I haven't suggested that I don't support military action where it's appropriate, I just don't think that doing what essentially amounts to hiding in a control room potentially many miles away from a target and letting what is basically a robot fight for you is doing anything that is particularly worthy of a medal.
Medals are for recognition - sure you might be hiding in a control room, but there are circumstances where what you did deserves recognition.
Drones are often deployed in support roles - providing an eyes in the sky view for the ground team, for example. While out on patrol, the ground team gets pinned because of an unknown shooter. So while their lives are in danger, the drone operator flies around and then sports the shooter and relays their coordinates to the ground team so they know where to look and try to take it out.
At the end of the mission, those guys on the ground are thankful for the drone operator to provide support - it could've ended very badly. Perhaps the guy in the air conditioned control room stateside should get a little recognition for that? Because I'm sure that team doesn't care about the drone operator's working conditions, but they're damn appreciative he was there.
I don't want to download your stupid app. Just make your website not suck on mobile devices. End of story.
If your app really truly has enough complexity that a mobile site is too slow, and a native app is the only way to get decent performance, your app is probably too complicated. Keep it simple stupid.
Maybe 1% of apps actually honestly need to be a standalone app.
Better yet, why not both? An app AND a website? They're not mutually exclusive, you know.
Here's the thing - it seems when we want to add "bad" features to the web standard, everyone goes and says "they should make it an app!" and when they do, everyone complains "why don't they just make a web site".
Think about all the controversy over DRM support in HTML. Everyone's saying that Netflix should just be an app. Great, they do it, then people complain when they don't have a website to watch anymore or that it requires plugins to install. The solution everyone WANTS is not likely to happen (Netflix going DRM-free),
Once Uber has driven its competition out of business, anyone will be able to offer a service like Uber, because the barriers to entry will have been removed â" at Uber's considerable legal expense. I fail to see how you fail to see that this is a win for everyone except entrenched taxi businesses enjoying a state-enforced monopoly. Taxi licensing may work in Germany, I can't speak to that, but Here in America, taxi licensing does absolutely none of the things it is supposed to do.
You're making a dangerous assumption that Uber won't lobby for legislative changes that bar easy entry into the field.
Once Uber has destroyed the taxi companies (and there are signs it's happening, for better or worse), Uber can just as easy do an Airbnb and lobby for legislation that's friendly for Uber, and nasty for everyone else.
Taxi regulations are complex because of the nasty things that were done in the past - discrimination ("Oh, you're a cripple? See ya!" - most taxi companies actually have to provide non-discriminatory service), fare jacking (taxi companies can't do surge pricing, for example), etc.
Of course, taxi companies have gotten fat and lazy and are crappy because they also introduced laws that give them power. Uber's fighting this, but that doesn't mean they won't do the same once they beat them. Hell, they'd be stupid not to freeze out potential competitors and become the "new taxi company".
About the only pushback happens not because of race, gender, sexuality, religion or other "social justice" thing. Instead, it's money.
Sometimes a professor must take back a failing grade - not because the student didn't deserve it, but because their parents either are high ranking members of society (i.e., rich) and thus threatened to withhold their annual contribution, or the administration is worried that students may drop out, and depriving them of tuition funds.
Forget social justice. Anti-social justice is just as bad. "I'm rich" or "I belong to a rich family" or "My father owns your ass" is basically what it boils down to.
They are still in negotiations for global rights to all of their content, but being available in many more countries should increase their bargaining power in that endeavor.
Unlikely, actually.
In fact, being available in more countries will likely result in more difficulty for Netflix - the problem being that the content industry is trying to avoid another Apple.
For those who don't know, the iTunes music store is wildly successful. So successful in fact that Apple was able to dictate the terms of the agreement to the music companies. The music industry tried and tried and they could not break Apple - Apple sold the most popular players and people were buying up music for that player at an astounding rate. So much so that Apple had all the power - if the record labels disagreed with Apple's terms, Apple said "tough" and didn't carry them. Which basically meant you either ripped it or pirated it.
Well, the only way the record labels and RIAA could break Apple was to do the nuclear option - DRM free. With that one move, they established Amazon as a viable competitor to Apple, and with this, it meant the labels/RIAA was now back in charge, not Apple. Apple could no longer dictate the terms, because they could simply move their offerings to Amazon. And likewise, Amazon couldn't dictate terms to them either, because then they'd move their offerings to Apple.
Hollywood saw what' went on, and they know they're not going to allow any one player to become too big or dominant. So Netflix may be big, but Hollywood is going to make it so Netflix won't grow TOO big and be a threat.
At best, they will help them secure rights from the local distributor.
I believe the brain is in need of exercise as much as a muscle, in that the people who remain mentally agile into old age are the ones who continue to challenge their minds with problem solving. Luminosity, reading, puzzle solving, posting intelligently... everything helps.
Stagnation is the great killer.
Correct, the brain is a "use it or lose it", however, the problem is Luminosity was making specific claims that their training helps you be more mentally agile and can reverse aging.
The science on "brain training" is quite clear - this was done years ago when the brain training games for Nintendo DS came out over a decade ago.
Yes, you do get mentally sharper, in the areas the game trains you in. So if you're doing a bunch of arithmetic problems, you actually get faster and better and doing it, and the brain areas also get improved. But it's a big stretch to say that it also improves other areas of your brain.
So it helps, but only in the area it's testing. Since doing arithmetic mentally is a generally useful skill, training like that can improve your life in general (knowing how much your shopping cart costs at the grocery store is a good aid in helping come in on budget, for example). But other games like a electronic version of three card monte is only useful if you want to be cheated by a con artist.
Luminosity might help, but the science behind it is sketchy as to what it actually does, compared to specific training for mental math and other skills. A lot of the improvement may simply come down to being able to play the game better.
How so? It's all in the design of the system. The way around this would be an authenticated "heart-beat" type setup wherein I tell you that I'm OK until I don't tell you I'm OK. In that case it becomes the monitoring center's responsibility to dial the police. Instead from what I've surmised the system is designed so that it's mostly a "I'm OK unless I say otherwise", which is poor design. The medium of communication has nothing to do with it.
Indeed.
In fact, the wireless sensors I've seen (900MHz based ones) operate on a 4 state system - contact open, contact closed, heart-beat, low battery. One of those must be reported periodically and the receiver must make sure all the sync'ed devices check in periodically (usually at least once a minute). The devices are sync'ed to the receiver in case your neighbour has the same system, and also to provide proper reporting of state (e.g., if the sensor is motion, you need to be notified it's motion so ignore it when in "armed at home" mode).
