I did know about the Caterpillar phone. Yes, it's awesome. Yes, I want one but they are hard to find if you don't pay full price from the manufacturer. (If you are paying full price for your phone you are a fool. You can get most any non-iPhone/Samsung phone for half price 6-months after it's release on the secondary market.)
The problem with a "smaller" phone is that most consumers will expect it to also come with a smaller price. a 3" phone basically costs the same thing to produce as a 6" phone, and will be sold at the same price.
This is why I think Motorola's mod solution is pretty great. If you think there is a market for those things, you can build it. I have a Moto Z2 and a 360 camera mod. It's really a game changer. I wish Motorola would opensource their "mod" developments so the program could really bloom.
"Brendan has previously suggested that adding bugs to experimental software code could help with ultimately winding up with programs that have fewer vulnerabilities."
This is not correct. His theory seems to be that you will get fewer exploits. The number of vulnerabilities will remain constant.
That's not what keeps Linux from going mainstream.
First of all, Android is Linux and it is mainstream. It's as mainstream as it can possibly be. I think it might be the most used OS in the world now.
Second, assuming you are referring to the desktop, it's not the over customization that holds Linux back. It's two things: 1) The lack of popular software. There is no MS Office on Linux. There is no iTunes. There is no Photoshop, etc. Yes, you can say "X is a great alternative to Y", and that's probably true. But why take the time and effort to learn X when you already know Y and all your previous work is already done in Y and everyone you know uses Y. You know Y. You like Y. Y isn't available on Linux. And your computer came with windows anyway. Stick with Windows and use Y.
2) Your computer came with Windows. Many people don't even bother installing a new browser. Asking them to install a new OS is WAY TOO MUCH to ask. So, since few people are going through the trouble to install a new OS, the makers of Y aren't going to spend millions of $$$ investing in a high quality version of Y. Perpetuating the problem.
The analogy breaks down when you reach the limits of the supply. For gold to be traded, it doesn't need a massive volunteer computational network expending thousands, if not millions, of dollars of processing power running 24/7. Bitcoin does. When the last bitcoin is mined, then there will be no incentive to volunteer your data center to process the transactions.
At least Apollo hoaxers can't physically just purchase a plane ticket and literally go to the moon by themselves. "Flat earthers" (which I still don't believe actually exist) could simply prove their theory by getting their pilot license and flying in a straight line for a few hours. None of them have ever done that.
Ok, an honest question about the sustainability of bitcoin.
Two features of bitcoin seem to be unsustainable: 1) The complicated processing necessary to make bitcoin work is rewarded by "mining" new coins. People use their computers to work for money. 2) The ultimate number of bitcoins is limited and "mining" will get harder and harder until there are no more coins.
So, what happens when that last coin is mined? What incentive will there be then for people to volunteer computer power to make the exponentially more complicated bit coin system work? Seems like, after there are no more coins, the system is going to collapse.
Ok? Assuming "flat earthers" really exist and aren't just Russians trolling us (I don't believe they actually exist), do you think not having their flat earth projection on Google Maps is going to sway their opinions at all?
A better idea then UBI is just to have the government build inexpensive housing units. Everyone gets a free apartment if you want it. It's not going to be in the best area of town. It's going to have a lot of bad characters and other problems. And the commute is probably going to suck. It's the Projects. But it's a free apartment. That's what "free" buys you. If you want something better, then go shop in the private market and pay private market prices.
We should have a similar system for food and medicine. Every human should have a free apartment with utilities, free food, and free basic medical care. Free is not top-of-the-line. Free is free. If you want better, then go buy it on the private market.
Yes, we will have to greatly tax the wealthy to pay for UBI. Sure that will cause some decline in the sale prices of the super-rich apartments, as there will be fewer super-rich people competing for those apartments because some of them will be taxed out of the market.
But most of us aren't competing for multi-million $ apartments.
So, think about what you are saying when you, correctly, point out that: "some commodities will experience a rise in demand for them, but equally others - in this case the apartments that people who want to move into these ones - will see a fall in demand."
