Paper. It never goes away. That's interesting but I'm not sure what to make of it. Angry people will say it is an abomination and needs to go away by force. But tactile input media seems important. On the otherhande I used to never think a kindle could replace a paperback. Now I prefer the kindle.
What I do miss however is that it screws up my photograpic recall. I recall facts and images in equations in text books in part, by where they are on the page. The kindle eradicates that so my recall goes down. I don't care about that for pulp fiction but for text and jouranl articles it matters.
My fingers also remember what pages things were near.
The other nice thing about paper is that grouping effect. You dont' just get what you were looking for but also things you might be interested in that are related.
We'ver lost that with academic search engine. It used to be that half the value of reading a journal was the article after the one you searched for was more important.
The sole purpose of voting is to convince the losers they lost a fair election, so the winner's can govern with a mandate.
to be convincing There are only three things about any voting system that are important 1. the secret ballot 2. THat everyone can see how it works and and thus see how it's secured 3. That there's a way to recount that is traceable to the voters own hand written ballot.
Anything else is dross. Crytposystems, proof your vote was counted, etc, all nice but not important if you lose any of the above 3.
All these online voting systems utterly destroy the secret ballot and the also harm the other two.
The problem with any machine vision recognition system is that there is really no way of looking at a still image (or even a still scene with depth) and/knowing/ which Objects are discrete and independent
This is not a problem. If you have enough data, the machine will find the patterns.
You are solving the wrong problem with this data abundance. The problem is knowing if the machine learned the right pattern. The surprise is that in many cases it's actually harder to know if the right pattern has been learned than to actually learn the right pattern. Mind bending but there's some quantitative proofs about that called "the no-free-lunch theorem for generalization". The machine will always find a pattern and with enough data it's use of the pattern will defeat your ability to crossvalidate if it learned the right pattern.
One day you will see the queen of hearts and enter a suggestible hypnotic state, put on an elephant costume, and walk across a road and be run down by the Uber that had a pathological classification caused by seeing elephants in the middle of the road.
Entropy. Compression. Same thing. The whole world is thermodynamics and your state of knowledge about the world is also limited by thermodynamics. There will never be a computer that can predict the future of the universe before the universe arrives simply because you can't store a representation of the universe inside the universe itself.
Lossy Compression is therefore how we get around that and be able to compute/think/predict what an approximate future state of the universe is.
What the goal is to align the losses of the compression into the input space which does not exist. For example, if there is no possibly image of a living room of size smaller than an elephant that could contain the elephant then any mapping of images with and without elephants to the same compressed reprensention is a good compression. To say it differently the compresses state is a many to one mapping back to the original state. If for every compressed state there is only one realizable original state then it's invertable. THe images in the original space that could never happen are also mapped to the same compressed state but because they could never exist we lose nothing by ignoring them.
Thus compression and prediction are the same thing.
AI fails when it either over-compresses to a space too small to hold every realizable state. Or it compresses poorly so that in unnessarily conflates two possible real states. For example, the uber car that thought the woman in the road was blowing trash.
On the otherhand, it's often very valuable to overcompress as long as you are tolerant of mistakes on the prediction. That is, the uber car in question was able to do a great job of driving most of the time because it made fact choices that were nearly always good enough. The Cheetah can't just chase the antelope, it needs to try to guess and cut corners a bit. As long as most of it's guesses are good it wins. In the case of the cheetah, a mistake just means a missed meal, which is tolerable. But in the case of the uber driver or an ICBM nuclear missile failsafe system, then our tolerance for error is a bit lower.
Thus a little overcompression is acutally good for generalizing rather than parroting. A lot of overcompression leads to bad predictions.
It's a cookbook. And since this whole article is merely about extraction of semantic meaning in ambiguous cases, then I will assert that the phrase "As someone who has worked in A.I. for decades" is literally a statement about the matrix and their occupancy within in.
