If you're in a coal-fired powerstation area, then it's still a major win. There's mercury in the bulbs, but mercury is released by burning coal and the power savings more than outweigh what's in the bulb.
From what I understand, lighting tech change is the biggest easiest win when reducing power consumption that doesn't significantly adversely affect the end user. You can imagine that several 100W bulbs in a house all going down to 25W CFL is going to add up pretty quickly, and there's always more lightbulbs around than you think. Asking someone not to wash clothes as often or heat their house is potentially a bigger saving, but nobody's going to do it.
Google was invited to join this group, but declined.
Of course... what would it have got them? It would have given Google themselves protection, while leaving the manufacturers using Android (and who Google need) out in the cold and vulnerable. Google being part of that racket would have helped Android not a bit, they either needed to control all of them and use them to protect their partners, or not be involved at all.
Google is a for profit company like any other one.
This is what's sad... that we're down to saying that a for-profit company is necessarily like any other. Companies are run by *people*, and those people can choose what they do. A corporation does not always have to act in an immoral way in favour of profit.
They are not saints, you're right, but they have been acting consistently in a better way than their contemporaries are.
I get pissed when you hear programmers say "Oh memory is cheap, we don't need to optimize!"
Preach on, brother. I'd love to see how some of these guys would function in the embedded world, where you often get 1K of flash and 128 bytes of RAM to work with.
Eh... It's all down to how much time you get to create your program and how much it has to do. Embedded has to do much less, and gets longer to do it than desktop / server work. Yeah, I'd love to optimise everything but there's a great big list of business requirements here and a deadline, and an already-complex codebase that needs more features added. Embedded and server have *totally* different challenges.
Shhh... You don't want to mess with a good old fashion outrage with facts.
Wait now, the only facts we know is that people who have paid for permanent content have had it removed from their devices. That is bad form, even if it was just a mistake and the only reason we are vulnerable to this 'mistake' is because the systems are biased in favour of the content providers.
That it was a mistake is just what Amazon say, and certainly can't be considered a fact. Perhaps it was, but since they've pulled this sort of shit before, outrage isn't really unexpected. We're at a stage where we believe this sort of stuff could be done.
I'm actually the guy who posted first and this is completely incorrect. The reason I post anonymously is because my browser has trouble supporting cookies.
For those who don't know... digital tv is this thing that carries the same mindless, retarded, idiotic, uninteresting programs as analog tv, only it's digital.
I get the guys in pain, that his dad is in pain but if his mind is "98%" gone as he says then his dad is suffering less than he is. If his dad had a living will requesting to not be left on life support than it likely wouldn't be an issue. There are legal ways around assisted suicide, it just seems Scott would rather ignore them and point fingers like every other douche on the planet.
Since we're using a person's vocation to decide whether or not their opinion is valid, what do you do for a living?
Well, I don't write a fucking comic strip for a living, that's for sure.
A device that tempts a bicyclist into doing something stupid like taking his eyes off the road while cycling is a stupid, dangerous, utterly retarded technology that nobody with a three digit IQ would ever use.
And yet most of us do now accept the value in car GPS systems... so the difference between a driver and a cyclist is...? In fact, a car driver is far more dangerous with his eyes off the road.
I don't think it's intelligent behaviour, I think it's snobbish. "I don't want a technology therefore I think you shouldn't have it either."
If you see the context of my post, then I'm mostly agreeing with you. Also, not talking about accident-safety but am-I-going-to-get-stabbed safety, which are very different things...
Get over yourself. The thing about biking is getting from point A to point B. If it's not, you're doing it wrong. However, getting from point A to point B is a mostly solved problem - do your groundwork and plan, before you even set off. For another 9, have something to refer to when the route doesn't match your plan. It's worked for centuries.
"Cadence", sheesh, I almost feel embarassed to have never had a road-going vehicle with more than 2 wheels in my 3 decades of adult life. And you wonder why Critical Mass Porto Alegre happened?
Ahh.. the typical/. lack of empathy or imagination. Here's some situations that you clearly can't be bothered to think of:
- You've moved to a new city, or are going somewhere in a city that you haven't been before. Most people cannot memorise a whole city street plan.
- You've found yourself in a section of the world where you really don't want to stop (lots of traffic, or the locals don't look too friendly).
- Why should I plan, do groundwork? We don't have to! We have the technology! For a technology site there's a massive luddite community on here.
- Fine, you don't like 'cadence', how about 'momentum'. Going up a long hill, tired, then stopping is a massive ballache since you lose all the speed you had.
Lots of things have worked for centuries, doesn't mean we can't do them better.
An app that needs to update every week is not from a reliable developer.
Well I'm not sure I think that's necessarily fair. We update about every 2 weeks, because we have a team of 6 developers, adding features and squashing bugs. When you have a demanding business running to keep ahead of the competition, and new devices & new frameworks to keep on top of, it's not particularly unlikely to have an update pretty often. Even bugfixing alone, there's quite a few problems that you personally will never see as it is an issue on someone else's devices, but you have to get the update because everyone does.
Slashdot Mirror
And here's what Apple smartphones looked like in 2006
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_404
Another Desktop??? Can't we focus on getting ONE right?
Define 'right' for all users.
If you're in a coal-fired powerstation area, then it's still a major win. There's mercury in the bulbs, but mercury is released by burning coal and the power savings more than outweigh what's in the bulb.
From what I understand, lighting tech change is the biggest easiest win when reducing power consumption that doesn't significantly adversely affect the end user. You can imagine that several 100W bulbs in a house all going down to 25W CFL is going to add up pretty quickly, and there's always more lightbulbs around than you think. Asking someone not to wash clothes as often or heat their house is potentially a bigger saving, but nobody's going to do it.
Google was invited to join this group, but declined.
