Yet another messenger app along with yet another renaming of service that no one asked for and will be confused at, backtracked as soon as Google realizes that a lot of companies don't want to help them with the new standard and are not willing to open their platforms to an alternative app that will outright kill their own efforts on their own messaging solutions.
Apple and Apple users won't adopt it because they already have iMessage, people who already uses WhatsApp will keep at it, specially because it already offers hassle free messaging with encryption and folks who uses other stuff like Facebook Messenger, Snapchat, among others won't migrate to a new thing that no one else uses. The one thing SMS is good at is exactly the stuff RCS won't ever be able to achieve, which is working in all cellphones independent of OS or carrier.
In summary, RCS is offering nothing new. In fact, it seems to have several disadvantages when compared to the competition.
I dunno why Google continues with this strategy of shooting in all directions with a peashooter, but it's not gonna work. Consolidate your messaging to a single app under the Google/Android umbrella and focus on getting it right or just stop it. How many electronic payment systems has Google been through now? How many people don't use it because they don't know the difference between Pay, Wallet, the defunct Hands Free which was another lame attempt on fragmenting the whole thing, among others? Does the company really expect every consumer to keep track and test between half a dozen of their offers for each single service because they cannot decide which to focus and keep?
It's such a stupid strategy that I can't even anymore. I'll be disabling this crap as soon as it comes out and defaulting to Signal for SMS. WhatsApp for regular messaging because that's what everyone in my contact list uses. There is no need for a new standard that does what others already do. Either come up with something new, or consolidate all your other services into one thing.
Interesting way to twist the narrative from Apple being a leader in innovation to Apple purposedly delaying tech breakthroughs to their advantage... I guess it's the fanboy distortion field operating once again. If they remove features to sell more dongles it's for having courage to take the next step, if they don't adopt a tech that is plenty mature it's because they have something in development that is better, if they close down the system it's either for security or privacy, if they make accessories proprietary and expensive to license it's for quality control, if there's a hardware defect either you are holding it wrong or it affects too few devices to count... This is one key difference I've noticed between Android and iOS fans... iOS fans are far more forgiving. Oh well.
Anyways, I'm not sure if this is the right move. I can understand why it happens, but the thing is that the first reveal of the Hololens happened in what feels like ages ago, and with no updates in between, people might just forget about it. But more importantly, it's quite likely that the competition will step up their game and come up with something before 2019.
Then again, I'm not entirely sure how the state of key components are these days, so perhaps it's just a better strategy to wait for them to evolve to release a fully realized product.
When we have advanced further into flexible transparent OLED technology, flexible batteries and electronic components, plus a few other things - and can finally shove everything needed in the form factor of regular glasses, then I can see it becoming a fully fledged mainstream market potential product. So perhaps it's just better for Microsoft to wait. They'll have to restart the marketing strategy once again though.
Well, other news on this came out sometime ago now, but it's well known that car manufacturers have no clue about security when it comes to their car systems. It's a bit like IoT devices, only worse.
Thing is, these car manufacturers managed to develop and evolve systems for a long time with costumers not questioning or taking security in consideration for the systems. The hacker and security community has been warning several manufacturers for the longest time, but they won't do anything because the vast majority of costumers have no clue how insecure their cars are.
And really, it'll only come up once some crime happens. A car that was hacked, ended up crashing and killing everyone inside. A bunch of cars stolen or that stopped working due to some malware.
Can you imagine manufacturers who act like that putting out autonomous cars on the streets?
Though I have no way of confirming this nor I know if it's completely true, but I heard that it's not a good idea deleting your account at all. The reasoning is that once your account gets completely deleted, it becomes available once again for whoever gets it, so it could end up in impersonation if it was an account that you used frequently.
I've kept mine but ceased all activities on it and deleted everything in there, while also replacing my password with a 20+ alphanumeric random thing.
From my personal experience, I can't help but wonder if there is even ONE out of all the auto-generated captions that is accurate at all.:P Have you guys ever seen one? I mean, a few mistakes are ok... but so far I haven't seen any video that had auto-generated captions that was even understandable at all. More like a mish mash of guesses. Which is great for comedic effect I guess, but not so much for viewers with difficulties in hearing.
