You keep using that word but Kickstarter backers are not investors. Investors have legal rights that Kickstarter users donâ(TM)t have.
Nope.
An investor is simply someone who provides capital for something. That's it. Some investors have legal rights, because they invest in regulated markets - stock markets, for example. These are highly regulated and investors have a lot of rights because of abuses done years ago.
But you can invest and lose everything. In fact, most business you see have investors. It could be simply the parents loaning their kids $10,000 to set up a store in a strip mall, friends doing same, etc. They are all investors, and should the business fail, they lose their investment. Or some companies sell shares privately (off the stock market, which is public). These companies are under none of the obligations of public companies (including disclosure). And many a lawsuit has been waged when one investor gets their shares forcefully taken back or diluted. And this even extends if the company goes public - many an investor has been screwed out of their public shares because the company devalued their specific private shares to the benefit of others.
Anyhow, at least the unit I have (Smyth Research Realiser A16) is likely to come out, even though the price recently doubled from $2000 to $4000 (the Kickstarter offered them much cheaper at $1200), which has 3D audio, including head position tracking for up to 2 separate headphones. It works with industry-standard 3D audio technologies from 7.1 to Atmos and DTS:X
The very best humans can beat ABS under the very best conditions if they're prepared for it.
As soon as the road gets slippery or the braking effectiveness differs from one side of the car to another (eg: one wheel on paint) ABS _will_ stop you faster. In the latter case a human will virtually always spin the vehicle.
The purpose of ABS is not to stop sooner. That's a side benefit, and it's one of those things that plays well with human behavior.
In a panic situation, humans well, panic. Logical thought goes out the window, and only the best trained in scenarios generally can maintain logical thinking. It's why airline pilots have to go through simulation training every 6 moths - it makes all the emergency situations more routine so there's less panic when the alarm goes off and more order.
Of course, most drivers don't practice panic stops and control, so in any emergency, the natural instinct is to slam on the brakes. Feathering control? Fat chance. ABS is perfect for this (since it requires constant pressure on the pedal to work) and thus makes roads safer because panicky human behavior is perfect ABS behavior.
But the real reason for ABS is in the name - it's purpose is to keep the wheels from locking up. By keeping the wheels moving, you use static friction (always greater than dynamic friction) on the tires. This means the wheels are not sliding. This also means you maintain control of the vehicle. If you're panic stopping and swerve, guess what? With ABS, the car actually swerves. Without ABS, the wheels lock and you can spin the steering wheel lock to lock, and you will just continue moving in a straight line. (There are plenty of shows on TV that illustrate this, and any high-performance emergency driving course will also demonstrate wheel lockup and loss of control)
That's why ABS exists - so you maintain full control of the vehicle and can swerve or avoid an accident in panic situations.
Movie theaters have little incentive to offer discounts to MoviePass. In fact, theater owners have been raising box-office prices, pushing revenue to near all-time highs, as a way to offset lower attendance.
Is it just me or does that sound like "we don't have enough people coming in, so we'll put prices up so we get even fewer"? I don't remember supply and demand working that way.
That's because it doesn't.
Box office prices generally go direct to the studios. The first few weeks of a new movie's run, the studio-theatre split is 100-0%. Yes, all ticket revenues for the first week or two go straight to the movie studio. The theatre doesn't mind - enough people buy concessions that they make a small profit that way.
As time goes on the split gets better - 75-25, 50-50, 25-75, or so. This generally makes up for the lack of people going and thus lower concession sales to those movies.
MoviePass might have bought tickets to cheap second run and special event movies at heavily discounted rates (the tickets usually only cost $3 anyways) and capitalized on the fact that those could've been used for first run movies in an odd loophole, but I'm sure the theatre chains caught on fairly quickly because the studios would've demanded full price.
Studios demand more ticket revenue, forcing theatres to raise ticket prices. It's only during the slow periods and after a few weeks can you see the movie at discounted rates (usually matinee tuesdays or so) because of naturally low business so they actually do discount.
But really theres no reason to fear the GPL, as long as your not being shifty
Or the first lesson is, everyone pirates software.
Yes, a GPL violation is piracy. Whether it's distributing the Linux kernel without source, or Photoshop, or Windows, or Office, it's all the same thing. (No one has to agree to the GPL at all to use GPL software. If you don't, it falls under standard copyright law, so distribution without agreeing to the GPL is like making copies of commercial software).
It makes the whole "copyleft" thing much easier to explain to everyone - GPL and BSD and other licenses are unlike commercial licenses, which seek to reduce your rights from what the law gives you. Instead, you have an alternate path - you can choose standard "All Rights Reserved" as given by the law, or you can choose additional benefits if you agree to additional terms, as a win-win style solution.
Of course, GPLv3 does have companies scared, and good companies have established open-source processes that basically identify all open-source software used within an organization, its licenses, and whether or not it goes in the final product and thus needs to have a special source release. Yes, these processes are a lot of extra paperwork, but they help clarify things. Often there are blanket policies like "No GPLv3 software allowed, at all" which reduces the paperwork some.
Perhaps... except that Bitpay only guarantee the rate for 15 mn, and bitcoin transaction can make much more time to be processed. Hence government also takes a share in the volatility risk.
No, it just converts it at the current rate. Which means you can underpay and have to pay again.
And even when BitCoin payments were taking days to transact, you can still get them done in 10 minutes - it just means you have to pay $50 in transaction fees since you set how much extra you need to pay. There's a default fee you can pay which will be handled as and when the miners get around to it.
You have to remember that these companies are there to eliminate risk, and for risky systems like bitcoin, they do it by passing it onto you. The 15 minute guarantee is generally necessary (since it takes 10 minutes per block so they give you the opportunity if you're unlucky and then some), and even during periods of extreme volatility, 15 minute rates can be stable. Plus, they build in the risk into the exchange rate so the chance of losing money is extremely low. All this ensures they can make money on the transaction as well.
They don't provide the same quality of service as the other carriers though, they are cheaper and thats great and on the volume that Amazon needs they are probably a good option (hence the reason Amazon uses them) but if they cost as much as Fedex, but loose more packages then nobody is ever going to use them.
They only lose more packages because they handle way more packages. It's also why their service is worse.
Think of it this way. In 3 days, USPS handles as much mail pieces as FedEx in a year. UPS is bigger, so it takes USPS about 7 days to exceed UPS' amount. And not surprisingly, I haven't found many people with a high opinion of UPS, either.
