why would you pay $2499 for a portable that can't even play games? What, is their market supposed to be only coaching staff for (insert your favorite NFL team here)?
so $20,000 to go 1800 feet up(probably not), to take a picture, to see for himself whether the Earth is flat. Or, or, and I'm just spitballing here, but he could spend $500 to get to 39,000 feet, on a ticket from LA to Hawaii, otherwise known as 40 times less for 22 times as high.
Do you people never get tired of this nonsense?
Electric cars are most popular in California. My house is on solar. Both California, and the city I live in, have 100% renewables targets. Me - that's who drives electric cars. Not you rednecks out in where ever running off coal or whatnot.
way back in the day, there was a site called del.icio.us - it effectively made a social network out of bookmarks. It was great. Then yahoo bought it, and it nearly immediately went to complete crap. Anyway, point being that "social networks" can extend past just the book of faces and the little chirping birds. Can/could/should include reviews somehow. And no, yelp doesn't count.
it's a single lens resting on a sensor. You can't get non-flat pictures with that. Ever. You can't get things that look real. You can try, with digital tricks, but in the end...no. There's no reason to have better and better sensors on the stupid phones. It would be like putting $5000 wheels on a honda civic - the sensor has not been the limiting factor for the "quality" of the pictures in a long while. I mean for fark's sake, with dozens and dozens of major phone options, can you even name a single one that doesn't tout its bloody camera? The camera is mildly useful for taking a picture of something at a store, so it can be identified later - that sort of thing. But for the love of all that is holy, have duck faces improved our lives in any way at all?
that makes no sense. Back in the day there were cheap point-and-click cameras, and then there were SLR. The film (analogue to "resolution" or MP) was the same, but the stuff that brought the image to the film (sensors) was different. There's nothing you can do electronically that reproduces real depth of field - a single lens pointed directly onto a sensor a millimeter away can't...do lots of things, no matter what software filter tricks you try.
between my 2 laptops, it's 3.4A@110V. The two displays add 2.1A@110V. That's 605W, and doesn't yet include my wife's laptop, nor the phone chargers, nor anything else.
The room was designed to be a bedroom, in the 50s. They didn't...plan...on the electronics of today.
I've not updated my fun/"main" pc for a long time, have needed to for a bit now but was waiting for ryzen/vega as a combo. Not a fan of nvidia for various lack-of-open-source-drivers-forever reasons, but yeah...it's a very fair point that the power consumption of these things is horrible. Was just a couple years ago everyone was bragging about power efficiency, and suddenly...out the door. I don't want nvidia, but I also don't want my GPU to be using more electricity than every light in my house combined.
my house has a pretty massive solar array on it, enough to supply my two electric cars and a fairly large place. What I don't want to do is have to rip up ceilings and walls just to route additional cooling to whatever room I put a PC in; the office in our house merely has 3 laptops in it right now, and is already noticeably warmer than anywhere else in the house. Watts aren't just about power, they're also about heat. If this weren't San Diego, then I guess you could make some comment about heating bills in the winter (which would be silly, it's not like it's an efficient heater...it is just a prolific one).
Umm...yes I did. No he doesn't, no he didn't. I won't get into cherry-picking, because even your cherries are a bit rotten. And I suspect I know a bit more about proper scientific research than you.
"It would be career suicide for any executives or directors to support me" - as it should be. There's being non-"PC" and then there's just being a sexist ass, and he was very clearly the later. BTW, high level execs don't tend to read every single letter every single lowly employee writes; that's not what they get paid the big bucks to do. They didn't respond for a few weeks, because it was below their radar - as an employee's ramblings normally should be.
there is a cap to the number of cars per manufacturer. Even if people buy from the other brands at a slower rate, it will catch up. My wife has a Chevy Volt, I have a Chevy Bolt - the Bolt is pretty awesome, really. I would have gotten a model3 if I didn't...you know...need a car a bit sooner than that. The tax credits aren't Tesla against other car manufacturers, it's EV vrs Oil, and Oil has had fed subsidies for practically a century. Not loans, subsidies (and special treatment, ala Valdez repayment delay, Dakota Pipeline bullshit, drilling and fracking on federal land, etc)
what crack are you smoking? GM paid $39.7B of $51B given to it. While Ford didn't take a TARP bailout like GM, they/did/ take a $5.9B loan from a fed program to make alternate fuel tech cars, with a stipulation that money be used for US jobs. Ford hasn't paid back a penny from that 2009 loan, and has moved the production and design the money paid for out of the US. TARP lost $10.2B total, and if you add the $5.9B from Ford which happened at the same time and was more or less a sideways bailout, that's $16.1BILLION DOLLARS that you're just dismissing as "paid back their loan" - no, they didn't.