And please could you take a step back because you are pixelating in my vision and I don't like the reminder that you are not real
Sony engineer: We cane make it smaller if we leave out the recording function. Sony marketing Exec: No one will want a tiny cassette tape player without a record function. Someone decided to try--
Apple removed the floppy and every howled.
taking away things that have always been there isn't always a bad thing,
Consumer reports did the same sort of tests and reports the opposite finding at least on the iphone X series.
What did they do differently? well consumer reports uses a robotic finger to run the test suite the same way that a human finger would. The Washington pose it appears used programatic control to drive the phone.
It appears that perhaps the User interface engineers have discovered how to let the phone rest between finger taps or to anticipate what finger taps follow others such that it actually improves power efficiencny.
Now as for your comment about case modularity. Well it's a nice thought and the argument makes sense down to the point where it defeats the overall objective. Here things have scaled down to the point where the case is taking up a significant portion of the volume. Having two cases is nuts when you could have a bigger battery in the same volume.
One could imagine having a replaceable cover on a phone without a structural inner case.
Yes, yawn, camelid antibodies. To me the big deal here is they are doing Gene therapy to get the host to make them. Now that's kinda edgy dangerous territory.
Perhaps GM is thinking of putting scooters into cars. Have a scooter charging station and a compartment you can access easily without shifting all the junk. But then the problem comes if someone steals your personal scooter. So now you have On-star to keep track of it?
The indictment alleges conspiracy to steal secrets. Which is slightly different than actually having stolen secrets. Thus the company needs to actually dispute this by saying "we didn't plan to steal secrets" or "the stolen secrets we received were not known to be stolen by us". Simply saying they didn't steal the secrets isn't a denial.
the path here is indirect and while showing the pattern of a conspiracy has many layers of companies fronting this operation. It's not entirely unlike how Uber ended up with Waymo desgins
According to the indictment, the defendants were engaged in a conspiracy to steal the trade secrets of Micron Technology, Inc. (Micron), a leader in the global semiconductor industry specializing in the advanced research, development, and manufacturing of memory products, including dynamic random-access memory (DRAM). DRAM is a leading-edge memory storage device used in computer electronics. Micron is the only United States-based company that manufactures DRAM. According to the indictment, Micron maintains a significant competitive advantage in this field due in large part from its intellectual property, including its trade secrets that include detailed, confidential information pertaining to the design, development, and manufacturing of advanced DRAM products.
Prior to the events described in the indictment, the PRC did not possess DRAM technology, and the Central Government and State Council of the PRC publicly identified the development of DRAM and other microelectronics technology as a national economic priority. The criminal defendants are United Microelectronics Corporation (“UMC”), a Taiwan semiconductor foundry; Fujian Jinhua Integrated Circuit, Co., Ltd. (“Jinhua'”), a state-owned enterprise of the PRC; and three Taiwan nationals: Chen Zhengkun, a.k.a. Stephen Chen, age 55; He Jianting, a.k.a. J.T. Ho, age 42; and Wang Yungming, a.k.a. Kenny Wang, age 44. UMC is a publicly listed semiconductor foundry company traded on the New York Stock Exchange; is headquartered in Taiwan; and has offices worldwide, including in Sunnyvale, California. UMC mass produces integrated-circuit logic products based on designs and technology developed and provided by its customers. Jinhua is a state-owned enterprise of the PRC, funded entirely by the Chinese government, and established in February 2016 for the sole purpose of designing, developing, and manufacturing DRAM.
According to the indictment, Chen was a General Manager and Chairman of an electronics corporation that Micron acquired in 2013. Chen then became the president of a Micron subsidiary in Taiwan, Micron Memory Taiwan (“MMT”), responsible for manufacturing at least one of Micron’s DRAM chips. Chen resigned from MMT in July 2015 and began working at UMC almost immediately. While at UMC, Chen arranged a cooperation agreement between UMC and Fujian Jinhua whereby, with funding from Fujian Jinhua, UMC would transfer DRAM technology to Fujian Jinhua to mass-produce. The technology would be jointly shared by both UMC and Fujian Jinhua. Chen later became the President of Jinhua and was put in charge of its DRAM production facility.