While I'm sure that's technically true, long transoceanic routes are also pretty damn predictable. Once they've cleared the local air traffic their heading and cruise speed can be accurately projected hours ahead so it should only take very small early course adjustments to avoid flying "around" an incoming/crossing plane in the middle of the ocean. I suppose it could help if the skies were full that they could go more "bumper to bumper" but that would mainly just increase capacity. I just don't see the benefit to the typical ocean route, usually it's not that crowded. But I guess once the satellites are in place a signal is relatively cheap so even just a slightly straighter line can save more in fuel so that it makes economic sense, I doubt passengers would even notice though. My impression from international flights have been that they fly a very straight line already... well, the great circle but it's a matter of perspective.
It's really damn predictable, actually. So predictable, Canada controls the East to West Atlantic crossings, and the UK controls the West to East Atlantic crossings. Flights submit their flight plans ahead of time (they're quite predictable), and the governing ATC agency (e.g., Nav Canada) takes all the flight plans and arranges them by time. Depending on the winds, the agency creates 8-10 "routes" in the sky and gives them all a letter. The pilot merely has to fly that route, knowing that even without radar coverage, there is adequate separation between planes.
It's a remarkably sane system. And the lanes are by no means congested (these are only at the flight levels, too).
I don't believe anyone's actually complained they're congested - while there are only 10 routes, that applies to the route itself, there's plenty to altitude to go around as well.
Anyhow, this seems like a proprietary version of ADS-B that's being deployed worldwide. (Only the US is an oddity where the ADS-B is terrestrial - most other countries are using satellite-based ADS-B).
More and more all these various 'cryptocurrencies' are starting to remind me of the 'limited edition gold coins' and 'collectible coins' sold on the x.2 and x.3 (and so on) broadcast TV channels. They're not really worth more than the metal they're made out of but they try to convince you they're going to be worth orders of magnitude more than you're paying for them.
Actually, a lot of them are real. Just you can buy them from the Fed for about 1/5th the cost normally. They are only "collectible" in the sense someone paid a lot of money to make an ad for them thinking you can only get it from them. But your local bank should be able to order in a roll for you for basically face value (they may be gold coins, but the gold content is nowhere near their face value). So the ad might sell you a roll of 20 $1 gold coins for $100 as "collectible" (they are limited - once the feds stop pressing, they're no more). Or you bank can get them for $20 or so.
Of course, it also plays on the "limited" part and "collectible" part. Just because something is limited, rare, or collectible, doesn't make it valuable. After all, the Fed just prints a new coin the next year and the scam repeats again.
Perhaps a little blurb about what Tidal is, why one would use it instead of Spotify, Google, Pandora, Amazon, etc.?
They stream supposedly lossless audio. Supposedly because you can pay for more expensive plans that give you lossy audio (go figure).
The idea behind it is somewhat sound - to offer high quality audio streaming. Instead of offering whatever those streams offer, you can stream losslessly encoded audio. Just like the maligned Pono store offered an easy way to buy lossless music.
Of course, it only appeals to those who can stand its much higher costs, so it's not something you'd use if you were listening on your phone.
It has a touch of audiophoolery to it, because you can pay even more for "MQA" audio (stands for "Master Quality Authenticated") which is supposedly a way to get "master studio quality audio" at lower bitrates (i.e., CD compatible). The trick is it's "backwards compatible" so you don't need an MQA player to listen to it, but one is preferred for "superior quality".
The quotes are because it's pretty much crap - while you do get smaller files, it's mostly because you're actually reducing sample rates and bit depth, so you're left with a 44.1k/16bit or a 48k/16bit stream run through an "MQA" encoder which performs noticeably worse than if you simply used FLAC.
Either way it's lossy, and even worse Meridian wants money from encoders, decoders and the like, and the wider audio community sees it as a poor half-assed way to "DRM" all music. "DRM" because the goal is not to protect rights, but rather, create a single monopoly standard getting everyone to pay Meridian for music.
They also offer DSD streams, for extra audiophoolery. (DSD is worse than PCM as s distribution format).
They've been around long enough, there's so many lacking features.
Where is multi-channel audio for a start?... When will they offer multi-video streams? (diff camera angles for example on some videos) When can there be chaptering added to videos?
That's off the top of my head in about 30 seconds. I regularly think of fairly decent features they could / should add to the platform.
That's because for most users, those features are useless.
Multichannel audio? I'd bet 99.99% of users listen in 2 channel stereo. Even if 10% of users have access to multichannel audio systems, and the systems connected to it (e.g., game consoles), it consists of a very small proportion of people who actually watch youtube.
Remember, YouTube is for video - they do not care too much about audio. The best you can get is 192kbps AAC (in 1080p/4K mode). Lower resolutions get lower audio quality, decreasing to 32kbps for the lowest 240p mode.
Multi-angle video are complex to set up and synchronize. Enough so that even though we've had formats that could do that for over two decades now, it's a rarely used feature. Users also generally prefer replays from different angles rather than switching angles and having to restart the video to re-view fro ma different angle.
Chaptering is nice, but since YouTube's metrics have most videos under 6 minutes, impractical and unnecessary except for the rare 2+ hour video. Which usually are that way because they're recorded livestreams and "creators" don't usually like to go back and edit their work
As for competitors, there are plenty. DailyMotion and Vimeo come to mind. Vimeo would have a case for chaptering and multichannel audio, given it's used as a long format video medium used by filmmakers
For navigation, yes, it matters whether a TV show has individual articles on its episodes, or they are all merged into one article. For a viewer who comes in seeking this information, either it is all laid out in front of him, or he makes 22 clicks through each episode article to find it - very unwieldy. It's not simply about disk space, but also the administration of those separate articles.
Depends on the length. If it's 22 1-paragraph articles, yes, you have a point. When it's 22 articles of detailed episode information, no, you do not want it one page because navigation becomes really unwieldy, especially on mobile. You do however do a reasonable compromise of having the episode list have the short logline of the episode there so you can get a basic gist on one page that can extend for many seasons without excessive scrolling. Those capsules link to a more detailed article, so a user may have to click on 1 or 2 to find the episode they were looking for.
And for manpower: yes, having articles on every single obscure manga character would damage the integrity of the rest of the encyclopedia. Wikipedia soldiers on with a very limited userbase even as its collection of articles tops 5.6 million. Every one of those involved users has a watchlist and a certain purview of articles in his interest. In one day he can only review so many diffs to articles and evaluate them for vandalism, policy violations, or constructive activity. Now there is no limit to the number of fresh vandals, trolls, and sock puppets that can come disrupt Wikipedia, so you do begin to see the point of the deletionists when they say not everything can be on Wikipedia. It is mainly a quality control issue.