If a sensor battery needs changing, it sends the low battery heartbeat which causes the system to report which sensor has a low battery. If a sensor hasn't been heard from, then it's a fault and reported to the security company who calls you.
None of this uses ZigBee - wireless alarm sensors have been around a while. And the manuals from all of them I've seen send a heartbeat signal.
The original tape was duck tape, and used for waterproofing ammo boxes... it's not meant to be used for ducts, and it's a terrible application for it, or so I've been told by people who install furnaces. Not sure why it morphed into duct tape.
Yes, it was originally a tape used to seal ammo boxes. It was called "duck tape" because when wet, it shed water like a duck.
It morphed into "duct tape" more as the classical game of telephone - someone mis-hears it and thought it was called duct tape. Both terms actually apply to the tape, though "duck tape" is actually more accurate since it's bad at ductwork and there are much better adhesive tape for sealing ducts.
Do you can pretty much blame duck/duct on pronunciation and hearing.
It was against centrifuges. But talking about nuclear weapons just makes it scarier, eh?
It was against centrifuges used for the production of nuclear weapons.
You use, there are two uranium isotopes - U-235 and U-238. U-238 makes up the vast majority of uranium mined (over 99%) while U-235 is around half a percent or so. For a nuclear reactor, depending on its design, it may be able to run on unenriched uranium, or enriched to around 3%.
Nuclear weapons use weapons-grade enriched uranium, which requires 90% U-235.
The only way to separate U-235 from U-238 is through a centrifuge which works only because of the slightly higher mass of U-238.
Enriching uranium for nuclear reactor use doesn't require a whole lot of work - if at all since there are designs meant to operate on unenriched uranium. So if you see a bunch of centrifuges in operation, there really is only one reason - nuclear weapons. Enrichment is expensive, to weapons grade even more so, so you don't want to bother if you're just going to make electricity from it.
Considering how many centrifuges they were running, it was pretty obvious - if you want to get weapons grade, it takes a LOT of them.
I'm okay with this. Long range, low bandwidth. It might be useful for fairly remote devices that just don't have a lot to say. Some folks are disturbed about the possibility of interference with other devices on this band (mobile mostly) but presumably the FCC did their job (yea, large values of Assume in that Presume, of course). I don't think it is going to get a lot of use so I don't think it is going to much matter. It will probably have a lot of value in the industrial world in terms of remote sensing. Not so much for the home.
It's going to be fun because the 900MHz band already has a lot of proprietary WiFi systems on it - a lot of smart meters use it for networking (done via a modified 802.11g running at 900MHz rather than 2.4GHz), provided by one vendor since well, they don't interoperate.
So it will be interesting since you have to content with a lot of almost-WiFi gear.
So basically, Edge and Firefox have to adopt their shitty, broken, prefixed CSS, because web developers were too lazy to do things right... just like how Mozilla and others have had to adopt IE6-isms, because developers were too lazy in the same way. Great. Shows just how professional my peers are that they refuse to develop to proper standards, and worse, developed sites without proper (and usually trivial) fallbacks... all for mere eye candy.
Well, a lot of the prefixed stuff is actually in the standards, so what Mozilla had to do was merely alias the prefixed version to the proper standard name.
It's just easier for one browser to fix their parser to handle the aliases than to ask lots of web developers to fix their code. Especially with the usershare of Firefox these days, most people will be more apt to blame Firefox than fix their code.
Oh, don't give me that. American minimum wage is enough to put you into the 1% super rich global elite. Even a single part time job, paid minimum wage, would be 10 times the salary of the vast majority of families in the world. If they do not have enough money for food, it is become of an ill managed luxurious lifestyle. And if this improved test scores, well they still are scoring orders of magnitude under many many communities living under much greater poverty.
Statistics fail - sorry, but 1% is not the entire US.
The world has around 7-7.3 billion people. 1% of that puts you at 70-73 million people. The US population is nearly 320M people. Or basically, if all the 1%-ers are in the US, that would mean almost one-in-four to one-in-five is a 1%-er.
As much as it is trendy to hate on the rich, being in a first world nation does not make you a 1%-er. There are much more valid reasons to hate on the 1% such as creating the laws that make income inequality a growing thing since the 70s, or the CEO salary ratio, which means the average CEO would make as much money as their lowest paid employee by mid-day Tuesday (this is in the US) this week (January 5). Those are very valid problems.
Most kids in poverty aren't there because the parents spent all the money on yachts and expensive cars, but are because of those policies. Minimum wage is a wage - money paid per hour. Just because it's $10.50 or so doesn't mean you even get full time work - a lot of those jobs are for 4 hour blocks or less per day. Which is why a lot of those parents work 2, 3 or more jobs, plus commuting (and a lot of places in North America mean you need a car, which is expensive).
So housing, car(s), food, and you can barely make it through the month. That sort of stress creates a negative learning environment. And that assumes they can make it - if they can't, then something has to give - rent, electricity/heat/etc, food, etc.
And it's a big social problem too - because people then turn to crime to fulfill basic needs, so society ends up paying. WE end up paying anyhow becase someone has to pay for their medical bills and other social problems they inflict on everyone else as well.
So yes, hate on the 1% for creating an environment where the rich get richer and everyone else gets screwed (and stuff like medical reform and Obamacare are putting bandaids on the real problem).
Sure you may think the guy living on the street is lazy, but it actually costs everyone time and money dealing with them.
That's kind of the point. It will make his e-book new and innovative. That's how progress happens.
Except since it hasn't happened, the market pretty much must've rejected it.
I mean, Apple has iBooks Author, which is a free (beer, on OS X) application for creating "rich" books which can be exported to PDF or EPUB. (There's a licensing thing in there - if you want to sell the book for money, you have to have it approved by Apple for sale in the iBookstore. But if it's free, go nuts - distribute how you see fit). They run on iPad, which is still one of the more popular tablets on there. And aside from the initial hype on release, well, most of it has died out it seems.
I mean, yes, it's Apple proprietary at the moment, because ebooks aren't supposed to have such support and when you're the only one doing it, well, there you go.
If it was a good idea, then Amazon and everyone else would've copied the ideas and implement their own solution, which then will attract the attention of standards bodies to create a standard "rich" ebook format.
Apple still supports the software so it can be used to create rich ebooks. But the market has spoken and rich ebooks are not on the menu, unless you're an Apple owner. Probably because it's easier to do as an app...
