Exactly.... Let's say a recall cost $10 million. How much medicine food and other health and services now are foregone?
In fact the average settlement in wrongful death is up past $10 million, which is so grossly higher than the actual price of a life that far more is being done for safety than ought to be.
No one recalls vaccines because one in a million are allergic and die, nor do they make less vaccines so they can make more allergy tests.
This time last year Intel said they were a year away from 32 layer 3d band, with 256g per layer, that's 8T per chip, and 8/16/32TB per SSD.
The year before last year they were talking about 8 layer nand with 2tb Chips. Still haven't seen them.
Intel claims on SSD are usually way to optimistic.
Bit coin is a joke when you really look at it.
It's limited to about 30 transactions per second and takes an average of 10 minutes to verify a transaction.
It's amazing our has gotten this far.
Either way, bit coin is massivly limited in the amount of transactions it can do. What they are talking about now is one group who want the limited transactions bid up, and another group who want to increase the number of transactions.
Both groups are long term losers. Increasing transactions eventually well lead to so much data that it will be impractical to keep up - you will use up your entire internet bandwidth just keeping up with all the transactions.
Bidding up transactions just results in the currency getting slower and slower except for the rich. You already have to wait 10 minutes just to conform a transaction, imagine waiting until midnight or Sunday afternoon for the off peak time, etc.
Bit coin was never expected to take off like it did. It doesn't scale and it has to be continually patched and tweaked.
Under libertarianism, you cant agress against others. Pollution is not ok under libertariranism and never has been.
The pollution on china is a tratdegy of the commons, the state has not allowed people the right to own air nor defended or even acknowledged any such right exists. That's what you get in communism, not libertarianism.
Economically, going to the moon was a failure. What i mean by this is: it lowered living standards for those on earth, because the resources consumed in doing it, did not create anything useful that allowed the same amount to be created. This is the reason we have never gone back.
Mars is the next target because only governments will pour so much money down the drain, and no government is interested in doing something that Americans did 50 years ago. So it's the next political goal.
The viability of mars one has nothing to do with the technology or cost, and everything to do with sustained economics.
It's worth comparing to missions undertaken to the new world, or the colonisation of Australia. They succeeded when they were self supporting economically, so they could trade for what they needed and increase living standards themselves.
Mars one is just for some rich people to throw money away on what will always be a welfare dependant colony, which one day the funding will dry up and everyone will die.
I'll believe mars one and moon colonisation is practicable when there are private companies all over Antarctica and other barron areas making money.
They don't have to spend months testing it, maybe a couple of days tops. Remember they test with all wareleveling off, a single bit fails extremely quickly (100k writes).
Looking at profit margins is way to narrow.
Lets say it came all out of the CEO's pocket and revenue and margins are not effected.
None the less, the employees on $70k now know that they are at the top of the ladder. There is no hope of future growth unless they somehow drag every one up by the same amount. Their future prospects looks extremely bleak. They are now stuck under a cap where by their potential development and renumeration will be limited by the average development of their peers.
I think this really highlights the difference between people on high incomes and those on low incomes. The low income people and the left supports are focused on just having a wage. Where as those on high incomes are more concern with actually developing their skills and growing themselves as individuals.
The only people to stay at the business would be those who felt happy living the reset of their live on $70k. I doubt the top achievers at the company didn't have higher dreams and ambitions.
Sorry but, a company run that like has no future.
While the media like to claim they leave because of 'unfairness', in reality anyone with half a brain would leave because by valuing all labor as the same, the company is setting a cap on value of knowledge, experience and skill.
Think about if you were on $70k already. Well no matter what, your pay rise will almost certainly now be tied to the 'average'. So now you are trapped in job that doesn't allow you to benefit from gaining knowledge, experience and skill. Why would an employee work in such a job? The best they can hope for is to tread water for the rest of their life, while hoping the company doesn't go under.
Also, they would know that the company, even if it needs to, will never high a person with a market value of over $70k. The company should of course hire resources it needs for the projects and jobs it is doing. This limit will knee-cap the company and make it less flexible, and ultimately less competitive. Add in the over paying of low skilled labor, and the company will be even more less competitive eventually, and in the end it will go under.
If I had options, I would consider leaving, even for lower pay, but more future opportunity.
I don't know why they start the project so early.
For hardware projects, you should have a finished working product, and the kick start should be to get volume mass production.