I don't usually side with Tesla because they are very wrong in some of the accident cases, but honestly?
She was DUI, no one forced her to drive, no one forced whoever the owner was to buy the car, and from what the investigation has come up with so far, it was the fault of another driver who was going the wrong way.
It's no use clinging to if scenarios. If we didn't have a culture that worships fast cars, if she knew better not to drive a fast car after drinking, if speed limit laws were properly obeyed and applied, if the streets weren't so tight, if automated driving was already around and working well, if electric cars didn't use batteries that can explode on impact, if the city provided public transportation and security good enough so no one needed to get a car, if if if.
I'm sorry for this father's loss, but I can even imagine that the car owner bought it considering the acceleration as bonus point. At the very least, this is shared responsibility. The only reason why car manufacturers keeps making cars that goes into dangerous speeds and with dangerous features is because people buy them.
I mean, really, we could all have cars that can never go over a certain speed limit and never accelerate too fast. It'd not only be easy to make, but also cheaper. If money was invested on efficiency and other features instead of speed, acceleration and whatnot, we'd probably also have gone past the whole oil dependancy thing by now. And I won't even mention the ammoung of accidents we would not have if we didn't live in an alcohol driven and dependant society. Alas, it is what it is.
His entire quote is more accurate, but I'd say it's not like eating only potato chips... it's letting people choose what you eat, whether it's poisonous shit or a nice steak. A tip though, nowadays it's looking more and more like only shit.
On the other hand, Flipboard is not all that different if you are looking at their curation alone. I'd say it's extremely stupid to follow news on Facebook, but if people are doing it anyways, the important part is not where you get your news from, but whether you check for credibility and look for different sources at least on the stuff you care about. Always consider the possibility of an inaccurate and biased cover, because no matter where you get the news, more often than not it has some sort of agenda there.
And no, news channels and whatnot are not all that much more trustworthy. It's not uncommon to even traditional news with centuries of history to put crap on the frontpage because their news sources were all the same: agencies. And there have been tons of cases when several traditional news rushed to publish something without verifying things properly. All in all, impartiality is a myth, it's impossible to cover a subject without an angle or perspective. So yeah, you always need multiple sources and a good filter. Make a habit to verify sources and flag news portals and blogs that spread fake news, and stop giving them an audience. There isn't any other solution to this, so the faster people learn, the better things will be for everyone.
Not sure if I'm not getting the entire story here, but how can a guy who tested one method alone (a plugin to boot) can generalize that encrypted email is still a pain? Encrypted messaging is also a pain if I use only SMS or smoke signals.
I have a Protonmail account. It's encrypted during transit, and completely encrypted from Protonmail to Protonmail account, and it all works seamlessly.
I don't know why people are still reporting on this scam. It's simple people: this company scammed people out of their money to pay big bucks for a famous special effects company to produce a fake ad for a product that doesn't exist, because they wanted to scam even more people out of their money. It's also why they keep this stupid "secrecy" thing around the whole deal: because they both want the press to keep talking about it, and because they don't have anything to show. The gullible tech press ate the whole shit as if it was some imported chocolate mousse and spit it all over. It's not a whole lot different from lots of Kickstarter campaigns. I don't even know why this one is getting so much special treatment.
Just open the Kickstarter page and search for some ridiculously miraculous products. Or go watch the original Pokemon Go teaser campaign. Magic Leap cannot deliver what they promised because what they promised is impossible. In the most optimal scenario it'll be something like Hololens. But it'll more likely be comparable to lower end AR/VR devices.
While I don't really think that universal basic income will be a solution for all the problems, nor think it wouldn't have some very detrimental side effects, the opinion of a trade union economist will quite obviously be incredibly biased towards painting it in an extremely bad light. People living on universal basic income won't be paying unions, even if they continue having a side-job or something.
Here's the thing though: lots of people are thinking of an universal basic income not because they WANT to be unemployed... it's more because of the risk of BEING FORCED not to be employed due to lack of jobs. I don't think AI will take all jobs anytime soon, but there's definitely a tendency for a huge shift that will take some sectors that employ a lot of people by surprise.
