At least in the long term. Short term, we will probably see a glut of already-manufactured product on the market that retailers, wholesalers, etc. will start slashing prices on to move out the door. We'll see 10-20% sales, maybe.
Then, when the supply is a little less thick, the price will 'stabilize'. Then it'll start going up, just as we've seen with every other 'old' media format (I'm thinking IDE drives in particular, as it's a recent memory).
First, we'll see the availability of inexpensive SATA drives disappear, then we'll see the variety decrease. We'll see the price edge closer towards that of 'Enterprise' drives, while said Enterprise drives also move north in price. And since they're basically the same drives, with only geeky consumers wanting them for their massive porn and/or whatever collections, we'll see the prices more or less merge with the 'enterprise' disks only being marginally more expensive but the consumer disks losing pretty much anything resembling a warranty.
Basically, what we're looking at here is the possible death of the consumer hard drive market. The prices could turn around, but since 256 SSDs probably aren't far off from being put in consumer products, and we still haven't gotten to the point where the average consumer needs a 250GB hard drive, I see no reason why we'll ever see $100 "high capacity" hard drives again.
I've never noticed the "prettier" part when imbibing. I may be more likely or interested in taking advantage of said prettiness, but I have absolutely no idea how someone would be able to drink enough to go home with an 'ugly' simply on the basis of alcohol.
For me, my tolerance for stupidity doesn't necessarily go down, but my general giveafuck gets depleted and fewer things in general agitate me. That's a win for everyone, as I'm more social and lively.
Not exactly. Replace "caffeine" in what you wrote there with "alcohol" and see what I mean.
Case in point, I've got a very high tolerance to alcohol. This is a natural tolerance; I'm only 155lb at 6' tall, but if drinking beer, I am physically full long before I even feel the effects and it can take hours of maintaining that 'full' before feeling remotely drunk.
My ex, on the other hand, weighed about 10-15lb less than I do, and she couldn't handle a full beer before getting tipsy. She'd get sick with a full beer consumed over the course of 30-40 minutes or so.
Similarly, I know people who can drink coffee all day and not have a problem sleeping. Others get the jitters and can't sleep after having a small piece of chocolate. If you've got that low a tolerance, a single energy drink can do some very bad things to you, particularly if you've got heart problems or something like diabetes.
If the people running my company's operations is any indication, they're not only going to be jerking off, they're going to be blaming the shortcomings on the working person...
An individual Citizen with a musket (or a canon or ship of the line, for that matter - as was often the case in the early US history) was no more or less protected from his government by his implements of war and defense than someone today is protected by his rifle against an M1 or an Apache.
People have to sleep. They have to live their lives. If the government wants to assassinate you, they will - eventually. You've got a number.
The threat to a tyrannical government isn't in the armed individual. An individual member of said government is quite potentially endangered, however, and since governments are composed of individuals just as the citizenry is, it's a more level playing field. The firearm is the great equalizer, granting the weak the ability to stand up against the strong, and sometimes bite the heel of tyranny.
OP says things which make me think they'd argue that C has failed. I'm sorry, Perl ships in the base install of pretty much every single OS I'm aware of, and it is the single easiest way to write things which will consistently work cross platform (from a sysadmin perspective).
The point is what, that they thought they needed armed guards?
I think I need a pony; that doesn't make it so. I can scream "I need a pony, I can't walk and people are chasing me" all day, and if it's false (such as is the case with the paper - no threats were made as they claimed), it's just still bullshit.
These distros are funny. They keep changing how they work and do things. "We're going to do something fresh and different" - abandoning what works. Then they fail. Redhat, Mandrake, Ubuntu... they've all done it.
Guess what? Debian is still pretty much the same as it was in 1998 (but yes, with newer packages, you jokers).
There shouldn't be any kind of "social contract" at all.
Please show me this social contract you signed. I never received a copy.
Our corporations should be sleek, vicious, beautiful monsters, utterly amoral, streamlined of every impulse except a ravening urge to destroy the competition and feast on the juices of sweet, sweet captive markets, the blood and ichor of consumer franchises trickling down their fangs.
Oh baby, say it again, I'm getting wet.