While at UMC, Chen recruited numerous MMT employees, including Ho and Wang, to join him at UMC. Prior to leaving MMT, Ho and Wang both stole and brought to UMC several Micron trade secrets related to the design and manufacture of DRAM. Wang downloaded over 900 Micron confidential and proprietary files before he left MMT and stored them on USB external hard drives or in personal cloud storage, from where he could access the technology while working at UMC.
in 1968, The 90-minute presentation essentially demonstrated almost all the fundamental elements of modern personal computing: windows, hypertext, graphics, efficient navigation and command input, video conferencing, the computer mouse, word processing, dynamic file linking, revision control, and a collaborative real-time editor (collaborative work). it featured video conference, picture-in-a-picture, an early form of windowing, electret head set microphones, the GUI. Engelbart's presentation was the first to publicly demonstrate all of these elements in a single system
There's an expression that says Pioneers get the arrows, settlers get the land. But there's a third layer to this. For there to be Pioneers first there had to be some new invention that let people press farther into unknown regions than they had before.
Apple is both a pioneer and a settler. Their inventive side is less to do with the techical invention but the invention of a use for it.
while people will quibble here's a list of things that apple didn't invent but did arguably pioneer and settle the us of.
Dynamic memory over static memory. Memory mapped graphics over fixed graphics cards (ironically, in the age of NVIDIA we have reverse this, but it was what let us switch from kludged dumb terminal fixed width text to real graphics in games and fonts.) software replacing hardware (e.g. soft sectored floppy's, fonts over character generators, software serial over UAARTS, ) small connectors and universal use of Serial ports over parallel ports and single use ports. (apple desktop bus for example) Postscript printers. (first major adoption was apple). The mouse and WYSIWIG. (doug englebart showed us this in the mother of all demos).
and so on.
By the way if you have never watched Englebarts Mother of all Demos it's a mind blowing experience. His team basically invented everything computers did for the next 40 years. Only recently have we gone beyond polishing the patterns his team laid out.
But it was apple that pioneered to use cases that Englbart and then Parc never did. Then they settled the land by selling integrated soltuions for those use cases at the right price that individuals could buy them/
Over my life I've noticed that every sports specialty store gravitates from selling cool hardware to having most of its retail space filled with clothing. The same pattern has been replicated in the internet age too. Geek gear stores grow, expand into new products but the mature end-state is the clothing store.
The reason I think is the product of repeat-sales* volume * margins / up-front-inventory cost is the highest on clothing so once you discover how to include clothing in your store it just takes over like cancer.
Look at REI as great example.
iphones ate apple. And services will eat iphones.
But of course the reason you go to the store and not another clothing store is specialty items that are now set decorations. REI was originally formed to import specialty hardware not made in the USA at cheaper prices than individuals could get it. It still has all the drool worthy gear and expert displays but the prices are barely competitive and when you check out most of the most of the bill is for the clothing you happened to see while you were drooling over the brass candle lantern or the ultra light titanium coke spoon.
So the thing that's truly amazing about an Apple retail store is that it's still all about the hardware. Kinda amazing they do that. it shows you where there heart is and what their connection to the consumer is. Amazon and apple can both sell you music but, for some people at least, the lure is deep love of the fit and finish of the apple crafted gadgets.
So You will know that apple has lost the thread when it starts making most of it's money selling threads. For now, that's not the case.
Now when it comes to payments, pyschology is really important. There's two ways of looking at this that I think matter a lot in intent. One intent is to lure people to pay over time so they don't notice how expensive something is. The flip side of that intent is to allow them to get something now rather than save for it. Saving has the hazard that any accumulation of money becomes a temptation rather than a planned use later. So getting people into a home or a car now gets them something that is less of a waste of money and something they need. conversely 15 easy payments for the latest ginzu knife or thigh-master is just a trick.