I have stumbled upon obscure articles which haven't been edited significantly in years and years, and yet they have been the victims of glaring vandalism. There simply aren't enough Wikipedians to clean up all the mess, let alone chug away at adding new and constructive content, so that it serves well to limit the scope of what is added, so that it is maintainable and holds some editor's interest enough to be watched for the rest of its life.
The problem is not manpower, it's allocation of manpower. Far too much of it is handled by editors that only trawl their pet pages of the area they're supposed to be editing. They don't care about the rest of the pages, just the one or two pet pages they have that when you edit it, gets instantly reverted.
Then there's the fact that editors often revert just because they're too lazy to review the change - even if it was to fix a [citation needed], add useful information, correct a typo, fix vandalism, etc. It gets reverted. I'm sure your "obscure pages" suffer from that level of editorial oversight - as in, the editor refused to allow the change, thus it remains in the crap state it is.
Wikipedia is really a real life demonstration of Animal Farm, which if you recall your high school education, ended up with "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." But even then you could argue it's a shockingly close study of Wikipedia as it evolves.
I'm uncomfortable with the term malware too, but let's be honest: unwanted cryptocurrency mining software is going to slow down your PC, drain your battery faster if you have a laptop, and, unpredictably, cause more heat which, depending on the state of your fan, might cause problems too.
I'm still in two minds about the concept, but if we're going to see more software "funded" by mining, then we need to see some standards set otherwise "software funded by mining" will become synonymous with malware, even if the software really is funded this way (ie not prepackaged third party freeware), and controls are given to ensure the mining doesn't cause problems with the PC (ie low priority process, maxes at 5% of CPU, etc.)
The problem is legitimate activities done for the wrong reasons will classify something as malware.
For example, gathering user data for advertising purposes - gathering user data is a legitimate activity as there are apps with legitimate need. And they can use it for advertising purposes, too, since that's what Google et. al. do as well. However, it can trend into the malicious part if it's all done surreptitiously.
Likewise, designing a cryptocurrency miner is not necessarily a bad thing - there are legitimate uses. (It's also not a new thing - I believe Unity has had a plugin for Bitcoin for several years now - yes, Unity, the game engine). However, again, when done without the user's knowledge, it then becomes malware.
It's one of those things where intent and knowledge is just as much a part of the classification. There was another app that did it openly - it had a "free" version and a "pro" version. You could pay $25 for the pro version permanently, or you can do "Pro for free" where it runs a cryptocurrency miner. It was very honest about it - if you wanted to upgrade, it explained what happened. If you didn't want the pro features anymore, you could revert it to "free" status and it'll stop mining as well. (Or was supposed to - the library the developer used was buggy, and thus it did not shut down properly and had the possibility of running all the time. This unwanted behavior got the developer in a lot of trouble and was forced to remove "Pro for free" as an option).
The video in the article straightens that all out. TLDR; the body is tiny and the blades are huge, plus they spin really f-ing fast. The big unanswered question to me is, who's gonna pick it up if it falls on it's side!?! Not to knock the work of 2 dozen PhDs who spent 4 years on this, but wouldn't it be "better" to have it dock on the rover where it could recharge (and save the weight of it's own panels) and get safely locked in place, plus maybe cleaned?
You see the landing gear? The four balls splayed out is an accepted training rig configuration. As in, you put them that way to keep a helicopter from tipping over while you're training. It greatly increases the base of support which makes it just that much harder to tip.
I believe they were initially created for RC helos (you can make them yourself using a few dowels and whiffle balls).
Of course, I then saw it on a real life helo as well for a student pilot. Instantly knew what it was, didn't realize they made full size versions of training skids.
One issue is that in this area of the world, pay TV is delivered by satellite. Everyone in a region receives the same encrypted broadcast, and it is decrypted by secret keys inside the decoder box. If you have the money, separating that decryption module and capturing the decrypted video stream is child's play. Even where it is delivered by cable, the same signal is delivered, encrypted, to many customers, so this sort of work could determine which suburb they are capturing in - which isn't much use, as they would only capture from one site for a few minutes at a time.
And then you have to be using a way to mark it that doesn't degrade service for your customers, isn't detectable by your target (or they'll just strip it), and isn't destroyed by re-encoding.
The technology does exist, though. DirecTV and Dish Network have the exact same problems, and still have methods around it, some very creative (and exploding them in the final minutes of the Superbowl so all the pirates get to miss the excitement).
And cable providers have individually addressable boxes nowadays - you have to "activate" them which basically programs them with the necessary decryption keys. And it's enough so that it's generally a pain in the butt.
It's even a sport between the pirates and the satellite
Never understood why this has to be a racial thing. I'm whiter than white, yet have a much higher spice tolerance/enjoyment level than my partner, who's West Indian.
I think in general most people don't have a high spice tolerance. I've known a few who get the sweats just eating a bell pepper (no kidding). Anything spicier and... well, it ain't pretty.
Among the people I know, I appear to have the most spice tolerance or desire for spice. One of my coworkers cooked up something really spicy (chickpea curry) and it was delicious, but only had a mild kick. Yet that was about as much as they could tolerate.
About the most spicy food I could find was Chinese, Hunan in particular actually had a decent kick, and "really spicy" gave me the sweats. It was literally coated in the tiny Thai chilies (with seeds, of course).
I always wondered why Tabasco sauce even has "mild" versions - it adds a nice flavor to food, but I don't see what's even a little spicy about it.
Sadly, even something like ghost peppers, unless prepared yourself, generally is too mild..
And of course there's a city called "Vancouver" in Washington State approx 420 km (260 miles) almost due south of the more well known Vancouver, BC. It's on the north shore of the Columbia River, directly across from Portland, Oregon. The Columbia river is the boundary there.
It could confuse overseas tourists. For additional giggles, a Seattle radio station KOMO, in one of their jingles mentioned (deep announcer voice...) "From Vancouver to Vancouver, this is KOMO country"
I always imagined the I-5 signage would be interesting around Seattle - I-5 North - Vancouver, I-5 South - Vancouver.
Alas, it's not the case, because in Seattle, I-5 South is Tacoma. Then Olympia and finally Vancouver, I think (at least they didn't skip straight to Portland, OR).
But just to be extra cautious, WSDOT actually lists Vancouver (Canada) as "Vancouver BC", to not confuse it with Vancouver (South Washington)
Anyhow, Reuters needs to fix it. It's why people say Washington to mean the state, and DC to mean the national capital. Clean and unambiguous. After all, it's also easier to say "DC" than "Washington".