Selling spyware as a feature, the sales department should be congratulated. No, the whole industry.
Except WebOS has nothing to do with WebTV.
webOS is the mobile OS that Palm created to run on its phones as a competitor to Android and iOS. It was developed after PalmSource sold the old PalmOS code to Access Ltd (Japan), while they worked on webOS.
They released a couple of phones, and you may remember the old HP tablet that was clearanced out running webOS. Palm sold itself to LG and it lives on to power the smart TV.
As soon as the manager starts to filter information, it starts to take decisions indirectly about the project. If the guy knows the matter, it does it right. However, if the guy knows enough to know what to filter, the guy should not be being wasted on communications - the guy should be in a active hole on development.
Managers should manage. And nothing more.
A manager manages by filtering information. Customers, sales people, etc., request features, the manager consolidates these requests down, sees what makes sense and allocates resources to those tasks. If a task is already being done while a request comes in for it, the manager handles it.
Sometimes a manager has delegates, like a project engineer (someone who is technically skilled in the project and knows it inside and out) to whom they offload the more technical questions to so as to avoid bothering the rest of the development team with the questions, or if the team is too large, to have the project engineer assign it to the right person.
Customers can be quite demanding, and there has to be effectively a firewall between development and sales - aka the manager. Customers tell sales what they want, sales relays it to the software team manager who aggregates and works with sales to figure out what people are really wanting. The manager then takes those requests, then works with a project engineer to figure out how best to schedule and do do the work to implement the requested feature. The project engineer (who may be the manager) then works with the developers to actually implement the feature - to do a proper spec, design it, implement it, test it and prep it for release.
Because when sales talks directly to developers, chaos erupts.
My problem is this one
'drop whatever you are doing this is your top priority' then 'why is xyz not done yet'.
I spend at least 2-3 days a week in meetings. The remaining time is spent doing 'support'. The other time is supposed to be my development time. Guess which one suffers?
My 'passion' is gone. I come in at 9ish leave at 5. I then take a decent lunch. I dont care anymore. They do not want to let me schedule time for dev work. I am not going to give them extra time. They dont care then I dont.
Depends - if you're the only developer doing this because you're the one who knows most about the project, congratulations - you got promoted to manager, or at least now manage your team. Because you're being pulled into meetings means management thinks you've got stuff to contribute. If everyone on your team is like this though, then the development process is screwed, and you need to have a strong word with your manager to tell your team to cut back on time sinks..
If you're the only one there because you're the knowledgeable one, then you've got a choice - you can tell your managers you don't want to be in a management position in which case you can sink back to a role of a developer, or you can adapt, realize your career has turned from lowly developer to manager, and start managing.
Looks like you want the former, which is perfectly OK - there are plenty of people who don't want the management track and want to stay technical. Depending on your company, there may be opportunity to advance to a high level technical person (architect or so). without management responsibility.
If you do want to pursue the management track, the first thing you need to dispose of is yourself as a #1 resource. You can develop, but you'll have to give the bigger chunks to someone else. As a side effect, you can also assign the crap jobs or tasks you don't want to do to someone else (too busy to take care of this). But you need to realize that you won't be in the code as much, but will be able to make the small changes people want.
Me personally, I've been pushed into that track as one of the top level of software developers where I have to manage a small team of people. I realize how much time meetin
They can't give physical access to the clients' BES servers but that doesn't mean they haven't given them a key to unlock intercepted encrypted traffic. If they are okay with giving access to their less paying patrons, why draw the line there?
You have to realize how BlackBerries work.
First, when they're attached to a BES server, the BES server and Blackberry exchange keys. That key is used for all traffic - the BlackBerry itself encrypts traffic using the BES server key, forwards it to the Blackberry network which sends it to the customer's BES installation. BES then decrypts the package and figures out what it needs to do - work email, traffic destined for the internet, etc. All communications are end-to-end encrypted and the Blackberry network just sees data blobs it can't decrypt.
In a consumer mode, what happens is the Blackberry network exchanges keys with the blackberry. The blackberry sends encrypted payloads to the blackberry network, which then decrypts it and accesses the internet. At this point the traffic is decrypted.
A "local" blackberry network server like that in India just means the Indian users are routed to that server. If the blackberry is attached to BES, then the indian server forwards it onwards as an encrypted payload as that's all it can do. If it isn't, then it's handled locally and decrypted.
A blackberry without BES has decrypted network traffic like a regular smartphone - if you're accessing an IMAP server unencrypted, the blackberry will access it unencrypted.
Pakistan wanted ALL blackberry traffic to be available to it - including BES traffic (India just wanted unattached traffic). That is not in the architecture, which is why Blackberry was shutting down - the design of the network was such that BES traffic could not be decrypted because it was end-to-end. Unattached blackberries are also end-to-end encrypted, except one end is the server attached to the public internet.
Huh? The only backwards compatibility aspects to HD DVD was that the player could play DVDs, but so could all Blu-Ray players.
HD-DVD manufacturing could be retrofitted on DVD equipment with minor upgrades. If you're a DVD plant, upgrading to HD-DVD equipment was simple and could be used to make both HD-DVDs and DVDs together. Blu-Rays require a whole new plant as Blu-Rays require a new production technique incompatible with DVD.
That's why most HD-DVDs came with a DVD copy of the movie as a "flipper" disc. DVD buyers could buy the HD-DVD version and play the movie, then when they buy an HD-DVD player, their collection could work immediately.
It was also why HD-DVD was cheaper - DVD manufacturing is highly mature and dual layer DVDs were easy and cheap to manufacture. (Dual-layer BDs were rare, expensive and were not commercially viable until 2009 or so). Plus, since every DVD plant was basically upgraded, but there were only 6 BD plants at the time which meant Blu-Ray was capacity constrained.
And the backwards compatibility means that even today the HD-DVD equipment is probably still running strong, making DVDs.
YJust before landing, pilots will kick the airplane over into a "slip", which is a deliberate mis-coordination of the flight controls. This puts the plane in a bank (using the horizontal component of lift to cancel the wind) with rudder cancelling the yaw. This is a harder technique because it requires constant control inputs, but it aligns the wheels with the direction of travel. That's good for not blowing out tires.
Actually, no. There are two crosswind landing techniques - the crab, and the wing low (aka forward slip).
The forward slip is where the airplane isn't flying coordinated anymore - the rudder and the ailerons are not working together to move smoothly through the air. In this case, the rudder is aiming the nose, while the ailerons are used to bank and keep the aircraft on the centerline.