Sarcasm aside, though: employers aren't obliged to offer you more than you agree to receive for your services. Unfortunately, we need to get -everything- outlined in iron clad contracts; it's preferable from a freedom perspective to do contractual work instead of be an employee, so if you can do that, go ahead. It's liberating but also somewhat more complicated/takes more effort.
Corporate personhood is another topic entirely. That's wrong.
We attempt to keep child molesters away from children.
We prohibit firearm offenders from possessing firearms. (This is actually more strictly regulated and controlled than keeping molesters away from children.)
This isn't "outing" people. This is publishing a list with a political agenda with the intention of causing severe - physical - repercussions for the people on the list.
Let's just make a list of all the Jews in Germany, why don't we? Don't mind for a second that some of them are bakers or butchers, maybe some policemen even. Jews are money people, though, and money people are evil...
How about if I go down to the South, 1860s style, and make a list of people who helped the slaves flee to the North publicly available? No harm done, right?
IE it's a volatile political issue in which death is truly on the line.
If I were buying a house, I would see high gun ownership in a neighborhood as a very bad sign, because it means that a large percentage of the people live in constant fear for their lives.
It will be quite a surprise to you, then, when you come across the statistics stating that neighborhoods with the highest per capita firearm ownership are also the safest (outside of gated and/or guarded communities).
I had to laugh at the chutzpah of an acquaintance who said, "I would be terrified if I ever found out one of my neighbors had a gun". Sweetheart, you live in an affluent (upper middle class) white neighborhood in one of the more conservative parts of Florida - you can bet damn well most of your neighbors not only possess firearms, but have at least one on them at all times. (She comes from Columbia and works in media, so her association of firearms with thugs in the streets or rednecks with confederate flags in the backs of their trucks can be, if not forgiven, understood. For many, such things are nothing if not an emotional decision.)
How is it anyone else's business what I keep in my bedroom closet any more than it is anyone else's business
There is more fervor over online published data on sex offenders in society than you people are expressing for legally registered gun owners (in the most restrictive state in the country) having the same done to them. That's kinda, I dunno, low.
Australia burned down in December; so what? I'm sure it was wintery cold in July, too, but that doesn't mean much in the grander scheme of things. It's one season.
OK, so just stick with the "it's too expensive" rebuttal.
What do you do about global warming if it's too expensive to 'fix'? Honest question. No, I'm not saying "just ignore it", I'm saying: come up with a real goddamn solution, or at least a path which is tenable without punishing first adopters or shoving government totalitarian enforcement down peoples' throats. (No, it isn't worth living or saving the planet if we all live as eco-slaves.)
So what you're saying is that Apple will in your eyes, essentially, be abandoning the 'maker' market completely.
You know, the people who need things like these capabilities: * photo editing * media management * rendering of any sort * video production * audio production * publishing
Sorry, the ability to run these kinds of applications (and probably more I'm not aware of) over the Internet is just not there yet. We're probably a good decade away, on the inside, before it becomes even remotely practical to do so.
Granted, most people who make things don't use macs anymore, at least as a significant part of the market. But the market is still there and there are a lot of holdouts. With Microsoft effectively trying to kill the PC, too, you can bet that there will even be people moving back to the Mac.
I've been in situations like this, though I've gotten the job(s). The employer has a decent position but at below market rates - but with promises of improvement "after 6 months', "when the company is doing better", "before we hire someone else".
Invariably, it's all been lies just to get a cheap employee (even when it's in writing - at will means at will, and they'll change the terms of the agreement out from underneath you).
Older, more experienced workers have the benefit of being able to jump ship to another employer fairly easily if they're currently employed. They've got the established work history; they just need to be employed at the time to jump (demonstrating that someone, somewhere, was willing to take a risk.) This isn't the case for younger workers, who have fewer options due to their lack of experience - so naturally, they're more preferable for the totalitarian/abusive employers.
I'm still fairly young (30), but the last interview I went to I was told, "I really like your resume, but you cost a lot more than we can afford. You obviously have all this experience. Might I recommend you leave off 5 years of experience? You're too intimidating to employers." I've got a job, but if I didn't, the possibility of working there would've been acceptable to me due to various other factors - but I'd have probably been more qualified (on paper) to be my boss than he was, aside from his tenure in the position. If I hadn't been employed, I doubt I'd have been asked in (I did it as a favor).