Of course... what would it have got them? It would have given Google themselves protection, while leaving the manufacturers using Android (and who Google need) out in the cold and vulnerable. Google being part of that racket would have helped Android not a bit, they either needed to control all of them and use them to protect their partners, or not be involved at all.
Google is a for profit company like any other one.
This is what's sad... that we're down to saying that a for-profit company is necessarily like any other. Companies are run by *people*, and those people can choose what they do. A corporation does not always have to act in an immoral way in favour of profit.
They are not saints, you're right, but they have been acting consistently in a better way than their contemporaries are.
Preaching to the converted... copyright has it's problems (mainly around its length), but it's an absolutely necessary construct.
Then let us all behave like you, and then there will be no strings of bits to copy anymore.
I get pissed when you hear programmers say "Oh memory is cheap, we don't need to optimize!"
Preach on, brother. I'd love to see how some of these guys would function in the embedded world, where you often get 1K of flash and 128 bytes of RAM to work with.
Eh... It's all down to how much time you get to create your program and how much it has to do. Embedded has to do much less, and gets longer to do it than desktop / server work. Yeah, I'd love to optimise everything but there's a great big list of business requirements here and a deadline, and an already-complex codebase that needs more features added. Embedded and server have *totally* different challenges.
Meh, all I can hear is "waaah waaah Give me my free stuff"
Slashdot IS the 1%: You need just $34,000 annual income to be in the global elite.
Oh good! Thanks! You've convinced me that we need to do nothing about inequality!
I presume you'll access internet through someone else's connection, too.
Are you high? What are you talking about?
Shhh... You don't want to mess with a good old fashion outrage with facts.
Wait now, the only facts we know is that people who have paid for permanent content have had it removed from their devices. That is bad form, even if it was just a mistake and the only reason we are vulnerable to this 'mistake' is because the systems are biased in favour of the content providers.
That it was a mistake is just what Amazon say, and certainly can't be considered a fact. Perhaps it was, but since they've pulled this sort of shit before, outrage isn't really unexpected. We're at a stage where we believe this sort of stuff could be done.
I'm actually the guy who posted first and this is completely incorrect. The reason I post anonymously is because my browser has trouble supporting cookies.
Argh this is the problem when everybody posts AC!
How about Google provides the cash to the city, the city
buys up the AT&T poles (via eminent domain).
Bit of a sledgehammer to crack a nut, don't you think?
For those who don't know... digital tv is this thing that carries the same mindless, retarded, idiotic, uninteresting programs as analog tv, only it's digital.
Perhaps you're watching the wrong shows...
(or are you this guy http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesnt-own-a-tel,429/ ?)
Yay! Missing the point entirely!
Since we're using a person's vocation to decide whether or not their opinion is valid, what do you do for a living?
Well, I don't write a fucking comic strip for a living, that's for sure.
Good retort...
A device that tempts a bicyclist into doing something stupid like taking his eyes off the road while cycling is a stupid, dangerous, utterly retarded technology that nobody with a three digit IQ would ever use.
And yet most of us do now accept the value in car GPS systems... so the difference between a driver and a cyclist is...? In fact, a car driver is far more dangerous with his eyes off the road.
I don't think it's intelligent behaviour, I think it's snobbish. "I don't want a technology therefore I think you shouldn't have it either."
I'm assuming you're joking, because the alternative is that you just said something colossally idiotic...
If you see the context of my post, then I'm mostly agreeing with you. Also, not talking about accident-safety but am-I-going-to-get-stabbed safety, which are very different things...
You wanna learn this? https://www.google.co.uk/maps/preview#!q=london&data=!1m4!1m3!1d69887!2d-0.1009979!3d51.5125128!4m15!2m14!1m13!1s0x47d8a00baf21de75%3A0x52963a5addd52a99!3m8!1m3!1d279450!2d-0.1015987!3d51.5286416!3m2!1i2560!2i1351!4f13.1!4m2!3d51.5112139!4d-0.1198244
Yup, simple...
Also, please mark on the map which areas are dangerous. Oh, what, you can't can you because you don't know that ahead-of-time?
Get over yourself. The thing about biking is getting from point A to point B. If it's not, you're doing it wrong. However, getting from point A to point B is a mostly solved problem - do your groundwork and plan, before you even set off. For another 9, have something to refer to when the route doesn't match your plan. It's worked for centuries.
"Cadence", sheesh, I almost feel embarassed to have never had a road-going vehicle with more than 2 wheels in my 3 decades of adult life. And you wonder why Critical Mass Porto Alegre happened?
Ahh.. the typical /. lack of empathy or imagination. Here's some situations that you clearly can't be bothered to think of:
- You've moved to a new city, or are going somewhere in a city that you haven't been before. Most people cannot memorise a whole city street plan.
- You've found yourself in a section of the world where you really don't want to stop (lots of traffic, or the locals don't look too friendly).
- Why should I plan, do groundwork? We don't have to! We have the technology! For a technology site there's a massive luddite community on here.
- Fine, you don't like 'cadence', how about 'momentum'. Going up a long hill, tired, then stopping is a massive ballache since you lose all the speed you had.
Lots of things have worked for centuries, doesn't mean we can't do them better.
Seriously? WTF did Groklaw do that would warrant such a thing?
That is a terrible way of looking at it...
An app that needs to update every week is not from a reliable developer.
Well I'm not sure I think that's necessarily fair. We update about every 2 weeks, because we have a team of 6 developers, adding features and squashing bugs. When you have a demanding business running to keep ahead of the competition, and new devices & new frameworks to keep on top of, it's not particularly unlikely to have an update pretty often. Even bugfixing alone, there's quite a few problems that you personally will never see as it is an issue on someone else's devices, but you have to get the update because everyone does.