The other technique is the crab, where the plane flies at an angle relative to the flight path over the ground. It's flying coordinated. Just before the tires touch the ground, the aircraft is kicked over so the nose points straight down the runway. This is done close to the ground because you do not transition to a slip so the aircraft is blown sideways. Luckily inertia and timing make it so the airplane doesn't land in the ditch.
Wing low is easiest to do because unless it's gusty, once you're set up, you hold it pretty much all the way to the ground so it's a nice stablized approach that follows you to the ground (you land on the upwind wheel first, followed by the downwind main). Crabbing is hard because you have to kick it over at the last second - do it too late and you land sideways, too early and you're headed to the side of the runway.
However, crabbing is much friendlier to passengers - wing low has them leaning to one side of the aircraft and that's uncomfortable, while crabbing has them sitting properly because they're still in coordinated flight. Crabbing also has the advantage that the wings are level - airliners are typically mid to low wing, and the engines hang under the wing, so if you do wing low, you run the real risk of scraping it.
If you're curious, airliners are designed so if you do make a mistake, they can handle the crab - I think the 747 has the ability to be landed up to 45 degrees of crab. Light aircraft don't have such ability and many an aircraft has been bent when the crab technique is used incorrectly.
This is definitely true. For example, WebDAV. Or, the replacement of SMTP, NNTP, and websites by social networks. There are protocols which are good that they are replaced. DHCP has done an excellent job at replacing BOOTP and RARP.
Then, you get protocols which -should- be supported by vendors. SSHFS comes to mind as one example of something that should be everywhere, just because the server side only needs to care about RSA key authentication and running sftp, and the client side handles all the heavy lifting.
The problem is there are lots of standards, and the other problem is, well, it lacks innovation.
Why did DropBox become popular? Many websites offer more than 2GB of storage for free (without looking too hard, you can get 5-50GB easy). Well, it was because it was easy to use - you dumped a file in a special folder on your hard drive and your data is backed up, with versioning and all that.
And it's not like it didn't already exist - Windows has had a WebDAV client since the XP days which can be manipulated from within explorer.
No, the key part of it was the syncing and local caching - the Dropbox folder is a local folder so accessing it is like a regular file, and the client syncs it to the Dropbox servers. The client also replicates it across your other computers (using the LAN if it's local) so your change shows up instantly.
Existing WebDAV clients downloaded the file as you needed them, which made it really slow. Now, I don't know the protocol, but maybe there's no support for the things Dropbox needs like a notification mechanism so all the attached clients can update the local caches, but there you go - things like this start showing the limits of the standard and soon you're extending and extending.
And of course, you could use a web browser to access your files on the go.
And that's really what happened - someone did something innovative that made life easier for a lot of people, so people flock to the service. It doesn't matter if they had standards or not, the key point is it made life simpler.
Sort of like how Apple does stuff - they don't innovate on technology, but they do take existing technology and make ways for it to be more useful to more people.
Could Dropbox use WebDAV? Maybe. Maybe not if the standard doesn't address things they need. But that's why people flocked to it - people don't care about the underlying standard, they just care that it just works.
The worst key omission on Apple laptops is the delete key. I'm not talking about the backspace key marked "delete". I want a real delete key I can delete stuff with.
Just hit Fn+Delete (backspace) to have traditional delete functionality.
Been that way for a long time now - even my old PowerBook had that feature.
The Eject key only exists on Macs that have internal optical drives.
Cook has a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders to maximize profits. If he were to repatriate $200B and pay an outrageous 40% tax on it, he would be sued into the stone age for needlessly squandering $80B. None of this capital will come into America until it gets its corporate taxes under control. Until then, the rest of the world thanks you. Enjoy missing out!
First, let's split it up into Apple US, and Apple Rest-of-World.
Apple US pays all the taxes. If you buy an iPhone in the US, it's sold by Apple US and the profit Apple makes on that is taxed and goes to Uncle Sam. The rest of that money is spent on the engineers and other people at Apple.
If you buy an iPhone in say, Europe, then Apple Rest-of-World (RoW) records that profit. In this case, it would be Ireland and a little bit to the European country to which it was sold. (Apple Ireland sells Apple Italy iPhones for near retail price - Apple Italy makes a profit and from 2008-2013, someone at Apple Italy forgot to file their taxes). So most of the profit is made at Apple Ireland. Apple Ireland pays Irish taxes per their (very favorable) tax arrangement which was probably arranged decades ago since Apple has had a presence there for a long time.
The problem is, US tax codes mean that the money Apple has outside of the US, to which Apple RoW has paid their taxes to, is going to be taxed again. It's only the US that has the funny tax law that means profit can be taxed twice.
Since Apple is getting popular outside the US now, they're having an ever-growing pile of money located outside of the US.
And the silliness of it is - it's cheaper to borrow money in the US than to repatriate it. Apple would be taxed at 40% to bring the money home, yet Apple could borrow the same amount of cash and pay only 5% or less.
In an ironic political twist this "center leftie" does share a lot of concerns that a universal income would promote idleness and sloth. I say this based on my own personality traits: when I've been unemployed for substantial periods of time a deep torpor settles in and I get less and less motivated to do anything. That is not a life well lived, and while it's not for me to judge whose life is well lived and whose is not, I find it hard to fit that in with the principle that social programs help humans fulfill their moral responsibility to take care of one another. For example, wouldn't it be especially easy for people with substance abuse problems to fall into absolute squalor where they just collect their UBI and spend it all on feeding the beast? I realize the libertarian answer might be that they are freely choosing that life and society has no right to judge or force them to live differently (which I don't entirely disagree with), but with addiction problems the free will part gets complicated fast.
It's a "problem" in name only in the end. Because the basic income is supposed to pay for basic living - and by basic, we're talking basic - think dorm-style or barracks style living. Yes, you have a bed, you have a room, you're sharing it, sharing a kitchen, sharing a bathroom, etc. You can be idle and lazy all day and live like that.
But a funny thing happens - humans are generally competitive by nature, and they'll want to upgrade, but upgrades aren't covered by the basic income (even if the upgrade is to move from a 4/6/8 person room to a 2 person shared room), so they'll start to work - perhaps by mowing the lawn or other basic task. And then after moving in, they'll want a private room, then maybe an apartment of their own, etc., and they'll work towards that.
SO yes, you'll have the lazy. Leave them be - basically ensure they have their basic needs met (otherwise you'll have crime and society will have to pay for them). If they're truly lazy, you really don't want them doing a job anyways - the worst thing in the world would be to hire a lazy unmotivated person. So just leave them be - as long as their needs are met, they're on the their own.