In my experience, the SF Bay Area also has a bit of an IT reputation of people getting a set of skills, becoming a major prat of a primadona, and then sitting on their laurels expecting to be paid $dollars to do just the bare minimum while trumping up their actual accomplishments into epic deeds of old as fodder for their perpetual job applications. It's very "yes, I touched one of those before" friendly and almost openly hostile towards people who know their topics of expertise backwards and forwards: as long as you can talk marketing bullshit, you're good.
I say this having interviewed dozens of people over the past several years, all in the 25-35 age group. I interviewed a couple grey hairs as well, but if you're in this field in a non-managerial role by the time you're 50, you're probably a bit eccentric - as these guys were. (The eccentricity plus the very real generation gap is a big part of why there's such an ageist approach, I think.)
The Bay Area is, ironically, pretty hostile towards life experience in general, I think. As someone who's only 30 myself - married with 3 kids, college degree, a decade experience, etc.) I found people were openly threatened by me after finding things like this out. (No, I'm not from the Bay Area.)
Also, greyhairs with sense tend to leave the Bay Area and/or retire, so that might be another part of it. Other parts of the country are much more accepting of greyhairs, because outside the urban yuppie areas, people have a more evenly aged, if not elderly-weighted population. Many more people who have real life responsibilities (multiple jobs, extended family obligations, children, harder physical living conditions/weather) tend to make 'little' things like keeping up with the hair dye or buying the latest styles somewhat less important.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it means prices will go up.
At least in the long term. Short term, we will probably see a glut of already-manufactured product on the market that retailers, wholesalers, etc. will start slashing prices on to move out the door. We'll see 10-20% sales, maybe.
Then, when the supply is a little less thick, the price will 'stabilize'. Then it'll start going up, just as we've seen with every other 'old' media format (I'm thinking IDE drives in particular, as it's a recent memory).
First, we'll see the availability of inexpensive SATA drives disappear, then we'll see the variety decrease. We'll see the price edge closer towards that of 'Enterprise' drives, while said Enterprise drives also move north in price. And since they're basically the same drives, with only geeky consumers wanting them for their massive porn and/or whatever collections, we'll see the prices more or less merge with the 'enterprise' disks only being marginally more expensive but the consumer disks losing pretty much anything resembling a warranty.
Basically, what we're looking at here is the possible death of the consumer hard drive market. The prices could turn around, but since 256 SSDs probably aren't far off from being put in consumer products, and we still haven't gotten to the point where the average consumer needs a 250GB hard drive, I see no reason why we'll ever see $100 "high capacity" hard drives again.
I've never noticed the "prettier" part when imbibing. I may be more likely or interested in taking advantage of said prettiness, but I have absolutely no idea how someone would be able to drink enough to go home with an 'ugly' simply on the basis of alcohol.
For me, my tolerance for stupidity doesn't necessarily go down, but my general giveafuck gets depleted and fewer things in general agitate me. That's a win for everyone, as I'm more social and lively.
Not exactly. Replace "caffeine" in what you wrote there with "alcohol" and see what I mean.
Case in point, I've got a very high tolerance to alcohol. This is a natural tolerance; I'm only 155lb at 6' tall, but if drinking beer, I am physically full long before I even feel the effects and it can take hours of maintaining that 'full' before feeling remotely drunk.
My ex, on the other hand, weighed about 10-15lb less than I do, and she couldn't handle a full beer before getting tipsy. She'd get sick with a full beer consumed over the course of 30-40 minutes or so.
Similarly, I know people who can drink coffee all day and not have a problem sleeping. Others get the jitters and can't sleep after having a small piece of chocolate. If you've got that low a tolerance, a single energy drink can do some very bad things to you, particularly if you've got heart problems or something like diabetes.
If the people running my company's operations is any indication, they're not only going to be jerking off, they're going to be blaming the shortcomings on the working person...