What demand is going to be falling to see price decreases? What demand is going to be rising?
But demand will increase. That's exactly what will happen. Consider apartments as an easy example:
Say there is a nice area of town with nice apartments, a nice coffee shop down the street, easy access to transit, and good schools. Naturally lots and lots of people want to live there, many more people then there are units to rent. So naturally prices for those apartments are going to be high -supply and demand. Now you give everyone in the city an extra $1000 a month. Great, now more people can afford to live in the high end district, right? Of course not. Now that there are more people competing for the still limited available units, apartment owners are going to start raising rates. Ultimately, that extra $1000 didn't help anyone. Markets are going to optimize themselves.
UBI is stupid. If you give everyone on the planet $1000 a month, then all of the prices for everything on the planet will just rise to match. Markets will always optimize price by themselves. Rent and food and healthcare and internet service will just rise to match. You aren't going to be fixing anything.
Really all I read was: "Multi-hundred billion dollar company, joins up with another multi-hundred billion dollar company to go after an different multi-hundred billion dollar company. "
If you don't mind, I'll just take one of those hundred billions and you guys go to town on each other. You guys won't miss it.
There are a few websites -particular specialty government websites- that don't work right with this browser or that one, but for the most part, everything works fine regardless of browser.
I actually haven't thought about smart tvs tracking your viewing and phoning the info home. Not surprised at all, and don't really care seeing as how I don't have one, but never considered it.
Slashdot Mirror
I did know about the Caterpillar phone. Yes, it's awesome. Yes, I want one but they are hard to find if you don't pay full price from the manufacturer. (If you are paying full price for your phone you are a fool. You can get most any non-iPhone/Samsung phone for half price 6-months after it's release on the secondary market.)
Well.... The iPhone does come in a "small" size. I assumed you were talking about Android phones, which almost all > 5"
The problem with a "smaller" phone is that most consumers will expect it to also come with a smaller price. a 3" phone basically costs the same thing to produce as a 6" phone, and will be sold at the same price.
This is why I think Motorola's mod solution is pretty great. If you think there is a market for those things, you can build it. I have a Moto Z2 and a 360 camera mod. It's really a game changer. I wish Motorola would opensource their "mod" developments so the program could really bloom.
The Motorola Z is the only interesting hardware out there. The shatter-proof screen and the mods make it a wildly under-rated device.
All of the rest are barely innovating on anything hardware wise.
"Brendan has previously suggested that adding bugs to experimental software code could help with ultimately winding up with programs that have fewer vulnerabilities."
This is not correct. His theory seems to be that you will get fewer exploits. The number of vulnerabilities will remain constant.
That's not what keeps Linux from going mainstream.
First of all, Android is Linux and it is mainstream. It's as mainstream as it can possibly be. I think it might be the most used OS in the world now.
Second, assuming you are referring to the desktop, it's not the over customization that holds Linux back. It's two things:
1) The lack of popular software. There is no MS Office on Linux. There is no iTunes. There is no Photoshop, etc. Yes, you can say "X is a great alternative to Y", and that's probably true. But why take the time and effort to learn X when you already know Y and all your previous work is already done in Y and everyone you know uses Y. You know Y. You like Y. Y isn't available on Linux. And your computer came with windows anyway. Stick with Windows and use Y.
2) Your computer came with Windows. Many people don't even bother installing a new browser. Asking them to install a new OS is WAY TOO MUCH to ask. So, since few people are going through the trouble to install a new OS, the makers of Y aren't going to spend millions of $$$ investing in a high quality version of Y. Perpetuating the problem.
I was saying you could just fly around the earth. But I'm not really debating logic with you. There is no logic to debate in the flat-earth theory.
The analogy breaks down when you reach the limits of the supply. For gold to be traded, it doesn't need a massive volunteer computational network expending thousands, if not millions, of dollars of processing power running 24/7. Bitcoin does. When the last bitcoin is mined, then there will be no incentive to volunteer your data center to process the transactions.