Gone are the days when a corporation would acknowledge a problem and fix it. Now it takes lawsuits to get anything done. It would've been cheaper for Apple to acknowledge and fix the issue. As another poster stated, the 2nd tier of Apple's support is the class action lawsuit.
And gone are the days when people would accept them and move on. Nowadays acknowledging a problem is tantamount to admitting there was a problem, thus, a defective product, thus a class action lawsuit. Which you lose because you admitted there was a problem.
(You see it every time any company admits something - a lawsuit soon fallows).
It's thus more efficient to just skip all that and head to the lawsuit anyways. You save time and money , since the end result was a lawsuit. Except now it's not necessarily a slam dunk since there was no admission, so lawyers get to work extra hard.
Old money people are unbelievably stupid and helpless. If you did even a little searching, you could find many formerly rich families.
3 generations removed from the person that made the money, and you are pretty much guaranteed _metric_ room temperature IQs. e.g. The Kennedy family, the Bush family, the DuPont family, the Hunt family, the Rockefeller family, the Hilton family, the other Bush family (of Anheuser-Bush) etc etc etc.
Granting some family are so rich, they can't waste the money fast enough. Those fortunes last until the get an active investor, moron, heir.
Makes sense, really. I mean, think about it.
Guy makes a fortune in something. Guy then has offspring. You think his offspring will have the same work ethic as their dad? Heck, their dad might have grown up in the poor part of the tracks with barely enough food to eat and clawed his way to money one deal at a time. His kids will never have that experience, growing up in a relatively large house with plenty of food. And having to go without seems hard to do when you have enough money to buy what you want.
Daddy might try to impart some wisdom, but chances are it will fall on deaf ears - there never was a time they had to do without, never a time they needed to work. It's like a lottery winner who wins the big pot - chances are in 5 years they'd be broke and in debt, no matter how much money they won.
When you make your fortune the hard way, you learn the value of a dollar. When you have all the dollars given to you, you don't really know what it's like to not have a dollar and mouths to feed. About the only way to do so is to use that money to get oneself a head start, then abandon it - walk away, and live like every other working stiff does.
There are new-ass spectrum analyzers that know how to upload to IBM's cloud? We use external hard drives for a lot of things, since the network is amazingly slow, no way is the "cloud" going to be as convenient as "here, copy 4GB off this drive into/local directory". But maybe IBM is all office desk workers now and they don't really do technical work anymore?
Depending on the spectrum analyzer, yes. A lot of higher end oscilloscopes, logic analyzers, spectrum analyzers, etc, run a version of Windows internally, and those should be able to run IBM's software.
The lower end units won't, so either you use LXI and a network connection, or you do what everyone does and have security exceptions.
It's like a firewall. you DENY by default, and ALLOW what you need. This policy is only a problem if security is so strict as to not allow exceptions.
On the plus side, it also means no one at IBM can lose a hard drive full of personal information anymore.
I have older iOS devices that I sometimes go weeks at a time leaving them untouched on the shelf but I pick them up to play with once in a while.
Heck, I go on vacations greater than week a couple of times a year and since I don't want to bother with roaming, I leave my primary phone at home. I certainly don't want my USB to permanently lock out the first time I don't touch my phone for a week.
I'd rather personally give my PIN to any law enforcement officer who cared to ask for it than have this feature implemented.
It just means you have to unlock your device first before you can connect it to your computer. After a week, all it can do is charge from USB.
It doesn't permanently disable USB, it just makes it so if your device hasn't been unlocked, after a week, a data connection to the device is no longer possible.
It's a workaround to those GreyKey boxes - to use those to break the code, you need to do it within a week.
Exactly. The iMac's contribution (if you can call it that) to computing wasn't technical. It was psychological. It was available in a variety of colors, and the buyer got to choose which color theirs would be. Similar to the original Ford model T being available only in black, while all cars today are available in your choice of colors. For the non-technical masses, it turned the computer from "a" computer into "my" computer.
While I'm a technical guy and think that's mostly pointless, I don't deny the influence it's had on how many people buy and treat computers. The trend of people pimping out their PC case with LED lights traces its roots back to the iMac. Same for all the custom cases available for phones - people put a disproportionate amount of thought and care into that $10 purchase because they want it to reflect themselves.
The iMac's contribution was it was simple, and playful. Computers were seen as a necessary evil - large complex beige boxes that made a lot of noise and had a rat's nest of cabling. Even more if you wanted the Internet, which was slowly coming into the consciousness of the public.
With an iMac, you took it home. took it out of the box, connected the power, keyboard and mouse and either Ethernet from your broadband or phone cable to it, and powered it up. No rat's nest of cables, no software to install. Plug it all in, turn it on, you're done/ And the colors and clear plastic was more of a reassurance to people - computers aren't complex metal boxed beasts, but friendly playful things.
Even better, it wasn't cheap nasty plastic you might associate with computers of the era, but nice high quality plastic that reassured users it was sturdy.
And this was the Bondi Blue. The next year Apple went fruity and came out in 5 colors, and then after that added the polka dot, graphite and other colors to the mix.
Of course, the irony would be that a decade later, we'd go from plastic back to metal cases...
... that gcc has gone "uncool", largely because llvm is where all the hipsters are but also because it's now trying too hard, and worse, that C++ is trying to prove something, only to end up like some sort of perl or something. This doesn't seem to be a recipe for success to me.
No, everyone moved to LLVM because for a long time, GCC development basically stalled. It was "good enough" and everyone put up with it. DIdn't like it, just put up with it.
Then LLVM came about and that spurred on a flurry of development - it was modern, it was complete, it was useful. There were clear advantages at the time to using LLVM - the compiler gave better error messages and better warnings. And it started supporting modern language features.
This forced the GCC developers to kick up development because GCC was getting rather tired and lacking. This has resulted in GCC improving in leaps and bounds and becoming far less crusty and more modern.
For a long time everyone stuck with GCC 2.95 for everything as it generally worked and was the stable version for many platforms and architectures. The past decade with LLVM has brought so much more to the table and GCC was forced to adapt and proceed beyond 2.95 and produce releases that made significant improvements.
I'd say what happened was LLVM exposed just how old and tired GCC was (something everyone knew but couldn't spur development on) and GCC was forced to shape up. It still has issues, but at least it's up to date these days.
But that's not what happened. NVIDIA just came with GPP and said "We want you to move AMD's (and others', if any) offerings under a different brand and dedicate your already-existing, top gaming-brand only for our stuff" -- completely reverse of the scenario you painted! The move was wholly designed to hurt AMD and to let NVIDIA ride on these existing brands' reputations. No one would've batted an eye if NVIDIA asked manufacturers to create a new branding just for NVIDIA's offerings, but that's not what they did.