This is only a personal opinion, but honestly, I don't think that many people would outright stop working just because of it. Ultimately, universal basic income won't be enough to attend most peoples' needs. And like it or not, people in absolute poverty that can't get a job are already living with the help of some sort of financial support that's either coming from public or private companies.
It might not be a bad idea to pick all the mess of social support programs, NGO work, among several other stuff, unify it into an universal basic income, and work from there upwards. It ultimately also achieves and attends the basics of human rights that governments in general should be providing to it's populace.
I might be wrong and things could turn to all hell, but I personally think we have to at least try. I'm no socialist myself, but if this could be one way to lessen the social gap, it's at least worth trying. The current reality for several countries is of complete abandonment to entire parts of the population, and there's a whole lot of public sectors that fails in providing the very basic needs for part of the population that is in most need. The human cost of all this might be way worse than most people imagine.
Will there be people using this universal income in the worst way possible? No doubts about that. Not only they won't be using that for their basic needs, it could be just spent on booze, drugs and whatnot. Could people take that as a way to just laze around and not work on anything for the rest of their lives? I guess so, though I think most people don't realize how much they depend on work to keep their sanity in check. But it's as naive to think universal basic income will be all bad without benefits, just as it is thinking it'll be the perfect solution for all the problems.
Funny how Twitter pretty much ignored complaints and requests from users to implement tools to stop harassment and hate speech for the longest time back when this all started, several years ago waaaay before everything that the election brought with it, but now that the company's ass is on the line with failing stock prices they finally decided to do something about it... I'm guessing too little too late. Just too many users lost because of the problems they refused to solve.
I don't understand the need for some sort of special polymer layer or whatever... if you wanna make something that's either automated or dependant of some sort of command, just make a needle module to puncture the Li-po battery. Perhaps they wanted to avoid the Samsung lawsuit? xD
I should laugh about Cameroon's government censorship and feel sad about people affected by it, but then again, just today I heard about some moronic politician in Brazil trying to pass a law that has some extremely broad lines like penalties and fines for anyone who tries to spread "false information" on the Internet... dumbfucks are just everywhere.
"...which, until not too long ago, all terminated in a 3.5mm connector (or 6.35mm on non-portable hi-fi models designed for at-home listening)."
Until not too long ago my ass. It still is, and will be for a very long foreseeable future. The only idiots thinking that these standards will go away are delusional Apple fanboys who swallows all the crap Apple says on their cult gatherings.
And if we're talking about not ALL headphones and speakers using 3.5mm connectors, should I remind that USB headphones have been around for the longest time? Or that old cellphones used to pull the same crap Apple is doing today by forcing consumers to use their own connector standards for headphones and cables to connect to a pc?
I dunno how people can be so gullible... Apple pulled this once before when they switched from one lightning connector (30-pin) to another, they sold a whole lot of accessories and cables with that move, and not only they are making this a recurring fixture, they are also implementing it for wireless audio now.
Who wants to bet from now on Apple will change the lightning connector and the wireless chip required to connect to Apple devices on a regular basis with some justification based on "courage", "better technology" or "optimized music listening experience"?
I hope this served as a lesson to the industry at the very least... and for people who are constantly looking for all sorts of advices to follow from their favorite celebrities.
Wanna borrow a celebrity name to sell stuff, ok, no problem. But pop stars and celebrities will always be worried more about selling their own name and face. Even if there was some hidden genious out there, their priority will always be their own brand.
But the uglier fact is that most of them are not even responsible for most of their fame, so what companies are essencially doing is hiring the most unqualified people to run an important part of their businesses... how did big companies like those get into a situation like that is why "innovation is stifled" and such.
All in all, you'd get better results by hiring strangers that have even a tiny bit of interest in the product line itself.
I don't think their quotes were "too aggressive"... weirdly enough, the professor pretty much said exactly what Gates and Musk said. But I definitely agree that it's still far away. I'd honestly say that 30 to 50 years is still extremely optimistic. Not only technology has to reach there, but then we'd be faced with cost and time to get all these robots with AI going for all sorts of jobs.