And we really should be moving towards such an economy - as robots start to take over more and more jobs, a basic income leaves the robots to do their work, and humans free to explore and do whatever.
I'd say have they solved the glasshole problem - a problem that's more social than technological. I mean, the original Google Glass suffered from that problem.
The technology has its uses, but the problem is the humans behind it seek to use it in ways considered socially unacceptable. Hence the term "glasshole" which basically soured the technology to the public - it turned a good technology into an antisocial pervert tool.
And when that happened, it's too late. When Google themselves had to issue an etiquette guide to using it you know public opinion has soured on it. And with people banning it all over the place, well.
Trying to compare his little walled garden to a hospital just makes him look like a giant robber baron jackass.
Well, except hospitals are paid for by taxpayers, so the "free healthcare" really isn't. (Though single payer healthcare has many benefits).
You have to remember that "Free basics' is just that - completely free (beer) access to the walled garden. You don't pay a single cent for data in the walled garden. Sure you;re limited to what you can do, buy someone else is paying for it, and they get to say what you see.
If you don't like that, go for a competitor offering a similar service. I mean, everyone is criticizing Zuckerberg for offering FREE walled garden access. How come those people aren't offering FREE internet access then?
It's free. You don't have to take it, you can pay for regular internet access (probably cost you most of your monthly salary). Or you can just take the limited access, but use your money for other things.
And yes, if it's free, you're the product. But your choices are limited outside contact, a walled garden but some internet access, or full internet access at the cost of starving or not making rent.
It seems critics think no internet access at all is better than limited for free. But it's not mutually exclusive, either - you can ignore the free limited internet offering and continue like you always have, or take the offering. Or let competition work - the critics can offer their version of internet access for free and force Facebook and Zuxkerberg to improve their offering.
The summary lists HDDs as viable vs SSDs when "high areal density is more important than ripping transfer speeds" but in most applications it's the random access time that's more useful and SSDs are better than HDDs in this regard by several orders of magnitude.
There are plenty of cases where random access isn't as big an issue, and density is.
First off, yes, random access is good - for random access patterns. Like an OS drive. And games that load lots of little files randomly.
But there are cases where users want more storage, and sheer size of files means they won't be seeing much random access to be a problem. Media storage, for example - if you're storing your 50GB Blu-Ray rips, or just holding movies up that are 1GB or larger, then they would most likely not be very fragmented to begin with, so seek time is less of an issue.And in which case, well, being able to store 6TB or more on a disk is much more useful.
Heck, a lot of people are into movie editing, and movie files are big, and usually only linearly accessed, which means you want to store a massive amount more than random access.
It's really all about the usage now. Bulk storage, hard drives are still the cheapest, while fast storage SSDs have it.
The only problem is, SSDs can be pricey if you want more storage - 2TB hard drives can be had for $50, but are nearly $1K in SSD form, and sometimes you need bulk storage.
Heck, even building something like Android requires a 200+GB source code tree. Holding a few build trees is possible on a cheap 2TB hard drive. Practically impossible on an SSD, even 512GB cheap ones.
Slashdot Mirror
Medals are for recognition - sure you might be hiding in a control room, but there are circumstances where what you did deserves recognition.
Drones are often deployed in support roles - providing an eyes in the sky view for the ground team, for example. While out on patrol, the ground team gets pinned because of an unknown shooter. So while their lives are in danger, the drone operator flies around and then sports the shooter and relays their coordinates to the ground team so they know where to look and try to take it out.
At the end of the mission, those guys on the ground are thankful for the drone operator to provide support - it could've ended very badly. Perhaps the guy in the air conditioned control room stateside should get a little recognition for that? Because I'm sure that team doesn't care about the drone operator's working conditions, but they're damn appreciative he was there.
Better yet, why not both? An app AND a website? They're not mutually exclusive, you know.
Here's the thing - it seems when we want to add "bad" features to the web standard, everyone goes and says "they should make it an app!" and when they do, everyone complains "why don't they just make a web site".
Think about all the controversy over DRM support in HTML. Everyone's saying that Netflix should just be an app. Great, they do it, then people complain when they don't have a website to watch anymore or that it requires plugins to install. The solution everyone WANTS is not likely to happen (Netflix going DRM-free),
You're making a dangerous assumption that Uber won't lobby for legislative changes that bar easy entry into the field.
Once Uber has destroyed the taxi companies (and there are signs it's happening, for better or worse), Uber can just as easy do an Airbnb and lobby for legislation that's friendly for Uber, and nasty for everyone else.
Taxi regulations are complex because of the nasty things that were done in the past - discrimination ("Oh, you're a cripple? See ya!" - most taxi companies actually have to provide non-discriminatory service), fare jacking (taxi companies can't do surge pricing, for example), etc.
Of course, taxi companies have gotten fat and lazy and are crappy because they also introduced laws that give them power. Uber's fighting this, but that doesn't mean they won't do the same once they beat them. Hell, they'd be stupid not to freeze out potential competitors and become the "new taxi company".
About the only pushback happens not because of race, gender, sexuality, religion or other "social justice" thing. Instead, it's money.
Sometimes a professor must take back a failing grade - not because the student didn't deserve it, but because their parents either are high ranking members of society (i.e., rich) and thus threatened to withhold their annual contribution, or the administration is worried that students may drop out, and depriving them of tuition funds.
Forget social justice. Anti-social justice is just as bad. "I'm rich" or "I belong to a rich family" or "My father owns your ass" is basically what it boils down to.
Unlikely, actually.
In fact, being available in more countries will likely result in more difficulty for Netflix - the problem being that the content industry is trying to avoid another Apple.
For those who don't know, the iTunes music store is wildly successful. So successful in fact that Apple was able to dictate the terms of the agreement to the music companies. The music industry tried and tried and they could not break Apple - Apple sold the most popular players and people were buying up music for that player at an astounding rate. So much so that Apple had all the power - if the record labels disagreed with Apple's terms, Apple said "tough" and didn't carry them. Which basically meant you either ripped it or pirated it.
Well, the only way the record labels and RIAA could break Apple was to do the nuclear option - DRM free. With that one move, they established Amazon as a viable competitor to Apple, and with this, it meant the labels/RIAA was now back in charge, not Apple. Apple could no longer dictate the terms, because they could simply move their offerings to Amazon. And likewise, Amazon couldn't dictate terms to them either, because then they'd move their offerings to Apple.