Actually, the move was to hurt Intel. GPP was incidentally targeting AMD, but more specifically, designed to go against Kaby Lake+G chips. These are the Intel CPUs with on-package AMD GPUs instead of Intel GPUs. Intel positions these processors above their "pro" graphics line (so you have basic Intel graphics, Intel Iris Pro graphics, and now Intel+AMD graphics)..
It was targeted at OEMs specifically - to not produce a laptop or desktop PC with Kaby Lake+G chips. nVidia is worried - OEMs would choose this to simply have a single-source simple graphics solution that's decent. This is especially so for say, Apple, who has yet to forgive nVidia over their premature release back in the Steve Jobs days, but who may be very interested in selling high end MacBook Pros with AMD graphics on chip to save engineering effort.
Scanning a ticket is never the slowdown at the entrance to a venue where I live. It's security do bag searches of people in front of who want to bring them into the venue. Of course it isn't really about security, it's about making sure you're not bringing outside food or drink so they can gouge you for food & drink at the venue. I've suggested to the venues that they should have lines for people that bringing bags to speed it up but they don't seem interested or "it would be confusing for other patrons".
It's both nowadays. A lot of venues are doing enhanced ID scanning - it's no longer acceptable to just have a ticket, but you must (as a group) have the ID of who purchased the ticket(s) on you. This could be as simple as producing the credit card used to buy the tickets, to showing government photo ID. Naturally, most people aren't actually ready to show ID.
Then there's security, yes they do bag checks, but most venues have adopted X-ray scanners similar to airports - while some venues might scan for outside food and drink, most are scanning for weapons and bombs. And the usual requisite metal detectors and such.
Most people aren't prepared for this - while going to an airport they'd usually get rid of their knives and other potential weaponry, when going to an event, most people will be carrying - a pocket knife, some other metal thing or accessory, etc. And if you think that's nuts, wait until there's a cosplay event to really drive security up the wall.
The security checkpoints seem to go by OK - when it was implemented, they gave lots of notice to arrive early and get through and things seemed to go well. But when they implemented the ID check, it lead to a lot of chaos and lots of people having to get refunded because they were stuck in the line and only made it in an hour after the show started.
Remember - security is relatively independent and is embarrassingly parallel - they can add security scanners to cope with the traffic very easily. But ID checks are not - you can bet a lot of the delays come from groups getting split up and now everyone spends 2 minutes stuck at the gate because either the group needs to be reunited by the gate people, or the person who bought the ticket needs to walk to every single person to show the ID. Given people will buy 3-4 tickets at a time, this will lead to lines stalling out because everyone got split up and has to be reunited, which is chaotic when you got crowds of people and everyone's separated.
When I was a teenager, Metallica was popular, especially in Denver. They would sell out Mile High Stadium. So they scheduled a show on Friday, and another on Saturday. It takes a large crew all day to set up the stage, lighting, sound system, etc for a major concert, then the concert is couple hours, then all day taking everything down and packing it in trucks. The band and promoter made a lot more profit by selling twice as many tickets, with the same expense to transport everything, set it all up, and take it all down again.
Then when the Saturday show sold out - they added a Sunday show. The stadium was nearly sold out the the third night. The people putting on the concert got all triple the revenue, and there were plenty enough tickets for all the fans.
The problem is venues are booked months to years in advance. Unless you're in a tiny town or something, venues can often be booked solid, so you can't simply add a day - because two days later another act is using it and you have to allow for time to tear down, the venue to clean up, and the next act to set up.
For a normal city, you don't usually have the option of extending - unless you book and prepay the fees well in advance the extra days you may or may not need.
This makes it almost impossible - if you want to give people a date, you need to get the venue to book the date for you - but the date they give might have no room for extension. If you want an extension, you need to book the extension dates as well.
Remember, venue owners want to maximize revenue,and they'll want to book as many events as possible as tight as possible. Popular venues are booked solid, and you would have to pre-book extension dates long before you sell extra days.
Anyhow, the real problem with events is how many tickets are actually available. As little as 33% of a venue's seats are available to the general public.
The first third is for event participants reserve - they get a third of the tickets to distribute how they please - anywhere from the headline act to the roadies can get tickets from this pool.
The second third is for special promotions. This ranges from those tickets they offer on TV, radio, newspapers and online as contests to those special offers you get as being a member to something. Special credit cards often have special access tickets cardholders can buy - those tickets come out of that pool.
And remainder is what you get at the ticket booth. Some promoters will close reserved ticket sales prior to general admission sales and toss the remainder into the general pool to maximize sales.
Yes, a lot of those special reserve tickets end up being scalped by people who buy reserved tickets for resale - roadies and members buy up all the reserved tickets and scalp them.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope.
An investor is simply someone who provides capital for something. That's it. Some investors have legal rights, because they invest in regulated markets - stock markets, for example. These are highly regulated and investors have a lot of rights because of abuses done years ago.
But you can invest and lose everything. In fact, most business you see have investors. It could be simply the parents loaning their kids $10,000 to set up a store in a strip mall, friends doing same, etc. They are all investors, and should the business fail, they lose their investment. Or some companies sell shares privately (off the stock market, which is public). These companies are under none of the obligations of public companies (including disclosure). And many a lawsuit has been waged when one investor gets their shares forcefully taken back or diluted. And this even extends if the company goes public - many an investor has been screwed out of their public shares because the company devalued their specific private shares to the benefit of others.
Anyhow, at least the unit I have (Smyth Research Realiser A16) is likely to come out, even though the price recently doubled from $2000 to $4000 (the Kickstarter offered them much cheaper at $1200), which has 3D audio, including head position tracking for up to 2 separate headphones. It works with industry-standard 3D audio technologies from 7.1 to Atmos and DTS:X
The purpose of ABS is not to stop sooner. That's a side benefit, and it's one of those things that plays well with human behavior.
In a panic situation, humans well, panic. Logical thought goes out the window, and only the best trained in scenarios generally can maintain logical thinking. It's why airline pilots have to go through simulation training every 6 moths - it makes all the emergency situations more routine so there's less panic when the alarm goes off and more order.
Of course, most drivers don't practice panic stops and control, so in any emergency, the natural instinct is to slam on the brakes. Feathering control? Fat chance. ABS is perfect for this (since it requires constant pressure on the pedal to work) and thus makes roads safer because panicky human behavior is perfect ABS behavior.