For me, I buy ski passes rather than ski tickets. the goal is not to save money it's to not worry about money and enjoy the skiiing. When I have a pass I don't have to ski 9 to 4 to "get my money's worth". I ski 9 to 12 till the powder is all used up then I go home and leave the hard pack for the ticket buyers to suffer on to get their day's money's worth. I probably ski fewer hours in total when I'm buying passes but I sure as heck enjoy it more. The same is true with health insurance. I found that when I had high co-pays and high-deductibles that sometimes I put off seeing the doctor when I knew that was a risk. SO I now buy higher priced plans that lower those. Economically I pay more than if I tuffed out the deductibles.. But psychologically I'm motivated by by health needs not by my marginal costs.
there is a nice looping symmetry here. 1990 - ARM is founded as a spin-off from Acorn and Apple, after the two companies started collaborating on the ARM processor as part of the development of Apple's new Newton computer system.
Apple shed ARM after the newton failed. Then after tablets came back the ARM became the key. Now apple has made the best ARM hardware implementation.
Next step is for the tablet to grow a keyboard and it's the new Acorn-- a light weight computer. Someone should put an Acorn emulator app on it.
could you explain this non-blocking versus blocking paradigm's implications more. Also I don't quite see why I'd want to have a server and UI on the same thread.
Macs are not for average people. They are for people whose time is valuable and thus who want computers that they don't have to screw around with. These people also are not concerned about repairing or putting win-modems or sound-blaster cards in their computers and having to screw around with choosing non-conflicting interrupts. Yes, I know those interrupt nighmare days are long past and windows isn't a joke anymore. But I'm just making the point there's always been a market for people who want their computer to be a reliable appliance not an experiment in itself. Macs are not overpriced for what they deliver. You just may not want one yourself.
the benchmark is geekbench so it's going to be a non-trivial speed measurement and not just integers. But it is the geekbench cpu benchmark not the geekbench computer benchmark so it's trying to test the processor speed not the integrated computer speed or real-world calculation that uses other parts of the computer.
Slashdot Mirror
Paper. It never goes away. That's interesting but I'm not sure what to make of it. Angry people will say it is an abomination and needs to go away by force. But tactile input media seems important. On the otherhande I used to never think a kindle could replace a paperback. Now I prefer the kindle.
What I do miss however is that it screws up my photograpic recall. I recall facts and images in equations in text books in part, by where they are on the page. The kindle eradicates that so my recall goes down. I don't care about that for pulp fiction but for text and jouranl articles it matters.
My fingers also remember what pages things were near.
The other nice thing about paper is that grouping effect. You dont' just get what you were looking for but also things you might be interested in that are related.
We'ver lost that with academic search engine. It used to be that half the value of reading a journal was the article after the one you searched for was more important.
Explain how the ledger secures anything if the ballots must remain anonymous. And the method has to be not complicate or no one will believe it.
The sole purpose of voting is to convince the losers they lost a fair election, so the winner's can govern with a mandate.
to be convincing There are only three things about any voting system that are important
1. the secret ballot
2. THat everyone can see how it works and and thus see how it's secured
3. That there's a way to recount that is traceable to the voters own hand written ballot.
Anything else is dross. Crytposystems, proof your vote was counted, etc, all nice but not important if you lose any of the above 3.
All these online voting systems utterly destroy the secret ballot and the also harm the other two.
Sheer stupidity.
The problem with any machine vision recognition system is that there is really no way of looking at a still image (or even a still scene with depth) and /knowing/ which Objects are discrete and independent
This is not a problem. If you have enough data, the machine will find the patterns.
You are solving the wrong problem with this data abundance. The problem is knowing if the machine learned the right pattern. The surprise is that in many cases it's actually harder to know if the right pattern has been learned than to actually learn the right pattern. Mind bending but there's some quantitative proofs about that called "the no-free-lunch theorem for generalization". The machine will always find a pattern and with enough data it's use of the pattern will defeat your ability to crossvalidate if it learned the right pattern.
One day you will see the queen of hearts and enter a suggestible hypnotic state, put on an elephant costume, and walk across a road and be run down by the Uber that had a pathological classification caused by seeing elephants in the middle of the road.