I am sick of projects that talk about a product as if it actually exists. Typically they will claim a product does X and show a video of it. Then you find out they haven't even designed it or programmed it, and haven't even got a quote to manufacture its parts. It's just an idea with more spent on video to sell the idea.
Basically far too many kick staters outright lie.
The absolute worst I've had was a soft cpu in a altera fpga. It shipped with a C compiler. A programmer came to me to explain how his program would crash if he changed the order in which subroutines were defined. After carefully checking the logic it, there was nothing wrong with his code. So i then trawled through the assembly. Again i could find nothing wrong And thought i was losing my mind. I had to painstakingly check the cpu state after each instruction until i eventually found one instruction that did not set a flag as per the manual, and the assembler matched the manual. It was a fault that would only trigger it you did a certain conditional jump after a certain fetch increment then store sequence. It was a bug in the cpu pipeline logic.
I learnt a valuable lesson never to trust anything. We wasted allot of time because we were convinced we must have been the source of the fault.
When ARM first came out on some philips CPUs it had bugs in the C compiler.
The IT department called us hardware engineers in after being stuck on a bug for months. The problem with programmers is to many of them work at a high level, and they hit a wall at some abstraction layer, usually at assembly code.
The other problem with these compiler bugs was as you removed unrelated code, they went away, as the compiler had pointer corruption issues. So to get the vendor to fix it, you often had to submit an entire copy of your code project. Sometimes we had to submit images of entire machines because the compiler would interact with an IDE and with Windows.
These days we use only open source compilers to ensure we arnt held up and can identify and fix problems quickly.
You can get a Intel compustick for like $100. Full pc that can simu wifi to a shared folder and play whatever you want, plus as it runs windows or Linux you can do anything you want
one use is as a ram cache. You could have 16g dram swapping out to 128g of this new memory, with the swaps in ware levelling blocks.
However I think it's more likely that this tech has the potential to be in smaller packages. For example it could fit into micro SD sized cards while retaining huge speeds.
Modern systems have various cache levels. The switching would be done in blocks and could be ware levelled. Flipping a bit at 100mhz is never going to leave the cpu.
Only useful productive companies benefit from tax cuts, while this allows otherwise useless companies to consume resources without having to show that there is any cost benefit.
The rats aren't doing a task, they are rewarding the rat based on electrode readings. For example they would shock one part of the brain, and if a certain signal was made in another part, the rat would be rewarded. After time the probability of success increases as the brain learns or gets programmed. So the brain might get rewarded only 50% of the time initially, by pure luck, but would slowly increase to 60%.
The 4 brains when hooked up together learnt faster and were successful more often, for example reached 64% quicker than a single one would reach 60%.
The two biggest I have seen:
-Comms card slips out of box while being carried over to submarine. Worth about $220,000, fell into the water and had to be recovered by divers for security.
-Electrician didn't test circuit was isolated, he went to disconnect 3 phase circuit and decided to start with neutral. He lifted the neutral off, putting up to 400v where there should have been 230v. This destroyed over $300,000 in components, and cost another $200,000 due to lost operations.
If you read the commentary at the time, they simple wanted to project one out in the plane of the solar system and one out towards its axis. I believe Voyager 1 still hasn't passed pluto if projected back down onto its orbital plane.
I don't know about France but in Australia the taxi system typically operates line this:
Taxi gets in $200,000 per year in fairs across two driver shifts running pretty between 24/7 and 22/6.
Cost are typically $30,000 per year (car, maintenance, fuel, insurance).
Each of two drivers earns at most $35,000 per year.
The owner of the cabs licence takes the left over $100,000 per year.
Most of the licences have been brought up by one our two big companies in each state.
The owners typically pay $8,000 per year to be part of the cab company who issue the jobs and keep the drivers getting fairs.
Needless to say with half the money going to artificial licence holder, uber can easily under cut taxi prices. I suspect in a free market taxi prices would decrease at least 40%.
The drivers themselves are tricked mainly by the rich licence holder into thinking that uber will take there jobs and threaten their messag megre pay. Of course in reality if it's the licence holders who are the only ones who attend to lose anything.
Taxi licencing are regulation is often favored by the left. Uber is interesting because it exposes that even though the left are meant to be progressive they draw the line at labor regulation, and will stand fast on the side of entrenched interests of regulated industries.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly.... Let's say a recall cost $10 million. How much medicine food and other health and services now are foregone? In fact the average settlement in wrongful death is up past $10 million, which is so grossly higher than the actual price of a life that far more is being done for safety than ought to be. No one recalls vaccines because one in a million are allergic and die, nor do they make less vaccines so they can make more allergy tests.