But the real reason for ABS is in the name - it's purpose is to keep the wheels from locking up. By keeping the wheels moving, you use static friction (always greater than dynamic friction) on the tires. This means the wheels are not sliding. This also means you maintain control of the vehicle. If you're panic stopping and swerve, guess what? With ABS, the car actually swerves. Without ABS, the wheels lock and you can spin the steering wheel lock to lock, and you will just continue moving in a straight line. (There are plenty of shows on TV that illustrate this, and any high-performance emergency driving course will also demonstrate wheel lockup and loss of control)
That's why ABS exists - so you maintain full control of the vehicle and can swerve or avoid an accident in panic situations.
That's because it doesn't.
Box office prices generally go direct to the studios. The first few weeks of a new movie's run, the studio-theatre split is 100-0%. Yes, all ticket revenues for the first week or two go straight to the movie studio. The theatre doesn't mind - enough people buy concessions that they make a small profit that way.
As time goes on the split gets better - 75-25, 50-50, 25-75, or so. This generally makes up for the lack of people going and thus lower concession sales to those movies.
MoviePass might have bought tickets to cheap second run and special event movies at heavily discounted rates (the tickets usually only cost $3 anyways) and capitalized on the fact that those could've been used for first run movies in an odd loophole, but I'm sure the theatre chains caught on fairly quickly because the studios would've demanded full price.
Studios demand more ticket revenue, forcing theatres to raise ticket prices. It's only during the slow periods and after a few weeks can you see the movie at discounted rates (usually matinee tuesdays or so) because of naturally low business so they actually do discount.
Or the first lesson is, everyone pirates software.
Yes, a GPL violation is piracy. Whether it's distributing the Linux kernel without source, or Photoshop, or Windows, or Office, it's all the same thing. (No one has to agree to the GPL at all to use GPL software. If you don't, it falls under standard copyright law, so distribution without agreeing to the GPL is like making copies of commercial software).
It makes the whole "copyleft" thing much easier to explain to everyone - GPL and BSD and other licenses are unlike commercial licenses, which seek to reduce your rights from what the law gives you. Instead, you have an alternate path - you can choose standard "All Rights Reserved" as given by the law, or you can choose additional benefits if you agree to additional terms, as a win-win style solution.
Of course, GPLv3 does have companies scared, and good companies have established open-source processes that basically identify all open-source software used within an organization, its licenses, and whether or not it goes in the final product and thus needs to have a special source release. Yes, these processes are a lot of extra paperwork, but they help clarify things. Often there are blanket policies like "No GPLv3 software allowed, at all" which reduces the paperwork some.
No, it just converts it at the current rate. Which means you can underpay and have to pay again.
And even when BitCoin payments were taking days to transact, you can still get them done in 10 minutes - it just means you have to pay $50 in transaction fees since you set how much extra you need to pay. There's a default fee you can pay which will be handled as and when the miners get around to it.
You have to remember that these companies are there to eliminate risk, and for risky systems like bitcoin, they do it by passing it onto you. The 15 minute guarantee is generally necessary (since it takes 10 minutes per block so they give you the opportunity if you're unlucky and then some), and even during periods of extreme volatility, 15 minute rates can be stable. Plus, they build in the risk into the exchange rate so the chance of losing money is extremely low. All this ensures they can make money on the transaction as well.
They only lose more packages because they handle way more packages. It's also why their service is worse.
Think of it this way. In 3 days, USPS handles as much mail pieces as FedEx in a year. UPS is bigger, so it takes USPS about 7 days to exceed UPS' amount. And not surprisingly, I haven't found many people with a high opinion of UPS, either.
The sheer scale of USPS is amazing
It's really damn predictable, actually. So predictable, Canada controls the East to West Atlantic crossings, and the UK controls the West to East Atlantic crossings. Flights submit their flight plans ahead of time (they're quite predictable), and the governing ATC agency (e.g., Nav Canada) takes all the flight plans and arranges them by time. Depending on the winds, the agency creates 8-10 "routes" in the sky and gives them all a letter. The pilot merely has to fly that route, knowing that even without radar coverage, there is adequate separation between planes.
It's a remarkably sane system. And the lanes are by no means congested (these are only at the flight levels, too).
I don't believe anyone's actually complained they're congested - while there are only 10 routes, that applies to the route itself, there's plenty to altitude to go around as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Anyhow, this seems like a proprietary version of ADS-B that's being deployed worldwide. (Only the US is an oddity where the ADS-B is terrestrial - most other countries are using satellite-based ADS-B).
Actually, a lot of them are real. Just you can buy them from the Fed for about 1/5th the cost normally. They are only "collectible" in the sense someone paid a lot of money to make an ad for them thinking you can only get it from them. But your local bank should be able to order in a roll for you for basically face value (they may be gold coins, but the gold content is nowhere near their face value). So the ad might sell you a roll of 20 $1 gold coins for $100 as "collectible" (they are limited - once the feds stop pressing, they're no more). Or you bank can get them for $20 or so.
Of course, it also plays on the "limited" part and "collectible" part. Just because something is limited, rare, or collectible, doesn't make it valuable. After all, the Fed just prints a new coin the next year and the scam repeats again.
They stream supposedly lossless audio. Supposedly because you can pay for more expensive plans that give you lossy audio (go figure).
The idea behind it is somewhat sound - to offer high quality audio streaming. Instead of offering whatever those streams offer, you can stream losslessly encoded audio. Just like the maligned Pono store offered an easy way to buy lossless music.
Of course, it only appeals to those who can stand its much higher costs, so it's not something you'd use if you were listening on your phone.
It has a touch of audiophoolery to it, because you can pay even more for "MQA" audio (stands for "Master Quality Authenticated") which is supposedly a way to get "master studio quality audio" at lower bitrates (i.e., CD compatible). The trick is it's "backwards compatible" so you don't need an MQA player to listen to it, but one is preferred for "superior quality".
The quotes are because it's pretty much crap - while you do get smaller files, it's mostly because you're actually reducing sample rates and bit depth, so you're left with a 44.1k/16bit or a 48k/16bit stream run through an "MQA" encoder which performs noticeably worse than if you simply used FLAC.
Either way it's lossy, and even worse Meridian wants money from encoders, decoders and the like, and the wider audio community sees it as a poor half-assed way to "DRM" all music. "DRM" because the goal is not to protect rights, but rather, create a single monopoly standard getting everyone to pay Meridian for music.
They also offer DSD streams, for extra audiophoolery. (DSD is worse than PCM as s distribution format).
That's because for most users, those features are useless.
Multichannel audio? I'd bet 99.99% of users listen in 2 channel stereo. Even if 10% of users have access to multichannel audio systems, and the systems connected to it (e.g., game consoles), it consists of a very small proportion of people who actually watch youtube.