At least Apollo hoaxers can't physically just purchase a plane ticket and literally go to the moon by themselves. "Flat earthers" (which I still don't believe actually exist) could simply prove their theory by getting their pilot license and flying in a straight line for a few hours. None of them have ever done that.
Yeah. Still don't believe they exist. No one is really that stupid. No one. She was played by a unreasonably devoted group of trolls.
Ok, an honest question about the sustainability of bitcoin.
Two features of bitcoin seem to be unsustainable:
1) The complicated processing necessary to make bitcoin work is rewarded by "mining" new coins. People use their computers to work for money.
2) The ultimate number of bitcoins is limited and "mining" will get harder and harder until there are no more coins.
So, what happens when that last coin is mined? What incentive will there be then for people to volunteer computer power to make the exponentially more complicated bit coin system work? Seems like, after there are no more coins, the system is going to collapse.
Ok? Assuming "flat earthers" really exist and aren't just Russians trolling us (I don't believe they actually exist), do you think not having their flat earth projection on Google Maps is going to sway their opinions at all?
It would be fun (if unnecessary and nerdy) if Google would let the user select any map projection they want, or even create their own.
... "on average" every one in the bar is a billionaire.
(see "earn an average of $135,000" for more bad statistics.)
A better idea then UBI is just to have the government build inexpensive housing units. Everyone gets a free apartment if you want it. It's not going to be in the best area of town. It's going to have a lot of bad characters and other problems. And the commute is probably going to suck. It's the Projects. But it's a free apartment. That's what "free" buys you. If you want something better, then go shop in the private market and pay private market prices.
We should have a similar system for food and medicine. Every human should have a free apartment with utilities, free food, and free basic medical care. Free is not top-of-the-line. Free is free. If you want better, then go buy it on the private market.
Yes, we will have to greatly tax the wealthy to pay for UBI. Sure that will cause some decline in the sale prices of the super-rich apartments, as there will be fewer super-rich people competing for those apartments because some of them will be taxed out of the market.
But most of us aren't competing for multi-million $ apartments.
So, think about what you are saying when you, correctly, point out that: "some commodities will experience a rise in demand for them, but equally others - in this case the apartments that people who want to move into these ones - will see a fall in demand."
What demand is going to be falling to see price decreases? What demand is going to be rising?
But demand will increase. That's exactly what will happen. Consider apartments as an easy example:
Say there is a nice area of town with nice apartments, a nice coffee shop down the street, easy access to transit, and good schools. Naturally lots and lots of people want to live there, many more people then there are units to rent. So naturally prices for those apartments are going to be high -supply and demand. Now you give everyone in the city an extra $1000 a month. Great, now more people can afford to live in the high end district, right? Of course not. Now that there are more people competing for the still limited available units, apartment owners are going to start raising rates. Ultimately, that extra $1000 didn't help anyone. Markets are going to optimize themselves.
regardless of the path in front of me that day, I am happy that my chosen profession doesn't involve giving tiny hand jobs to mice.
UBI is stupid. If you give everyone on the planet $1000 a month, then all of the prices for everything on the planet will just rise to match. Markets will always optimize price by themselves. Rent and food and healthcare and internet service will just rise to match. You aren't going to be fixing anything.
eww.
Really all I read was: "Multi-hundred billion dollar company, joins up with another multi-hundred billion dollar company to go after an different multi-hundred billion dollar company. "
If you don't mind, I'll just take one of those hundred billions and you guys go to town on each other. You guys won't miss it.
There are a few websites -particular specialty government websites- that don't work right with this browser or that one, but for the most part, everything works fine regardless of browser.
So who cares?
Next you are going to tell me that my car is phoning home about all my driving data.
Why yes, I did sign up for the Progressive thingy that gives me a discount. What does that have anything to do with anything?
I actually haven't thought about smart tvs tracking your viewing and phoning the info home. Not surprised at all, and don't really care seeing as how I don't have one, but never considered it.