If you think about it, all this diversity of jobs that robots are supposed to be stealing from us will be facing similar or even worse challenges as that of autonomous driving. Most countries won't be able to afford those types of technology, and it'll take years to set some standards. And then comes cultural, economic and other types of barriers. Sure, the US could go towards universal basic income and whatnot, but I can't see something like this alone being able to cope with consequences.
Universal basic income is good and all, but with free time, leisure and this supposed surge in creativity also comes all sorts of problems that happen when you have a bunch of people with nothing else to do.
As far as I know, the whole Windows 10 cloud rumors came from a piece of code that indicates that there might be a version of Windows 10 codenamed cloud... Anyone that goes as far as assuming and then proceeding to cuss at a company because of speculative information leaked in a piece of code should be looked upon and considered a crazy paranoid maniac. Your agenda is showing Sweeney. Get yourself a better hobby, this one is unhealthy for you.
The Ars Technica article isn't doing any better on that front too.
Have people lost their critical reasoning and minds these days?
I mean, sure, if we're talking about numbers and comparisons between brands only.
But if we use the same metrics, MacOS is a failure, Macbooks are laughing stock in numbers when compared to windows laptops, and Android still holds 86% of the smartphone marketshare vs iOS' 13%.
You see how all these grand statements are comparisons to things we cannot measure? Best quarter ever is great, provided that the device was ever a good seller in the first place, which it wasn't. We couldn't make enough to attend demand can mean anything from there were too many buyers, to we just didn't make much of them. Record numbers on a market that has big brands closing production means nothing. And second only to Rolex in this day and age, you have to be joking to spout such nonsense.
One can pull narratives out of one's asses, but here's the thing: smartwatches in general are not selling as much as industry leaders thought they would, they are not a mainstream thing or "the next big thing", several brands are leaving the market, and most importantly: they don't have much room for evolution. Arguably, they never had much reason to exist. It's a convoluted accessory that, sure, some will find good use for them, but most people don't care for.
The thing Apple managed to get right was market. Because there sure is a whole shitload of Apple fans willing to pay whatever sum to show others they have the latest Apple gadget. Other than that, I don't see anything an Apple Watch does that is inherently superior to models from the competition. Personally, I don't see anything useful there for me. It has a sleek interface, it connects to your iPhone to take message and calls, it can provide some tracking data, and it looks good. That's it. Of all things, it's generic chinese smartwatches that are providing the most functions for smartwatches out of all the models in the market currently.
Is it a viable product for Apple as is? Sure, of course. Apple could make shit on a stick viable with their fanbase. On the other hand, they could be doing a whole lot better with Macbook Pros that take professionals needs in consideration, they didn't need to remove headphone jacks from their iPhone 7 line to force their own proprietary wireless or port solutions, and they could use the smartwatch money somewhere else instead. You see, there is no basis for comparison.
Also, I hate to say it, but it doesn't help collecting comments from Tim Cook and some other famous Apple loyalists to make a point. Looking at the opinion of people using rose colored glasses is not a good way to measure the market.
Then again, I don't really care. Apple could think of the product as a huge absurd best of all time success and keep selling it, keep investing money, research and development time, and all that. Invest shitloads of money on it. Chances are, at least fans will keep buying it. And if Apple fans are satisfied with the direction Apple has been taking in recent years, fine by me. Just don't ask me to join the cult.
Nothing more appropriate and to be expected of a Trump America. Leadership by example. My baseless and uneducated ignorance is just as worth as your data driven consensus research. Keep fighting for the right to be wrong 'till a bunch of people die... it's also the age of not assuming responsibility for anything anyways. Everything has become religion, and some human lives holds no sway on people's faith on just about anything. It's time for a full reset.
Second Life had some success back then because it was among the first 3D sandbox virtual world thing... people would at least try to see how it worked because it was something different. Not sure what would be the point these days with so many of those in the market already, even more if they are putting micro-transactions in it.
Well, I guess it's among the first of it's type on VR. Then again, the market is still tiny right now.
Slashdot Mirror
I remember there was an interesting tidbit about this thing but I can't quite recall it. Wasn't it one of the Napster guys who came up with the idea?