Remember, YouTube is for video - they do not care too much about audio. The best you can get is 192kbps AAC (in 1080p/4K mode). Lower resolutions get lower audio quality, decreasing to 32kbps for the lowest 240p mode.
Multi-angle video are complex to set up and synchronize. Enough so that even though we've had formats that could do that for over two decades now, it's a rarely used feature. Users also generally prefer replays from different angles rather than switching angles and having to restart the video to re-view fro ma different angle.
Chaptering is nice, but since YouTube's metrics have most videos under 6 minutes, impractical and unnecessary except for the rare 2+ hour video. Which usually are that way because they're recorded livestreams and "creators" don't usually like to go back and edit their work
As for competitors, there are plenty. DailyMotion and Vimeo come to mind. Vimeo would have a case for chaptering and multichannel audio, given it's used as a long format video medium used by filmmakers
Depends on the length. If it's 22 1-paragraph articles, yes, you have a point. When it's 22 articles of detailed episode information, no, you do not want it one page because navigation becomes really unwieldy, especially on mobile. You do however do a reasonable compromise of having the episode list have the short logline of the episode there so you can get a basic gist on one page that can extend for many seasons without excessive scrolling. Those capsules link to a more detailed article, so a user may have to click on 1 or 2 to find the episode they were looking for.
The problem is not manpower, it's allocation of manpower. Far too much of it is handled by editors that only trawl their pet pages of the area they're supposed to be editing. They don't care about the rest of the pages, just the one or two pet pages they have that when you edit it, gets instantly reverted.
Then there's the fact that editors often revert just because they're too lazy to review the change - even if it was to fix a [citation needed], add useful information, correct a typo, fix vandalism, etc. It gets reverted. I'm sure your "obscure pages" suffer from that level of editorial oversight - as in, the editor refused to allow the change, thus it remains in the crap state it is.
Wikipedia is really a real life demonstration of Animal Farm, which if you recall your high school education, ended up with "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." But even then you could argue it's a shockingly close study of Wikipedia as it evolves.
The problem is legitimate activities done for the wrong reasons will classify something as malware.
For example, gathering user data for advertising purposes - gathering user data is a legitimate activity as there are apps with legitimate need. And they can use it for advertising purposes, too, since that's what Google et. al. do as well. However, it can trend into the malicious part if it's all done surreptitiously.
Likewise, designing a cryptocurrency miner is not necessarily a bad thing - there are legitimate uses. (It's also not a new thing - I believe Unity has had a plugin for Bitcoin for several years now - yes, Unity, the game engine). However, again, when done without the user's knowledge, it then becomes malware.
It's one of those things where intent and knowledge is just as much a part of the classification. There was another app that did it openly - it had a "free" version and a "pro" version. You could pay $25 for the pro version permanently, or you can do "Pro for free" where it runs a cryptocurrency miner. It was very honest about it - if you wanted to upgrade, it explained what happened. If you didn't want the pro features anymore, you could revert it to "free" status and it'll stop mining as well. (Or was supposed to - the library the developer used was buggy, and thus it did not shut down properly and had the possibility of running all the time. This unwanted behavior got the developer in a lot of trouble and was forced to remove "Pro for free" as an option).
You see the landing gear? The four balls splayed out is an accepted training rig configuration. As in, you put them that way to keep a helicopter from tipping over while you're training. It greatly increases the base of support which makes it just that much harder to tip.
I believe they were initially created for RC helos (you can make them yourself using a few dowels and whiffle balls).
Of course, I then saw it on a real life helo as well for a student pilot. Instantly knew what it was, didn't realize they made full size versions of training skids.
The technology does exist, though. DirecTV and Dish Network have the exact same problems, and still have methods around it, some very creative (and exploding them in the final minutes of the Superbowl so all the pirates get to miss the excitement).
And cable providers have individually addressable boxes nowadays - you have to "activate" them which basically programs them with the necessary decryption keys. And it's enough so that it's generally a pain in the butt.
It's even a sport between the pirates and the satellite
I think in general most people don't have a high spice tolerance. I've known a few who get the sweats just eating a bell pepper (no kidding). Anything spicier and ... well, it ain't pretty.
Among the people I know, I appear to have the most spice tolerance or desire for spice. One of my coworkers cooked up something really spicy (chickpea curry) and it was delicious, but only had a mild kick. Yet that was about as much as they could tolerate.
About the most spicy food I could find was Chinese, Hunan in particular actually had a decent kick, and "really spicy" gave me the sweats. It was literally coated in the tiny Thai chilies (with seeds, of course).
I always wondered why Tabasco sauce even has "mild" versions - it adds a nice flavor to food, but I don't see what's even a little spicy about it.
Sadly, even something like ghost peppers, unless prepared yourself, generally is too mild..
I always imagined the I-5 signage would be interesting around Seattle - I-5 North - Vancouver, I-5 South - Vancouver.
Alas, it's not the case, because in Seattle, I-5 South is Tacoma. Then Olympia and finally Vancouver, I think (at least they didn't skip straight to Portland, OR).
But just to be extra cautious, WSDOT actually lists Vancouver (Canada) as "Vancouver BC", to not confuse it with Vancouver (South Washington)
Anyhow, Reuters needs to fix it. It's why people say Washington to mean the state, and DC to mean the national capital. Clean and unambiguous. After all, it's also easier to say "DC" than "Washington".
And gone are the days when people would accept them and move on. Nowadays acknowledging a problem is tantamount to admitting there was a problem, thus, a defective product, thus a class action lawsuit. Which you lose because you admitted there was a problem.
(You see it every time any company admits something - a lawsuit soon fallows).
It's thus more efficient to just skip all that and head to the lawsuit anyways. You save time and money , since the end result was a lawsuit. Except now it's not necessarily a slam dunk since there was no admission, so lawyers get to work extra hard.
Makes sense, really. I mean, think about it.
Guy makes a fortune in something. Guy then has offspring. You think his offspring will have the same work ethic as their dad? Heck, their dad might have grown up in the poor part of the tracks with barely enough food to eat and clawed his way to money one deal at a time. His kids will never have that experience, growing up in a relatively large house with plenty of food. And having to go without seems hard to do when you have enough money to buy what you want.
Daddy might try to impart some wisdom, but chances are it will fall on deaf ears - there never was a time they had to do without, never a time they needed to work. It's like a lottery winner who wins the big pot - chances are in 5 years they'd be broke and in debt, no matter how much money they won.