An individual Citizen with a musket (or a canon or ship of the line, for that matter - as was often the case in the early US history) was no more or less protected from his government by his implements of war and defense than someone today is protected by his rifle against an M1 or an Apache.
People have to sleep. They have to live their lives. If the government wants to assassinate you, they will - eventually. You've got a number.
The threat to a tyrannical government isn't in the armed individual. An individual member of said government is quite potentially endangered, however, and since governments are composed of individuals just as the citizenry is, it's a more level playing field. The firearm is the great equalizer, granting the weak the ability to stand up against the strong, and sometimes bite the heel of tyranny.
Yep, exactly. Makes me wonder why people are bothering with this petition. Should we not be simply trying to get the DMCA revoked?
America is also the best country in the world to be an illegal alien (where citizens will subsidize all manners of existence for them).
I agree with you.
OP says things which make me think they'd argue that C has failed. I'm sorry, Perl ships in the base install of pretty much every single OS I'm aware of, and it is the single easiest way to write things which will consistently work cross platform (from a sysadmin perspective).
The point is what, that they thought they needed armed guards?
I think I need a pony; that doesn't make it so. I can scream "I need a pony, I can't walk and people are chasing me" all day, and if it's false (such as is the case with the paper - no threats were made as they claimed), it's just still bullshit.
These distros are funny. They keep changing how they work and do things. "We're going to do something fresh and different" - abandoning what works. Then they fail. Redhat, Mandrake, Ubuntu... they've all done it.
Guess what? Debian is still pretty much the same as it was in 1998 (but yes, with newer packages, you jokers).
I did read what you said. I said what you're proposing is idiotic and impossible.
There shouldn't be any kind of "social contract" at all.
Please show me this social contract you signed. I never received a copy.
Our corporations should be sleek, vicious, beautiful monsters, utterly amoral, streamlined of every impulse except a ravening urge to destroy the competition and feast on the juices of sweet, sweet captive markets, the blood and ichor of consumer franchises trickling down their fangs.
Oh baby, say it again, I'm getting wet.
Sarcasm aside, though: employers aren't obliged to offer you more than you agree to receive for your services. Unfortunately, we need to get -everything- outlined in iron clad contracts; it's preferable from a freedom perspective to do contractual work instead of be an employee, so if you can do that, go ahead. It's liberating but also somewhat more complicated/takes more effort.
Corporate personhood is another topic entirely. That's wrong.
What's more, they probably aren't even bright enough to realize the hypocritical dichotomy.
On the contrary, gun control has a significant impact on increased homicides committed with illegal guns.
We attempt to keep child molesters away from children.
We prohibit firearm offenders from possessing firearms. (This is actually more strictly regulated and controlled than keeping molesters away from children.)
Did you have a point?
This isn't "outing" people. This is publishing a list with a political agenda with the intention of causing severe - physical - repercussions for the people on the list.
Let's just make a list of all the Jews in Germany, why don't we? Don't mind for a second that some of them are bakers or butchers, maybe some policemen even. Jews are money people, though, and money people are evil...
How about if I go down to the South, 1860s style, and make a list of people who helped the slaves flee to the North publicly available? No harm done, right?
IE it's a volatile political issue in which death is truly on the line.
Hah, joke's on you. We're pretty much a democracy at this point; the Republic is dead.
(Explain the middle class, or lack thereof, if you disagree.)
More harm has done to man with the silvered tongue or the flip of a quill than the firearm can ever do in and of itself. Keep that in mind.
If I were buying a house, I would see high gun ownership in a neighborhood as a very bad sign, because it means that a large percentage of the people live in constant fear for their lives.
It will be quite a surprise to you, then, when you come across the statistics stating that neighborhoods with the highest per capita firearm ownership are also the safest (outside of gated and/or guarded communities).
I had to laugh at the chutzpah of an acquaintance who said, "I would be terrified if I ever found out one of my neighbors had a gun". Sweetheart, you live in an affluent (upper middle class) white neighborhood in one of the more conservative parts of Florida - you can bet damn well most of your neighbors not only possess firearms, but have at least one on them at all times. (She comes from Columbia and works in media, so her association of firearms with thugs in the streets or rednecks with confederate flags in the backs of their trucks can be, if not forgiven, understood. For many, such things are nothing if not an emotional decision.)