Hollywood saw what' went on, and they know they're not going to allow any one player to become too big or dominant. So Netflix may be big, but Hollywood is going to make it so Netflix won't grow TOO big and be a threat.
At best, they will help them secure rights from the local distributor.
Correct, the brain is a "use it or lose it", however, the problem is Luminosity was making specific claims that their training helps you be more mentally agile and can reverse aging.
The science on "brain training" is quite clear - this was done years ago when the brain training games for Nintendo DS came out over a decade ago.
Yes, you do get mentally sharper, in the areas the game trains you in. So if you're doing a bunch of arithmetic problems, you actually get faster and better and doing it, and the brain areas also get improved. But it's a big stretch to say that it also improves other areas of your brain.
So it helps, but only in the area it's testing. Since doing arithmetic mentally is a generally useful skill, training like that can improve your life in general (knowing how much your shopping cart costs at the grocery store is a good aid in helping come in on budget, for example). But other games like a electronic version of three card monte is only useful if you want to be cheated by a con artist.
Luminosity might help, but the science behind it is sketchy as to what it actually does, compared to specific training for mental math and other skills. A lot of the improvement may simply come down to being able to play the game better.
Indeed.
In fact, the wireless sensors I've seen (900MHz based ones) operate on a 4 state system - contact open, contact closed, heart-beat, low battery. One of those must be reported periodically and the receiver must make sure all the sync'ed devices check in periodically (usually at least once a minute). The devices are sync'ed to the receiver in case your neighbour has the same system, and also to provide proper reporting of state (e.g., if the sensor is motion, you need to be notified it's motion so ignore it when in "armed at home" mode).
If a sensor battery needs changing, it sends the low battery heartbeat which causes the system to report which sensor has a low battery. If a sensor hasn't been heard from, then it's a fault and reported to the security company who calls you.
None of this uses ZigBee - wireless alarm sensors have been around a while. And the manuals from all of them I've seen send a heartbeat signal.
Yes, it was originally a tape used to seal ammo boxes. It was called "duck tape" because when wet, it shed water like a duck.
It morphed into "duct tape" more as the classical game of telephone - someone mis-hears it and thought it was called duct tape. Both terms actually apply to the tape, though "duck tape" is actually more accurate since it's bad at ductwork and there are much better adhesive tape for sealing ducts.
Do you can pretty much blame duck/duct on pronunciation and hearing.
It was against centrifuges used for the production of nuclear weapons.
You use, there are two uranium isotopes - U-235 and U-238. U-238 makes up the vast majority of uranium mined (over 99%) while U-235 is around half a percent or so. For a nuclear reactor, depending on its design, it may be able to run on unenriched uranium, or enriched to around 3%.
Nuclear weapons use weapons-grade enriched uranium, which requires 90% U-235.
The only way to separate U-235 from U-238 is through a centrifuge which works only because of the slightly higher mass of U-238.
Enriching uranium for nuclear reactor use doesn't require a whole lot of work - if at all since there are designs meant to operate on unenriched uranium. So if you see a bunch of centrifuges in operation, there really is only one reason - nuclear weapons. Enrichment is expensive, to weapons grade even more so, so you don't want to bother if you're just going to make electricity from it.
Considering how many centrifuges they were running, it was pretty obvious - if you want to get weapons grade, it takes a LOT of them.
It's going to be fun because the 900MHz band already has a lot of proprietary WiFi systems on it - a lot of smart meters use it for networking (done via a modified 802.11g running at 900MHz rather than 2.4GHz), provided by one vendor since well, they don't interoperate.
So it will be interesting since you have to content with a lot of almost-WiFi gear.
Well, a lot of the prefixed stuff is actually in the standards, so what Mozilla had to do was merely alias the prefixed version to the proper standard name.
It's just easier for one browser to fix their parser to handle the aliases than to ask lots of web developers to fix their code. Especially with the usershare of Firefox these days, most people will be more apt to blame Firefox than fix their code.
Statistics fail - sorry, but 1% is not the entire US.
The world has around 7-7.3 billion people. 1% of that puts you at 70-73 million people. The US population is nearly 320M people. Or basically, if all the 1%-ers are in the US, that would mean almost one-in-four to one-in-five is a 1%-er.
As much as it is trendy to hate on the rich, being in a first world nation does not make you a 1%-er. There are much more valid reasons to hate on the 1% such as creating the laws that make income inequality a growing thing since the 70s, or the CEO salary ratio, which means the average CEO would make as much money as their lowest paid employee by mid-day Tuesday (this is in the US) this week (January 5). Those are very valid problems.
Most kids in poverty aren't there because the parents spent all the money on yachts and expensive cars, but are because of those policies. Minimum wage is a wage - money paid per hour. Just because it's $10.50 or so doesn't mean you even get full time work - a lot of those jobs are for 4 hour blocks or less per day. Which is why a lot of those parents work 2, 3 or more jobs, plus commuting (and a lot of places in North America mean you need a car, which is expensive).
So housing, car(s), food, and you can barely make it through the month. That sort of stress creates a negative learning environment. And that assumes they can make it - if they can't, then something has to give - rent, electricity/heat/etc, food, etc.
And it's a big social problem too - because people then turn to crime to fulfill basic needs, so society ends up paying. WE end up paying anyhow becase someone has to pay for their medical bills and other social problems they inflict on everyone else as well.
So yes, hate on the 1% for creating an environment where the rich get richer and everyone else gets screwed (and stuff like medical reform and Obamacare are putting bandaids on the real problem).
Sure you may think the guy living on the street is lazy, but it actually costs everyone time and money dealing with them.
Except since it hasn't happened, the market pretty much must've rejected it.
I mean, Apple has iBooks Author, which is a free (beer, on OS X) application for creating "rich" books which can be exported to PDF or EPUB. (There's a licensing thing in there - if you want to sell the book for money, you have to have it approved by Apple for sale in the iBookstore. But if it's free, go nuts - distribute how you see fit). They run on iPad, which is still one of the more popular tablets on there. And aside from the initial hype on release, well, most of it has died out it seems.
I mean, yes, it's Apple proprietary at the moment, because ebooks aren't supposed to have such support and when you're the only one doing it, well, there you go.
If it was a good idea, then Amazon and everyone else would've copied the ideas and implement their own solution, which then will attract the attention of standards bodies to create a standard "rich" ebook format.
Apple still supports the software so it can be used to create rich ebooks. But the market has spoken and rich ebooks are not on the menu, unless you're an Apple owner. Probably because it's easier to do as an app...
