Here I absolutely agree with you, 100%.
But I'm willing to bet 100% of Tesla owners have flown SOMEWHERE before, where an AutoPilot was used, but never without a PILOT. The fact that it's industry jargon doesn't matter. It's becoming closer and closer to our natural understanding every day. The vehicle warns you anyhow, and even if you thought "well there wasn't a pilot in the airplane who flew me to LAX last time I traveled, this car must be able to run sans-driver!", the car tells you strait up that you must keep at attention.
If a car tells you "5 star safety rating!" and you elect not to strap the car seat in properly *despite* all the warning labels and instructions, does that mean you can sue the auto manufacturer, or fault them because "5 star means perfect"? No. Of course not. Implying otherwise is obtuse.