Yet another messenger app along with yet another renaming of service that no one asked for and will be confused at, backtracked as soon as Google realizes that a lot of companies don't want to help them with the new standard and are not willing to open their platforms to an alternative app that will outright kill their own efforts on their own messaging solutions.
Apple and Apple users won't adopt it because they already have iMessage, people who already uses WhatsApp will keep at it, specially because it already offers hassle free messaging with encryption and folks who uses other stuff like Facebook Messenger, Snapchat, among others won't migrate to a new thing that no one else uses. The one thing SMS is good at is exactly the stuff RCS won't ever be able to achieve, which is working in all cellphones independent of OS or carrier.
In summary, RCS is offering nothing new. In fact, it seems to have several disadvantages when compared to the competition.
I dunno why Google continues with this strategy of shooting in all directions with a peashooter, but it's not gonna work. Consolidate your messaging to a single app under the Google/Android umbrella and focus on getting it right or just stop it. How many electronic payment systems has Google been through now? How many people don't use it because they don't know the difference between Pay, Wallet, the defunct Hands Free which was another lame attempt on fragmenting the whole thing, among others? Does the company really expect every consumer to keep track and test between half a dozen of their offers for each single service because they cannot decide which to focus and keep?
It's such a stupid strategy that I can't even anymore. I'll be disabling this crap as soon as it comes out and defaulting to Signal for SMS. WhatsApp for regular messaging because that's what everyone in my contact list uses. There is no need for a new standard that does what others already do. Either come up with something new, or consolidate all your other services into one thing.
Interesting way to twist the narrative from Apple being a leader in innovation to Apple purposedly delaying tech breakthroughs to their advantage... I guess it's the fanboy distortion field operating once again.
If they remove features to sell more dongles it's for having courage to take the next step, if they don't adopt a tech that is plenty mature it's because they have something in development that is better, if they close down the system it's either for security or privacy, if they make accessories proprietary and expensive to license it's for quality control, if there's a hardware defect either you are holding it wrong or it affects too few devices to count...
This is one key difference I've noticed between Android and iOS fans... iOS fans are far more forgiving.
Oh well.
A strategy that Gaben never heard of. xD
Anyways, I'm not sure if this is the right move. I can understand why it happens, but the thing is that the first reveal of the Hololens happened in what feels like ages ago, and with no updates in between, people might just forget about it.
But more importantly, it's quite likely that the competition will step up their game and come up with something before 2019.
Then again, I'm not entirely sure how the state of key components are these days, so perhaps it's just a better strategy to wait for them to evolve to release a fully realized product.
When we have advanced further into flexible transparent OLED technology, flexible batteries and electronic components, plus a few other things - and can finally shove everything needed in the form factor of regular glasses, then I can see it becoming a fully fledged mainstream market potential product. So perhaps it's just better for Microsoft to wait. They'll have to restart the marketing strategy once again though.
Pick it all up, and deliver to:
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC 20500, USA
Well, other news on this came out sometime ago now, but it's well known that car manufacturers have no clue about security when it comes to their car systems.
It's a bit like IoT devices, only worse.
Thing is, these car manufacturers managed to develop and evolve systems for a long time with costumers not questioning or taking security in consideration for the systems. The hacker and security community has been warning several manufacturers for the longest time, but they won't do anything because the vast majority of costumers have no clue how insecure their cars are.
And really, it'll only come up once some crime happens. A car that was hacked, ended up crashing and killing everyone inside. A bunch of cars stolen or that stopped working due to some malware.
Can you imagine manufacturers who act like that putting out autonomous cars on the streets?
Though I have no way of confirming this nor I know if it's completely true, but I heard that it's not a good idea deleting your account at all.
The reasoning is that once your account gets completely deleted, it becomes available once again for whoever gets it, so it could end up in impersonation if it was an account that you used frequently.
I've kept mine but ceased all activities on it and deleted everything in there, while also replacing my password with a 20+ alphanumeric random thing.
From my personal experience, I can't help but wonder if there is even ONE out of all the auto-generated captions that is accurate at all. :P
Have you guys ever seen one? I mean, a few mistakes are ok... but so far I haven't seen any video that had auto-generated captions that was even understandable at all. More like a mish mash of guesses.