Except WebOS has nothing to do with WebTV.
webOS is the mobile OS that Palm created to run on its phones as a competitor to Android and iOS. It was developed after PalmSource sold the old PalmOS code to Access Ltd (Japan), while they worked on webOS.
They released a couple of phones, and you may remember the old HP tablet that was clearanced out running webOS. Palm sold itself to LG and it lives on to power the smart TV.
A manager manages by filtering information. Customers, sales people, etc., request features, the manager consolidates these requests down, sees what makes sense and allocates resources to those tasks. If a task is already being done while a request comes in for it, the manager handles it.
Sometimes a manager has delegates, like a project engineer (someone who is technically skilled in the project and knows it inside and out) to whom they offload the more technical questions to so as to avoid bothering the rest of the development team with the questions, or if the team is too large, to have the project engineer assign it to the right person.
Customers can be quite demanding, and there has to be effectively a firewall between development and sales - aka the manager. Customers tell sales what they want, sales relays it to the software team manager who aggregates and works with sales to figure out what people are really wanting. The manager then takes those requests, then works with a project engineer to figure out how best to schedule and do do the work to implement the requested feature. The project engineer (who may be the manager) then works with the developers to actually implement the feature - to do a proper spec, design it, implement it, test it and prep it for release.
Because when sales talks directly to developers, chaos erupts.
Depends - if you're the only developer doing this because you're the one who knows most about the project, congratulations - you got promoted to manager, or at least now manage your team. Because you're being pulled into meetings means management thinks you've got stuff to contribute. If everyone on your team is like this though, then the development process is screwed, and you need to have a strong word with your manager to tell your team to cut back on time sinks..
If you're the only one there because you're the knowledgeable one, then you've got a choice - you can tell your managers you don't want to be in a management position in which case you can sink back to a role of a developer, or you can adapt, realize your career has turned from lowly developer to manager, and start managing.
Looks like you want the former, which is perfectly OK - there are plenty of people who don't want the management track and want to stay technical. Depending on your company, there may be opportunity to advance to a high level technical person (architect or so). without management responsibility.
If you do want to pursue the management track, the first thing you need to dispose of is yourself as a #1 resource. You can develop, but you'll have to give the bigger chunks to someone else. As a side effect, you can also assign the crap jobs or tasks you don't want to do to someone else (too busy to take care of this). But you need to realize that you won't be in the code as much, but will be able to make the small changes people want.
Me personally, I've been pushed into that track as one of the top level of software developers where I have to manage a small team of people. I realize how much time meetin
You have to realize how BlackBerries work.
First, when they're attached to a BES server, the BES server and Blackberry exchange keys. That key is used for all traffic - the BlackBerry itself encrypts traffic using the BES server key, forwards it to the Blackberry network which sends it to the customer's BES installation. BES then decrypts the package and figures out what it needs to do - work email, traffic destined for the internet, etc. All communications are end-to-end encrypted and the Blackberry network just sees data blobs it can't decrypt.
In a consumer mode, what happens is the Blackberry network exchanges keys with the blackberry. The blackberry sends encrypted payloads to the blackberry network, which then decrypts it and accesses the internet. At this point the traffic is decrypted.
A "local" blackberry network server like that in India just means the Indian users are routed to that server. If the blackberry is attached to BES, then the indian server forwards it onwards as an encrypted payload as that's all it can do. If it isn't, then it's handled locally and decrypted.
A blackberry without BES has decrypted network traffic like a regular smartphone - if you're accessing an IMAP server unencrypted, the blackberry will access it unencrypted.
Pakistan wanted ALL blackberry traffic to be available to it - including BES traffic (India just wanted unattached traffic). That is not in the architecture, which is why Blackberry was shutting down - the design of the network was such that BES traffic could not be decrypted because it was end-to-end. Unattached blackberries are also end-to-end encrypted, except one end is the server attached to the public internet.
HD-DVD manufacturing could be retrofitted on DVD equipment with minor upgrades. If you're a DVD plant, upgrading to HD-DVD equipment was simple and could be used to make both HD-DVDs and DVDs together. Blu-Rays require a whole new plant as Blu-Rays require a new production technique incompatible with DVD.
That's why most HD-DVDs came with a DVD copy of the movie as a "flipper" disc. DVD buyers could buy the HD-DVD version and play the movie, then when they buy an HD-DVD player, their collection could work immediately.
It was also why HD-DVD was cheaper - DVD manufacturing is highly mature and dual layer DVDs were easy and cheap to manufacture. (Dual-layer BDs were rare, expensive and were not commercially viable until 2009 or so). Plus, since every DVD plant was basically upgraded, but there were only 6 BD plants at the time which meant Blu-Ray was capacity constrained.
And the backwards compatibility means that even today the HD-DVD equipment is probably still running strong, making DVDs.
Actually, no. There are two crosswind landing techniques - the crab, and the wing low (aka forward slip).
The forward slip is where the airplane isn't flying coordinated anymore - the rudder and the ailerons are not working together to move smoothly through the air. In this case, the rudder is aiming the nose, while the ailerons are used to bank and keep the aircraft on the centerline.
The other technique is the crab, where the plane flies at an angle relative to the flight path over the ground. It's flying coordinated. Just before the tires touch the ground, the aircraft is kicked over so the nose points straight down the runway. This is done close to the ground because you do not transition to a slip so the aircraft is blown sideways. Luckily inertia and timing make it so the airplane doesn't land in the ditch.
Wing low is easiest to do because unless it's gusty, once you're set up, you hold it pretty much all the way to the ground so it's a nice stablized approach that follows you to the ground (you land on the upwind wheel first, followed by the downwind main). Crabbing is hard because you have to kick it over at the last second - do it too late and you land sideways, too early and you're headed to the side of the runway.
However, crabbing is much friendlier to passengers - wing low has them leaning to one side of the aircraft and that's uncomfortable, while crabbing has them sitting properly because they're still in coordinated flight. Crabbing also has the advantage that the wings are level - airliners are typically mid to low wing, and the engines hang under the wing, so if you do wing low, you run the real risk of scraping it.
If you're curious, airliners are designed so if you do make a mistake, they can handle the crab - I think the 747 has the ability to be landed up to 45 degrees of crab. Light aircraft don't have such ability and many an aircraft has been bent when the crab technique is used incorrectly.
The problem is there are lots of standards, and the other problem is, well, it lacks innovation.