How is it anyone else's business what I keep in my bedroom closet any more than it is anyone else's business
There is more fervor over online published data on sex offenders in society than you people are expressing for legally registered gun owners (in the most restrictive state in the country) having the same done to them. That's kinda, I dunno, low.
Australia burned down in December; so what? I'm sure it was wintery cold in July, too, but that doesn't mean much in the grander scheme of things. It's one season.
OK, so just stick with the "it's too expensive" rebuttal.
What do you do about global warming if it's too expensive to 'fix'? Honest question. No, I'm not saying "just ignore it", I'm saying: come up with a real goddamn solution, or at least a path which is tenable without punishing first adopters or shoving government totalitarian enforcement down peoples' throats. (No, it isn't worth living or saving the planet if we all live as eco-slaves.)
So what you're saying is that Apple will in your eyes, essentially, be abandoning the 'maker' market completely.
You know, the people who need things like these capabilities:
* photo editing
* media management
* rendering of any sort
* video production
* audio production
* publishing
Sorry, the ability to run these kinds of applications (and probably more I'm not aware of) over the Internet is just not there yet. We're probably a good decade away, on the inside, before it becomes even remotely practical to do so.
Granted, most people who make things don't use macs anymore, at least as a significant part of the market. But the market is still there and there are a lot of holdouts. With Microsoft effectively trying to kill the PC, too, you can bet that there will even be people moving back to the Mac.
I've been in situations like this, though I've gotten the job(s). The employer has a decent position but at below market rates - but with promises of improvement "after 6 months', "when the company is doing better", "before we hire someone else".
Invariably, it's all been lies just to get a cheap employee (even when it's in writing - at will means at will, and they'll change the terms of the agreement out from underneath you).
Older, more experienced workers have the benefit of being able to jump ship to another employer fairly easily if they're currently employed. They've got the established work history; they just need to be employed at the time to jump (demonstrating that someone, somewhere, was willing to take a risk.) This isn't the case for younger workers, who have fewer options due to their lack of experience - so naturally, they're more preferable for the totalitarian/abusive employers.
I'm still fairly young (30), but the last interview I went to I was told, "I really like your resume, but you cost a lot more than we can afford. You obviously have all this experience. Might I recommend you leave off 5 years of experience? You're too intimidating to employers." I've got a job, but if I didn't, the possibility of working there would've been acceptable to me due to various other factors - but I'd have probably been more qualified (on paper) to be my boss than he was, aside from his tenure in the position. If I hadn't been employed, I doubt I'd have been asked in (I did it as a favor).
In my experience, the SF Bay Area also has a bit of an IT reputation of people getting a set of skills, becoming a major prat of a primadona, and then sitting on their laurels expecting to be paid $dollars to do just the bare minimum while trumping up their actual accomplishments into epic deeds of old as fodder for their perpetual job applications. It's very "yes, I touched one of those before" friendly and almost openly hostile towards people who know their topics of expertise backwards and forwards: as long as you can talk marketing bullshit, you're good.
I say this having interviewed dozens of people over the past several years, all in the 25-35 age group. I interviewed a couple grey hairs as well, but if you're in this field in a non-managerial role by the time you're 50, you're probably a bit eccentric - as these guys were. (The eccentricity plus the very real generation gap is a big part of why there's such an ageist approach, I think.)
The Bay Area is, ironically, pretty hostile towards life experience in general, I think. As someone who's only 30 myself - married with 3 kids, college degree, a decade experience, etc.) I found people were openly threatened by me after finding things like this out. (No, I'm not from the Bay Area.)
Also, greyhairs with sense tend to leave the Bay Area and/or retire, so that might be another part of it. Other parts of the country are much more accepting of greyhairs, because outside the urban yuppie areas, people have a more evenly aged, if not elderly-weighted population. Many more people who have real life responsibilities (multiple jobs, extended family obligations, children, harder physical living conditions/weather) tend to make 'little' things like keeping up with the hair dye or buying the latest styles somewhat less important.