All that ignores the fact that the subsidies aren't aimed against other car manufacturers, since they can use the same subsidies. I myself own a Chevy Bolt and a Chevy Volt, both of which gave me the "Tesla subsidy" despite not being Teslas. The goal is an alternate to oil an industry that has been benefiting from massive US subsidies and special programs for damn near a century. If anyone needs to not be subsidized anymore nor get special treatment (Exxon took how long to pay anything for their Valdez spill, for instance? And how many oil companies get to drill and destroy federal land? And the whole Dakota pipeline insanity?). The US has carried the oil industry for close to a century, if not longer. I can tell you from personal experience that the Bolt is actually a pretty good car. This isn't a "Tesla" subsidy.
the conversation wasn't about amazon/bezos, but sure. And the avg annual salary at facebook is $285k per https://www.paysa.com/blog/201... so to "retire" for less than 4 years pay seems a bit odd.
Amazon now has this no-questions return policy thing about which people are complaining. We could all order one of these phones, then leave horrible reviews (which, as people who bought them, would be considered more real), and then get refunds. If they popped up under a different account or product name, lather/rinse/repeat. Ah well, guess that's more of a job for reddit these days;)
I'll rephrase: utter bullshit. If he had given away $17billion in stock to his employees the last 15 months, enough to give them each a $million bonus, their productivity would have SKYROCKETED (much more than it did, natch) and the company itself would be worth substantially more than it currently is. The idea that giving away that much would crash the company is not only absurd, it's downright idiotic.
man, now I feel so sorry for him. It must be so hard to be unable to yearly liquidate 1000x more than the average American will make in a lifetime. I had no idea. Send him my most sincere apologies next time you're polishing his shoes? Thanks
my dog eats from our yard. chicken eggs, veggies, etc. The chickens eat from the yard. bugs, seeds, grains, etc. The point of life isn't to be restricted, but to live - "excess" means more than necessary, it's not a complaint about existence as a fact itself.
did you say/maybe/ it is reasonable to exclude potential security products from adversarial nations? Every DITSCAP, DIACAP, or DIARMF process I've ever driven has *required* that. Anything actually assigned a mission assurance category - even MACIII - can't just be regular-ol' COTS. It has to be COTS that is then assessed, and part of that is if any sensitive information is ever involved, the COTS product likely can't stay COTS anymore (because none of them do labeling by default) and suddenly you now can't have developers that don't have security clearances. I can't wrap my head around a use case for these drones in the military that wouldn't already have excluded anything developed by non-cleared personnel.
Slashdot Mirror
why would you pay $2499 for a portable that can't even play games? What, is their market supposed to be only coaching staff for (insert your favorite NFL team here)?
so $20,000 to go 1800 feet up(probably not), to take a picture, to see for himself whether the Earth is flat. Or, or, and I'm just spitballing here, but he could spend $500 to get to 39,000 feet, on a ticket from LA to Hawaii, otherwise known as 40 times less for 22 times as high.
Do you people never get tired of this nonsense? Electric cars are most popular in California. My house is on solar. Both California, and the city I live in, have 100% renewables targets. Me - that's who drives electric cars. Not you rednecks out in where ever running off coal or whatnot.
way back in the day, there was a site called del.icio.us - it effectively made a social network out of bookmarks. It was great. Then yahoo bought it, and it nearly immediately went to complete crap. Anyway, point being that "social networks" can extend past just the book of faces and the little chirping birds. Can/could/should include reviews somehow. And no, yelp doesn't count.
it's a single lens resting on a sensor. You can't get non-flat pictures with that. Ever. You can't get things that look real. You can try, with digital tricks, but in the end...no. There's no reason to have better and better sensors on the stupid phones. It would be like putting $5000 wheels on a honda civic - the sensor has not been the limiting factor for the "quality" of the pictures in a long while. I mean for fark's sake, with dozens and dozens of major phone options, can you even name a single one that doesn't tout its bloody camera? The camera is mildly useful for taking a picture of something at a store, so it can be identified later - that sort of thing. But for the love of all that is holy, have duck faces improved our lives in any way at all?
The Llama, which had been ignoring it for years, suddenly turned around and whipped *its* ass. Winamp hasn't been seen or heard from since.
that makes no sense. Back in the day there were cheap point-and-click cameras, and then there were SLR. The film (analogue to "resolution" or MP) was the same, but the stuff that brought the image to the film (sensors) was different. There's nothing you can do electronically that reproduces real depth of field - a single lens pointed directly onto a sensor a millimeter away can't...do lots of things, no matter what software filter tricks you try.
btw, the 350W mark is for just the GPU card alone. And yeah, a well-insulated room will indeed be heated up quite well with 350W.
between my 2 laptops, it's 3.4A@110V. The two displays add 2.1A@110V. That's 605W, and doesn't yet include my wife's laptop, nor the phone chargers, nor anything else. The room was designed to be a bedroom, in the 50s. They didn't...plan...on the electronics of today.