Which is great for comedic effect I guess, but not so much for viewers with difficulties in hearing.
Gaben: "Well, it's not like this is the 3rd version of it, AMIRITE?"
I don't usually side with Tesla because they are very wrong in some of the accident cases, but honestly?
She was DUI, no one forced her to drive, no one forced whoever the owner was to buy the car, and from what the investigation has come up with so far, it was the fault of another driver who was going the wrong way.
It's no use clinging to if scenarios. If we didn't have a culture that worships fast cars, if she knew better not to drive a fast car after drinking, if speed limit laws were properly obeyed and applied, if the streets weren't so tight, if automated driving was already around and working well, if electric cars didn't use batteries that can explode on impact, if the city provided public transportation and security good enough so no one needed to get a car, if if if.
I'm sorry for this father's loss, but I can even imagine that the car owner bought it considering the acceleration as bonus point. At the very least, this is shared responsibility. The only reason why car manufacturers keeps making cars that goes into dangerous speeds and with dangerous features is because people buy them.
I mean, really, we could all have cars that can never go over a certain speed limit and never accelerate too fast. It'd not only be easy to make, but also cheaper. If money was invested on efficiency and other features instead of speed, acceleration and whatnot, we'd probably also have gone past the whole oil dependancy thing by now. And I won't even mention the ammoung of accidents we would not have if we didn't live in an alcohol driven and dependant society. Alas, it is what it is.
His entire quote is more accurate, but I'd say it's not like eating only potato chips... it's letting people choose what you eat, whether it's poisonous shit or a nice steak. A tip though, nowadays it's looking more and more like only shit.
On the other hand, Flipboard is not all that different if you are looking at their curation alone. I'd say it's extremely stupid to follow news on Facebook, but if people are doing it anyways, the important part is not where you get your news from, but whether you check for credibility and look for different sources at least on the stuff you care about. Always consider the possibility of an inaccurate and biased cover, because no matter where you get the news, more often than not it has some sort of agenda there.
And no, news channels and whatnot are not all that much more trustworthy. It's not uncommon to even traditional news with centuries of history to put crap on the frontpage because their news sources were all the same: agencies. And there have been tons of cases when several traditional news rushed to publish something without verifying things properly.
All in all, impartiality is a myth, it's impossible to cover a subject without an angle or perspective. So yeah, you always need multiple sources and a good filter. Make a habit to verify sources and flag news portals and blogs that spread fake news, and stop giving them an audience. There isn't any other solution to this, so the faster people learn, the better things will be for everyone.
Not sure if I'm not getting the entire story here, but how can a guy who tested one method alone (a plugin to boot) can generalize that encrypted email is still a pain?
Encrypted messaging is also a pain if I use only SMS or smoke signals.
I have a Protonmail account. It's encrypted during transit, and completely encrypted from Protonmail to Protonmail account, and it all works seamlessly.
I don't know why people are still reporting on this scam.
It's simple people: this company scammed people out of their money to pay big bucks for a famous special effects company to produce a fake ad for a product that doesn't exist, because they wanted to scam even more people out of their money. It's also why they keep this stupid "secrecy" thing around the whole deal: because they both want the press to keep talking about it, and because they don't have anything to show.
The gullible tech press ate the whole shit as if it was some imported chocolate mousse and spit it all over.
It's not a whole lot different from lots of Kickstarter campaigns. I don't even know why this one is getting so much special treatment.
Just open the Kickstarter page and search for some ridiculously miraculous products. Or go watch the original Pokemon Go teaser campaign. Magic Leap cannot deliver what they promised because what they promised is impossible. In the most optimal scenario it'll be something like Hololens. But it'll more likely be comparable to lower end AR/VR devices.
While I don't really think that universal basic income will be a solution for all the problems, nor think it wouldn't have some very detrimental side effects, the opinion of a trade union economist will quite obviously be incredibly biased towards painting it in an extremely bad light. People living on universal basic income won't be paying unions, even if they continue having a side-job or something.
Here's the thing though: lots of people are thinking of an universal basic income not because they WANT to be unemployed... it's more because of the risk of BEING FORCED not to be employed due to lack of jobs. I don't think AI will take all jobs anytime soon, but there's definitely a tendency for a huge shift that will take some sectors that employ a lot of people by surprise.