Entropy. Compression. Same thing. The whole world is thermodynamics and your state of knowledge about the world is also limited by thermodynamics. There will never be a computer that can predict the future of the universe before the universe arrives simply because you can't store a representation of the universe inside the universe itself.
Lossy Compression is therefore how we get around that and be able to compute/think/predict what an approximate future state of the universe is.
What the goal is to align the losses of the compression into the input space which does not exist. For example, if there is no possibly image of a living room of size smaller than an elephant that could contain the elephant then any mapping of images with and without elephants to the same compressed reprensention is a good compression. To say it differently the compresses state is a many to one mapping back to the original state. If for every compressed state there is only one realizable original state then it's invertable. THe images in the original space that could never happen are also mapped to the same compressed state but because they could never exist we lose nothing by ignoring them.
Thus compression and prediction are the same thing.
AI fails when it either over-compresses to a space too small to hold every realizable state. Or it compresses poorly so that in unnessarily conflates two possible real states. For example, the uber car that thought the woman in the road was blowing trash.
On the otherhand, it's often very valuable to overcompress as long as you are tolerant of mistakes on the prediction. That is, the uber car in question was able to do a great job of driving most of the time because it made fact choices that were nearly always good enough. The Cheetah can't just chase the antelope, it needs to try to guess and cut corners a bit. As long as most of it's guesses are good it wins. In the case of the cheetah, a mistake just means a missed meal, which is tolerable. But in the case of the uber driver or an ICBM nuclear missile failsafe system, then our tolerance for error is a bit lower.
Thus a little overcompression is acutally good for generalizing rather than parroting.
A lot of overcompression leads to bad predictions.
It's a cookbook. And since this whole article is merely about extraction of semantic meaning in ambiguous cases, then I will assert that the phrase "As someone who has worked in A.I. for decades" is literally a statement about the matrix and their occupancy within in.
And please could you take a step back because you are pixelating in my vision and I don't like the reminder that you are not real
It can do anything But no one can prove if a conversation will end. The halting condition is Hitler.
Sony engineer: We cane make it smaller if we leave out the recording function.
Sony marketing Exec: No one will want a tiny cassette tape player without a record function.
Someone decided to try--
Apple removed the floppy and every howled.
taking away things that have always been there isn't always a bad thing,
sunspots have risen too.
Consumer reports did the same sort of tests and reports the opposite finding at least on the iphone X series.
What did they do differently? well consumer reports uses a robotic finger to run the test suite the same way that a human finger would. The Washington pose it appears used programatic control to drive the phone.
It appears that perhaps the User interface engineers have discovered how to let the phone rest between finger taps or to anticipate what finger taps follow others such that it actually improves power efficiencny.
Now as for your comment about case modularity. Well it's a nice thought and the argument makes sense down to the point where it defeats the overall objective. Here things have scaled down to the point where the case is taking up a significant portion of the volume. Having two cases is nuts when you could have a bigger battery in the same volume.
One could imagine having a replaceable cover on a phone without a structural inner case.
Yes, yawn, camelid antibodies. To me the big deal here is they are doing Gene therapy to get the host to make them. Now that's kinda edgy dangerous territory.
Total chaos will ensue when amazon starts sending stuff to the wrong Washington.
There might be a logic to having it as many time zones apart as possible though.
Perhaps GM is thinking of putting scooters into cars. Have a scooter charging station and a compartment you can access easily without shifting all the junk. But then the problem comes if someone steals your personal scooter. So now you have On-star to keep track of it?
The indictment alleges conspiracy to steal secrets. Which is slightly different than actually having stolen secrets. Thus the company needs to actually dispute this by saying "we didn't plan to steal secrets" or "the stolen secrets we received were not known to be stolen by us". Simply saying they didn't steal the secrets isn't a denial.
the path here is indirect and while showing the pattern of a conspiracy has many layers of companies fronting this operation. It's not entirely unlike how Uber ended up with Waymo desgins
from the primary source: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr...