When you make your fortune the hard way, you learn the value of a dollar. When you have all the dollars given to you, you don't really know what it's like to not have a dollar and mouths to feed. About the only way to do so is to use that money to get oneself a head start, then abandon it - walk away, and live like every other working stiff does.
Depending on the spectrum analyzer, yes. A lot of higher end oscilloscopes, logic analyzers, spectrum analyzers, etc, run a version of Windows internally, and those should be able to run IBM's software.
The lower end units won't, so either you use LXI and a network connection, or you do what everyone does and have security exceptions.
It's like a firewall. you DENY by default, and ALLOW what you need. This policy is only a problem if security is so strict as to not allow exceptions.
On the plus side, it also means no one at IBM can lose a hard drive full of personal information anymore.
It just means you have to unlock your device first before you can connect it to your computer. After a week, all it can do is charge from USB.
It doesn't permanently disable USB, it just makes it so if your device hasn't been unlocked, after a week, a data connection to the device is no longer possible.
It's a workaround to those GreyKey boxes - to use those to break the code, you need to do it within a week.
The iMac's contribution was it was simple, and playful. Computers were seen as a necessary evil - large complex beige boxes that made a lot of noise and had a rat's nest of cabling. Even more if you wanted the Internet, which was slowly coming into the consciousness of the public.
With an iMac, you took it home. took it out of the box, connected the power, keyboard and mouse and either Ethernet from your broadband or phone cable to it, and powered it up. No rat's nest of cables, no software to install. Plug it all in, turn it on, you're done/ And the colors and clear plastic was more of a reassurance to people - computers aren't complex metal boxed beasts, but friendly playful things.
Even better, it wasn't cheap nasty plastic you might associate with computers of the era, but nice high quality plastic that reassured users it was sturdy.
And this was the Bondi Blue. The next year Apple went fruity and came out in 5 colors, and then after that added the polka dot, graphite and other colors to the mix.
Of course, the irony would be that a decade later, we'd go from plastic back to metal cases...
No, everyone moved to LLVM because for a long time, GCC development basically stalled. It was "good enough" and everyone put up with it. DIdn't like it, just put up with it.
Then LLVM came about and that spurred on a flurry of development - it was modern, it was complete, it was useful. There were clear advantages at the time to using LLVM - the compiler gave better error messages and better warnings. And it started supporting modern language features.
This forced the GCC developers to kick up development because GCC was getting rather tired and lacking. This has resulted in GCC improving in leaps and bounds and becoming far less crusty and more modern.
For a long time everyone stuck with GCC 2.95 for everything as it generally worked and was the stable version for many platforms and architectures. The past decade with LLVM has brought so much more to the table and GCC was forced to adapt and proceed beyond 2.95 and produce releases that made significant improvements.
I'd say what happened was LLVM exposed just how old and tired GCC was (something everyone knew but couldn't spur development on) and GCC was forced to shape up. It still has issues, but at least it's up to date these days.
Actually, the move was to hurt Intel. GPP was incidentally targeting AMD, but more specifically, designed to go against Kaby Lake+G chips. These are the Intel CPUs with on-package AMD GPUs instead of Intel GPUs. Intel positions these processors above their "pro" graphics line (so you have basic Intel graphics, Intel Iris Pro graphics, and now Intel+AMD graphics)..
It was targeted at OEMs specifically - to not produce a laptop or desktop PC with Kaby Lake+G chips. nVidia is worried - OEMs would choose this to simply have a single-source simple graphics solution that's decent. This is especially so for say, Apple, who has yet to forgive nVidia over their premature release back in the Steve Jobs days, but who may be very interested in selling high end MacBook Pros with AMD graphics on chip to save engineering effort.
It's both nowadays. A lot of venues are doing enhanced ID scanning - it's no longer acceptable to just have a ticket, but you must (as a group) have the ID of who purchased the ticket(s) on you. This could be as simple as producing the credit card used to buy the tickets, to showing government photo ID. Naturally, most people aren't actually ready to show ID.
Then there's security, yes they do bag checks, but most venues have adopted X-ray scanners similar to airports - while some venues might scan for outside food and drink, most are scanning for weapons and bombs. And the usual requisite metal detectors and such.
Most people aren't prepared for this - while going to an airport they'd usually get rid of their knives and other potential weaponry, when going to an event, most people will be carrying - a pocket knife, some other metal thing or accessory, etc. And if you think that's nuts, wait until there's a cosplay event to really drive security up the wall.
The security checkpoints seem to go by OK - when it was implemented, they gave lots of notice to arrive early and get through and things seemed to go well. But when they implemented the ID check, it lead to a lot of chaos and lots of people having to get refunded because they were stuck in the line and only made it in an hour after the show started.
Remember - security is relatively independent and is embarrassingly parallel - they can add security scanners to cope with the traffic very easily. But ID checks are not - you can bet a lot of the delays come from groups getting split up and now everyone spends 2 minutes stuck at the gate because either the group needs to be reunited by the gate people, or the person who bought the ticket needs to walk to every single person to show the ID. Given people will buy 3-4 tickets at a time, this will lead to lines stalling out because everyone got split up and has to be reunited, which is chaotic when you got crowds of people and everyone's separated.
The problem is venues are booked months to years in advance. Unless you're in a tiny town or something, venues can often be booked solid, so you can't simply add a day - because two days later another act is using it and you have to allow for time to tear down, the venue to clean up, and the next act to set up.
For a normal city, you don't usually have the option of extending - unless you book and prepay the fees well in advance the extra days you may or may not need.
This makes it almost impossible - if you want to give people a date, you need to get the venue to book the date for you - but the date they give might have no room for extension. If you want an extension, you need to book the extension dates as well.
Remember, venue owners want to maximize revenue,and they'll want to book as many events as possible as tight as possible. Popular venues are booked solid, and you would have to pre-book extension dates long before you sell extra days.
Anyhow, the real problem with events is how many tickets are actually available. As little as 33% of a venue's seats are available to the general public.
The first third is for event participants reserve - they get a third of the tickets to distribute how they please - anywhere from the headline act to the roadies can get tickets from this pool.
The second third is for special promotions. This ranges from those tickets they offer on TV, radio, newspapers and online as contests to those special offers you get as being a member to something. Special credit cards often have special access tickets cardholders can buy - those tickets come out of that pool.
And remainder is what you get at the ticket booth. Some promoters will close reserved ticket sales prior to general admission sales and toss the remainder into the general pool to maximize sales.
Yes, a lot of those special reserve tickets end up being scalped by people who buy reserved tickets for resale - roadies and members buy up all the reserved tickets and scalp them.