The Nazi admins banned anyone from making cow jokes.
This time last year Intel said they were a year away from 32 layer 3d band, with 256g per layer, that's 8T per chip, and 8/16/32TB per SSD. The year before last year they were talking about 8 layer nand with 2tb Chips. Still haven't seen them. Intel claims on SSD are usually way to optimistic.
Bit coin is a joke when you really look at it. It's limited to about 30 transactions per second and takes an average of 10 minutes to verify a transaction. It's amazing our has gotten this far.
Either way, bit coin is massivly limited in the amount of transactions it can do. What they are talking about now is one group who want the limited transactions bid up, and another group who want to increase the number of transactions. Both groups are long term losers. Increasing transactions eventually well lead to so much data that it will be impractical to keep up - you will use up your entire internet bandwidth just keeping up with all the transactions. Bidding up transactions just results in the currency getting slower and slower except for the rich. You already have to wait 10 minutes just to conform a transaction, imagine waiting until midnight or Sunday afternoon for the off peak time, etc. Bit coin was never expected to take off like it did. It doesn't scale and it has to be continually patched and tweaked.
Under libertarianism, you cant agress against others. Pollution is not ok under libertariranism and never has been. The pollution on china is a tratdegy of the commons, the state has not allowed people the right to own air nor defended or even acknowledged any such right exists. That's what you get in communism, not libertarianism.
Economically, going to the moon was a failure. What i mean by this is: it lowered living standards for those on earth, because the resources consumed in doing it, did not create anything useful that allowed the same amount to be created. This is the reason we have never gone back. Mars is the next target because only governments will pour so much money down the drain, and no government is interested in doing something that Americans did 50 years ago. So it's the next political goal. The viability of mars one has nothing to do with the technology or cost, and everything to do with sustained economics. It's worth comparing to missions undertaken to the new world, or the colonisation of Australia. They succeeded when they were self supporting economically, so they could trade for what they needed and increase living standards themselves. Mars one is just for some rich people to throw money away on what will always be a welfare dependant colony, which one day the funding will dry up and everyone will die. I'll believe mars one and moon colonisation is practicable when there are private companies all over Antarctica and other barron areas making money.
They don't have to spend months testing it, maybe a couple of days tops. Remember they test with all wareleveling off, a single bit fails extremely quickly (100k writes).
Even I have my limits.
Looking at profit margins is way to narrow. Lets say it came all out of the CEO's pocket and revenue and margins are not effected. None the less, the employees on $70k now know that they are at the top of the ladder. There is no hope of future growth unless they somehow drag every one up by the same amount. Their future prospects looks extremely bleak. They are now stuck under a cap where by their potential development and renumeration will be limited by the average development of their peers. I think this really highlights the difference between people on high incomes and those on low incomes. The low income people and the left supports are focused on just having a wage. Where as those on high incomes are more concern with actually developing their skills and growing themselves as individuals. The only people to stay at the business would be those who felt happy living the reset of their live on $70k. I doubt the top achievers at the company didn't have higher dreams and ambitions.
Sorry but, a company run that like has no future. While the media like to claim they leave because of 'unfairness', in reality anyone with half a brain would leave because by valuing all labor as the same, the company is setting a cap on value of knowledge, experience and skill. Think about if you were on $70k already. Well no matter what, your pay rise will almost certainly now be tied to the 'average'. So now you are trapped in job that doesn't allow you to benefit from gaining knowledge, experience and skill. Why would an employee work in such a job? The best they can hope for is to tread water for the rest of their life, while hoping the company doesn't go under. Also, they would know that the company, even if it needs to, will never high a person with a market value of over $70k. The company should of course hire resources it needs for the projects and jobs it is doing. This limit will knee-cap the company and make it less flexible, and ultimately less competitive. Add in the over paying of low skilled labor, and the company will be even more less competitive eventually, and in the end it will go under. If I had options, I would consider leaving, even for lower pay, but more future opportunity.
I don't know why they start the project so early. For hardware projects, you should have a finished working product, and the kick start should be to get volume mass production. I am sick of projects that talk about a product as if it actually exists. Typically they will claim a product does X and show a video of it. Then you find out they haven't even designed it or programmed it, and haven't even got a quote to manufacture its parts. It's just an idea with more spent on video to sell the idea. Basically far too many kick staters outright lie.