This is only a personal opinion, but honestly, I don't think that many people would outright stop working just because of it.
Ultimately, universal basic income won't be enough to attend most peoples' needs. And like it or not, people in absolute poverty that can't get a job are already living with the help of some sort of financial support that's either coming from public or private companies.
It might not be a bad idea to pick all the mess of social support programs, NGO work, among several other stuff, unify it into an universal basic income, and work from there upwards. It ultimately also achieves and attends the basics of human rights that governments in general should be providing to it's populace.
I might be wrong and things could turn to all hell, but I personally think we have to at least try. I'm no socialist myself, but if this could be one way to lessen the social gap, it's at least worth trying. The current reality for several countries is of complete abandonment to entire parts of the population, and there's a whole lot of public sectors that fails in providing the very basic needs for part of the population that is in most need. The human cost of all this might be way worse than most people imagine.
Will there be people using this universal income in the worst way possible? No doubts about that. Not only they won't be using that for their basic needs, it could be just spent on booze, drugs and whatnot. Could people take that as a way to just laze around and not work on anything for the rest of their lives? I guess so, though I think most people don't realize how much they depend on work to keep their sanity in check.
But it's as naive to think universal basic income will be all bad without benefits, just as it is thinking it'll be the perfect solution for all the problems.
Funny how Twitter pretty much ignored complaints and requests from users to implement tools to stop harassment and hate speech for the longest time back when this all started, several years ago waaaay before everything that the election brought with it, but now that the company's ass is on the line with failing stock prices they finally decided to do something about it... I'm guessing too little too late. Just too many users lost because of the problems they refused to solve.
I don't understand the need for some sort of special polymer layer or whatever... if you wanna make something that's either automated or dependant of some sort of command, just make a needle module to puncture the Li-po battery.
Perhaps they wanted to avoid the Samsung lawsuit? xD
I should laugh about Cameroon's government censorship and feel sad about people affected by it, but then again, just today I heard about some moronic politician in Brazil trying to pass a law that has some extremely broad lines like penalties and fines for anyone who tries to spread "false information" on the Internet... dumbfucks are just everywhere.
"...which, until not too long ago, all terminated in a 3.5mm connector (or 6.35mm on non-portable hi-fi models designed for at-home listening)."
Until not too long ago my ass. It still is, and will be for a very long foreseeable future. The only idiots thinking that these standards will go away are delusional Apple fanboys who swallows all the crap Apple says on their cult gatherings.
And if we're talking about not ALL headphones and speakers using 3.5mm connectors, should I remind that USB headphones have been around for the longest time? Or that old cellphones used to pull the same crap Apple is doing today by forcing consumers to use their own connector standards for headphones and cables to connect to a pc?
I dunno how people can be so gullible... Apple pulled this once before when they switched from one lightning connector (30-pin) to another, they sold a whole lot of accessories and cables with that move, and not only they are making this a recurring fixture, they are also implementing it for wireless audio now.
Who wants to bet from now on Apple will change the lightning connector and the wireless chip required to connect to Apple devices on a regular basis with some justification based on "courage", "better technology" or "optimized music listening experience"?
I hope this served as a lesson to the industry at the very least... and for people who are constantly looking for all sorts of advices to follow from their favorite celebrities.
Wanna borrow a celebrity name to sell stuff, ok, no problem.
But pop stars and celebrities will always be worried more about selling their own name and face.
Even if there was some hidden genious out there, their priority will always be their own brand.
But the uglier fact is that most of them are not even responsible for most of their fame, so what companies are essencially doing is hiring the most unqualified people to run an important part of their businesses... how did big companies like those get into a situation like that is why "innovation is stifled" and such.
All in all, you'd get better results by hiring strangers that have even a tiny bit of interest in the product line itself.
I don't think their quotes were "too aggressive"... weirdly enough, the professor pretty much said exactly what Gates and Musk said.
But I definitely agree that it's still far away. I'd honestly say that 30 to 50 years is still extremely optimistic.
Not only technology has to reach there, but then we'd be faced with cost and time to get all these robots with AI going for all sorts of jobs.