I've not updated my fun/"main" pc for a long time, have needed to for a bit now but was waiting for ryzen/vega as a combo. Not a fan of nvidia for various lack-of-open-source-drivers-forever reasons, but yeah...it's a very fair point that the power consumption of these things is horrible. Was just a couple years ago everyone was bragging about power efficiency, and suddenly...out the door. I don't want nvidia, but I also don't want my GPU to be using more electricity than every light in my house combined.
my house has a pretty massive solar array on it, enough to supply my two electric cars and a fairly large place. What I don't want to do is have to rip up ceilings and walls just to route additional cooling to whatever room I put a PC in; the office in our house merely has 3 laptops in it right now, and is already noticeably warmer than anywhere else in the house. Watts aren't just about power, they're also about heat. If this weren't San Diego, then I guess you could make some comment about heating bills in the winter (which would be silly, it's not like it's an efficient heater...it is just a prolific one).
about what did I lie, pray tell?
Umm...yes I did. No he doesn't, no he didn't. I won't get into cherry-picking, because even your cherries are a bit rotten. And I suspect I know a bit more about proper scientific research than you.
"It would be career suicide for any executives or directors to support me" - as it should be. There's being non-"PC" and then there's just being a sexist ass, and he was very clearly the later. BTW, high level execs don't tend to read every single letter every single lowly employee writes; that's not what they get paid the big bucks to do. They didn't respond for a few weeks, because it was below their radar - as an employee's ramblings normally should be.
there is a cap to the number of cars per manufacturer. Even if people buy from the other brands at a slower rate, it will catch up. My wife has a Chevy Volt, I have a Chevy Bolt - the Bolt is pretty awesome, really. I would have gotten a model3 if I didn't...you know...need a car a bit sooner than that. The tax credits aren't Tesla against other car manufacturers, it's EV vrs Oil, and Oil has had fed subsidies for practically a century. Not loans, subsidies (and special treatment, ala Valdez repayment delay, Dakota Pipeline bullshit, drilling and fracking on federal land, etc)
the Chevy Bolt sitting in my garage has a thing or two to say about your claim this is a Tesla subsidy...
what crack are you smoking? GM paid $39.7B of $51B given to it. While Ford didn't take a TARP bailout like GM, they /did/ take a $5.9B loan from a fed program to make alternate fuel tech cars, with a stipulation that money be used for US jobs. Ford hasn't paid back a penny from that 2009 loan, and has moved the production and design the money paid for out of the US. TARP lost $10.2B total, and if you add the $5.9B from Ford which happened at the same time and was more or less a sideways bailout, that's $16.1BILLION DOLLARS that you're just dismissing as "paid back their loan" - no, they didn't.
All that ignores the fact that the subsidies aren't aimed against other car manufacturers, since they can use the same subsidies. I myself own a Chevy Bolt and a Chevy Volt, both of which gave me the "Tesla subsidy" despite not being Teslas. The goal is an alternate to oil an industry that has been benefiting from massive US subsidies and special programs for damn near a century. If anyone needs to not be subsidized anymore nor get special treatment (Exxon took how long to pay anything for their Valdez spill, for instance? And how many oil companies get to drill and destroy federal land? And the whole Dakota pipeline insanity?). The US has carried the oil industry for close to a century, if not longer. I can tell you from personal experience that the Bolt is actually a pretty good car. This isn't a "Tesla" subsidy.
where did I say anything about software? And wow but was that a whole pile of words you just gave us...
the conversation wasn't about amazon/bezos, but sure. And the avg annual salary at facebook is $285k per https://www.paysa.com/blog/201... so to "retire" for less than 4 years pay seems a bit odd.
Amazon now has this no-questions return policy thing about which people are complaining. We could all order one of these phones, then leave horrible reviews (which, as people who bought them, would be considered more real), and then get refunds. If they popped up under a different account or product name, lather/rinse/repeat. Ah well, guess that's more of a job for reddit these days ;)
I'll rephrase: utter bullshit. If he had given away $17billion in stock to his employees the last 15 months, enough to give them each a $million bonus, their productivity would have SKYROCKETED (much more than it did, natch) and the company itself would be worth substantially more than it currently is. The idea that giving away that much would crash the company is not only absurd, it's downright idiotic.
man, now I feel so sorry for him. It must be so hard to be unable to yearly liquidate 1000x more than the average American will make in a lifetime. I had no idea. Send him my most sincere apologies next time you're polishing his shoes? Thanks
my dog eats from our yard. chicken eggs, veggies, etc. The chickens eat from the yard. bugs, seeds, grains, etc. The point of life isn't to be restricted, but to live - "excess" means more than necessary, it's not a complaint about existence as a fact itself.
did you say /maybe/ it is reasonable to exclude potential security products from adversarial nations? Every DITSCAP, DIACAP, or DIARMF process I've ever driven has *required* that. Anything actually assigned a mission assurance category - even MACIII - can't just be regular-ol' COTS. It has to be COTS that is then assessed, and part of that is if any sensitive information is ever involved, the COTS product likely can't stay COTS anymore (because none of them do labeling by default) and suddenly you now can't have developers that don't have security clearances. I can't wrap my head around a use case for these drones in the military that wouldn't already have excluded anything developed by non-cleared personnel.
he would be so incredibly horrible as a president. He would so infinitely better than the one we have right now.