The absolute worst I've had was a soft cpu in a altera fpga. It shipped with a C compiler. A programmer came to me to explain how his program would crash if he changed the order in which subroutines were defined. After carefully checking the logic it, there was nothing wrong with his code. So i then trawled through the assembly. Again i could find nothing wrong And thought i was losing my mind. I had to painstakingly check the cpu state after each instruction until i eventually found one instruction that did not set a flag as per the manual, and the assembler matched the manual. It was a fault that would only trigger it you did a certain conditional jump after a certain fetch increment then store sequence. It was a bug in the cpu pipeline logic. I learnt a valuable lesson never to trust anything. We wasted allot of time because we were convinced we must have been the source of the fault.
When ARM first came out on some philips CPUs it had bugs in the C compiler. The IT department called us hardware engineers in after being stuck on a bug for months. The problem with programmers is to many of them work at a high level, and they hit a wall at some abstraction layer, usually at assembly code. The other problem with these compiler bugs was as you removed unrelated code, they went away, as the compiler had pointer corruption issues. So to get the vendor to fix it, you often had to submit an entire copy of your code project. Sometimes we had to submit images of entire machines because the compiler would interact with an IDE and with Windows. These days we use only open source compilers to ensure we arnt held up and can identify and fix problems quickly.
You can get a Intel compustick for like $100. Full pc that can simu wifi to a shared folder and play whatever you want, plus as it runs windows or Linux you can do anything you want
one use is as a ram cache. You could have 16g dram swapping out to 128g of this new memory, with the swaps in ware levelling blocks. However I think it's more likely that this tech has the potential to be in smaller packages. For example it could fit into micro SD sized cards while retaining huge speeds.
Yeah but your method is inefficient. 100 million for a display of I'm guessing not even 6 million pixels.
Modern systems have various cache levels. The switching would be done in blocks and could be ware levelled. Flipping a bit at 100mhz is never going to leave the cpu.
Only useful productive companies benefit from tax cuts, while this allows otherwise useless companies to consume resources without having to show that there is any cost benefit.
The rats aren't doing a task, they are rewarding the rat based on electrode readings. For example they would shock one part of the brain, and if a certain signal was made in another part, the rat would be rewarded. After time the probability of success increases as the brain learns or gets programmed. So the brain might get rewarded only 50% of the time initially, by pure luck, but would slowly increase to 60%. The 4 brains when hooked up together learnt faster and were successful more often, for example reached 64% quicker than a single one would reach 60%.
The two biggest I have seen: -Comms card slips out of box while being carried over to submarine. Worth about $220,000, fell into the water and had to be recovered by divers for security. -Electrician didn't test circuit was isolated, he went to disconnect 3 phase circuit and decided to start with neutral. He lifted the neutral off, putting up to 400v where there should have been 230v. This destroyed over $300,000 in components, and cost another $200,000 due to lost operations.
I wonder what's the furthest planet we have put something in orbit around? Trying to orbit Pluto would be interesting
If you read the commentary at the time, they simple wanted to project one out in the plane of the solar system and one out towards its axis. I believe Voyager 1 still hasn't passed pluto if projected back down onto its orbital plane.
I don't know about France but in Australia the taxi system typically operates line this: Taxi gets in $200,000 per year in fairs across two driver shifts running pretty between 24/7 and 22/6. Cost are typically $30,000 per year (car, maintenance, fuel, insurance). Each of two drivers earns at most $35,000 per year. The owner of the cabs licence takes the left over $100,000 per year. Most of the licences have been brought up by one our two big companies in each state. The owners typically pay $8,000 per year to be part of the cab company who issue the jobs and keep the drivers getting fairs. Needless to say with half the money going to artificial licence holder, uber can easily under cut taxi prices. I suspect in a free market taxi prices would decrease at least 40%. The drivers themselves are tricked mainly by the rich licence holder into thinking that uber will take there jobs and threaten their messag megre pay. Of course in reality if it's the licence holders who are the only ones who attend to lose anything. Taxi licencing are regulation is often favored by the left. Uber is interesting because it exposes that even though the left are meant to be progressive they draw the line at labor regulation, and will stand fast on the side of entrenched interests of regulated industries.
Vote for LDP.