If you think about it, all this diversity of jobs that robots are supposed to be stealing from us will be facing similar or even worse challenges as that of autonomous driving.
Most countries won't be able to afford those types of technology, and it'll take years to set some standards.
And then comes cultural, economic and other types of barriers. Sure, the US could go towards universal basic income and whatnot, but I can't see something like this alone being able to cope with consequences.
Universal basic income is good and all, but with free time, leisure and this supposed surge in creativity also comes all sorts of problems that happen when you have a bunch of people with nothing else to do.
As far as I know, the whole Windows 10 cloud rumors came from a piece of code that indicates that there might be a version of Windows 10 codenamed cloud...
Anyone that goes as far as assuming and then proceeding to cuss at a company because of speculative information leaked in a piece of code should be looked upon and considered a crazy paranoid maniac. Your agenda is showing Sweeney. Get yourself a better hobby, this one is unhealthy for you.
The Ars Technica article isn't doing any better on that front too.
Have people lost their critical reasoning and minds these days?
I mean, sure, if we're talking about numbers and comparisons between brands only.
But if we use the same metrics, MacOS is a failure, Macbooks are laughing stock in numbers when compared to windows laptops, and Android still holds 86% of the smartphone marketshare vs iOS' 13%.
You see how all these grand statements are comparisons to things we cannot measure? Best quarter ever is great, provided that the device was ever a good seller in the first place, which it wasn't. We couldn't make enough to attend demand can mean anything from there were too many buyers, to we just didn't make much of them. Record numbers on a market that has big brands closing production means nothing. And second only to Rolex in this day and age, you have to be joking to spout such nonsense.
One can pull narratives out of one's asses, but here's the thing: smartwatches in general are not selling as much as industry leaders thought they would, they are not a mainstream thing or "the next big thing", several brands are leaving the market, and most importantly: they don't have much room for evolution. Arguably, they never had much reason to exist. It's a convoluted accessory that, sure, some will find good use for them, but most people don't care for.
The thing Apple managed to get right was market. Because there sure is a whole shitload of Apple fans willing to pay whatever sum to show others they have the latest Apple gadget. Other than that, I don't see anything an Apple Watch does that is inherently superior to models from the competition. Personally, I don't see anything useful there for me. It has a sleek interface, it connects to your iPhone to take message and calls, it can provide some tracking data, and it looks good. That's it. Of all things, it's generic chinese smartwatches that are providing the most functions for smartwatches out of all the models in the market currently.
Is it a viable product for Apple as is? Sure, of course. Apple could make shit on a stick viable with their fanbase. On the other hand, they could be doing a whole lot better with Macbook Pros that take professionals needs in consideration, they didn't need to remove headphone jacks from their iPhone 7 line to force their own proprietary wireless or port solutions, and they could use the smartwatch money somewhere else instead. You see, there is no basis for comparison.
Also, I hate to say it, but it doesn't help collecting comments from Tim Cook and some other famous Apple loyalists to make a point. Looking at the opinion of people using rose colored glasses is not a good way to measure the market.
Then again, I don't really care. Apple could think of the product as a huge absurd best of all time success and keep selling it, keep investing money, research and development time, and all that. Invest shitloads of money on it. Chances are, at least fans will keep buying it. And if Apple fans are satisfied with the direction Apple has been taking in recent years, fine by me. Just don't ask me to join the cult.
You are holding it wrong, you are placing it wrong, you don't need a headphone jack, you don't need sd card and standard usb ports... get the gist?
Nothing more appropriate and to be expected of a Trump America.
Leadership by example. My baseless and uneducated ignorance is just as worth as your data driven consensus research.
Keep fighting for the right to be wrong 'till a bunch of people die... it's also the age of not assuming responsibility for anything anyways.
Everything has become religion, and some human lives holds no sway on people's faith on just about anything.
It's time for a full reset.
Second Life had some success back then because it was among the first 3D sandbox virtual world thing... people would at least try to see how it worked because it was something different. Not sure what would be the point these days with so many of those in the market already, even more if they are putting micro-transactions in it.
Well, I guess it's among the first of it's type on VR. Then again, the market is still tiny right now.