Why did DropBox become popular? Many websites offer more than 2GB of storage for free (without looking too hard, you can get 5-50GB easy). Well, it was because it was easy to use - you dumped a file in a special folder on your hard drive and your data is backed up, with versioning and all that.
And it's not like it didn't already exist - Windows has had a WebDAV client since the XP days which can be manipulated from within explorer.
No, the key part of it was the syncing and local caching - the Dropbox folder is a local folder so accessing it is like a regular file, and the client syncs it to the Dropbox servers. The client also replicates it across your other computers (using the LAN if it's local) so your change shows up instantly.
Existing WebDAV clients downloaded the file as you needed them, which made it really slow. Now, I don't know the protocol, but maybe there's no support for the things Dropbox needs like a notification mechanism so all the attached clients can update the local caches, but there you go - things like this start showing the limits of the standard and soon you're extending and extending.
And of course, you could use a web browser to access your files on the go.
And that's really what happened - someone did something innovative that made life easier for a lot of people, so people flock to the service. It doesn't matter if they had standards or not, the key point is it made life simpler.
Sort of like how Apple does stuff - they don't innovate on technology, but they do take existing technology and make ways for it to be more useful to more people.
Could Dropbox use WebDAV? Maybe. Maybe not if the standard doesn't address things they need. But that's why people flocked to it - people don't care about the underlying standard, they just care that it just works.
Just hit Fn+Delete (backspace) to have traditional delete functionality.
Been that way for a long time now - even my old PowerBook had that feature.
The Eject key only exists on Macs that have internal optical drives.
First, let's split it up into Apple US, and Apple Rest-of-World.
Apple US pays all the taxes. If you buy an iPhone in the US, it's sold by Apple US and the profit Apple makes on that is taxed and goes to Uncle Sam. The rest of that money is spent on the engineers and other people at Apple.
If you buy an iPhone in say, Europe, then Apple Rest-of-World (RoW) records that profit. In this case, it would be Ireland and a little bit to the European country to which it was sold. (Apple Ireland sells Apple Italy iPhones for near retail price - Apple Italy makes a profit and from 2008-2013, someone at Apple Italy forgot to file their taxes). So most of the profit is made at Apple Ireland. Apple Ireland pays Irish taxes per their (very favorable) tax arrangement which was probably arranged decades ago since Apple has had a presence there for a long time.
The problem is, US tax codes mean that the money Apple has outside of the US, to which Apple RoW has paid their taxes to, is going to be taxed again. It's only the US that has the funny tax law that means profit can be taxed twice.
Since Apple is getting popular outside the US now, they're having an ever-growing pile of money located outside of the US.
And the silliness of it is - it's cheaper to borrow money in the US than to repatriate it. Apple would be taxed at 40% to bring the money home, yet Apple could borrow the same amount of cash and pay only 5% or less.
It's a "problem" in name only in the end. Because the basic income is supposed to pay for basic living - and by basic, we're talking basic - think dorm-style or barracks style living. Yes, you have a bed, you have a room, you're sharing it, sharing a kitchen, sharing a bathroom, etc. You can be idle and lazy all day and live like that.
But a funny thing happens - humans are generally competitive by nature, and they'll want to upgrade, but upgrades aren't covered by the basic income (even if the upgrade is to move from a 4/6/8 person room to a 2 person shared room), so they'll start to work - perhaps by mowing the lawn or other basic task. And then after moving in, they'll want a private room, then maybe an apartment of their own, etc., and they'll work towards that.
SO yes, you'll have the lazy. Leave them be - basically ensure they have their basic needs met (otherwise you'll have crime and society will have to pay for them). If they're truly lazy, you really don't want them doing a job anyways - the worst thing in the world would be to hire a lazy unmotivated person. So just leave them be - as long as their needs are met, they're on the their own.
And we really should be moving towards such an economy - as robots start to take over more and more jobs, a basic income leaves the robots to do their work, and humans free to explore and do whatever.
I'd say have they solved the glasshole problem - a problem that's more social than technological. I mean, the original Google Glass suffered from that problem.
The technology has its uses, but the problem is the humans behind it seek to use it in ways considered socially unacceptable. Hence the term "glasshole" which basically soured the technology to the public - it turned a good technology into an antisocial pervert tool.
And when that happened, it's too late. When Google themselves had to issue an etiquette guide to using it you know public opinion has soured on it. And with people banning it all over the place, well.
That's the real problem with Google Glass.
Well, except hospitals are paid for by taxpayers, so the "free healthcare" really isn't. (Though single payer healthcare has many benefits).
You have to remember that "Free basics' is just that - completely free (beer) access to the walled garden. You don't pay a single cent for data in the walled garden. Sure you;re limited to what you can do, buy someone else is paying for it, and they get to say what you see.
If you don't like that, go for a competitor offering a similar service. I mean, everyone is criticizing Zuckerberg for offering FREE walled garden access. How come those people aren't offering FREE internet access then?
It's free. You don't have to take it, you can pay for regular internet access (probably cost you most of your monthly salary). Or you can just take the limited access, but use your money for other things.
And yes, if it's free, you're the product. But your choices are limited outside contact, a walled garden but some internet access, or full internet access at the cost of starving or not making rent.
It seems critics think no internet access at all is better than limited for free. But it's not mutually exclusive, either - you can ignore the free limited internet offering and continue like you always have, or take the offering. Or let competition work - the critics can offer their version of internet access for free and force Facebook and Zuxkerberg to improve their offering.
There are plenty of cases where random access isn't as big an issue, and density is.
First off, yes, random access is good - for random access patterns. Like an OS drive. And games that load lots of little files randomly.
But there are cases where users want more storage, and sheer size of files means they won't be seeing much random access to be a problem. Media storage, for example - if you're storing your 50GB Blu-Ray rips, or just holding movies up that are 1GB or larger, then they would most likely not be very fragmented to begin with, so seek time is less of an issue.And in which case, well, being able to store 6TB or more on a disk is much more useful.
Heck, a lot of people are into movie editing, and movie files are big, and usually only linearly accessed, which means you want to store a massive amount more than random access.
It's really all about the usage now. Bulk storage, hard drives are still the cheapest, while fast storage SSDs have it.
The only problem is, SSDs can be pricey if you want more storage - 2TB hard drives can be had for $50, but are nearly $1K in SSD form, and sometimes you need bulk storage.
Heck, even building something like Android requires a 200+GB source code tree. Holding a few build trees is possible on a cheap 2TB hard drive. Practically impossible on an SSD, even 512GB cheap ones.