According to the indictment, the defendants were engaged in a conspiracy to steal the trade secrets of Micron Technology, Inc. (Micron), a leader in the global semiconductor industry specializing in the advanced research, development, and manufacturing of memory products, including dynamic random-access memory (DRAM). DRAM is a leading-edge memory storage device used in computer electronics. Micron is the only United States-based company that manufactures DRAM. According to the indictment, Micron maintains a significant competitive advantage in this field due in large part from its intellectual property, including its trade secrets that include detailed, confidential information pertaining to the design, development, and manufacturing of advanced DRAM products.
Prior to the events described in the indictment, the PRC did not possess DRAM technology, and the Central Government and State Council of the PRC publicly identified the development of DRAM and other microelectronics technology as a national economic priority. The criminal defendants are United Microelectronics Corporation (“UMC”), a Taiwan semiconductor foundry; Fujian Jinhua Integrated Circuit, Co., Ltd. (“Jinhua'”), a state-owned enterprise of the PRC; and three Taiwan nationals: Chen Zhengkun, a.k.a. Stephen Chen, age 55; He Jianting, a.k.a. J.T. Ho, age 42; and Wang Yungming, a.k.a. Kenny Wang, age 44. UMC is a publicly listed semiconductor foundry company traded on the New York Stock Exchange; is headquartered in Taiwan; and has offices worldwide, including in Sunnyvale, California. UMC mass produces integrated-circuit logic products based on designs and technology developed and provided by its customers. Jinhua is a state-owned enterprise of the PRC, funded entirely by the Chinese government, and established in February 2016 for the sole purpose of designing, developing, and manufacturing DRAM.
According to the indictment, Chen was a General Manager and Chairman of an electronics corporation that Micron acquired in 2013. Chen then became the president of a Micron subsidiary in Taiwan, Micron Memory Taiwan (“MMT”), responsible for manufacturing at least one of Micron’s DRAM chips. Chen resigned from MMT in July 2015 and began working at UMC almost immediately. While at UMC, Chen arranged a cooperation agreement between UMC and Fujian Jinhua whereby, with funding from Fujian Jinhua, UMC would transfer DRAM technology to Fujian Jinhua to mass-produce. The technology would be jointly shared by both UMC and Fujian Jinhua. Chen later became the President of Jinhua and was put in charge of its DRAM production facility.
While at UMC, Chen recruited numerous MMT employees, including Ho and Wang, to join him at UMC. Prior to leaving MMT, Ho and Wang both stole and brought to UMC several Micron trade secrets related to the design and manufacture of DRAM. Wang downloaded over 900 Micron confidential and proprietary files before he left MMT and stored them on USB external hard drives or in personal cloud storage, from where he could access the technology while working at UMC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
in 1968, The 90-minute presentation essentially demonstrated almost all the fundamental elements of modern personal computing: windows, hypertext, graphics, efficient navigation and command input, video conferencing, the computer mouse, word processing, dynamic file linking, revision control, and a collaborative real-time editor (collaborative work). it featured video conference, picture-in-a-picture, an early form of windowing, electret head set microphones, the GUI. Engelbart's presentation was the first to publicly demonstrate all of these elements in a single system
There's an expression that says Pioneers get the arrows, settlers get the land. But there's a third layer to this. For there to be Pioneers first there had to be some new invention that let people press farther into unknown regions than they had before.
Apple is both a pioneer and a settler. Their inventive side is less to do with the techical invention but the invention of a use for it.
while people will quibble here's a list of things that apple didn't invent but did arguably pioneer and settle the us of.
Dynamic memory over static memory.
Memory mapped graphics over fixed graphics cards (ironically, in the age of NVIDIA we have reverse this, but it was what let us switch from kludged dumb terminal fixed width text to real graphics in games and fonts.)
software replacing hardware (e.g. soft sectored floppy's, fonts over character generators, software serial over UAARTS, )
small connectors and universal use of Serial ports over parallel ports and single use ports. (apple desktop bus for example)
Postscript printers. (first major adoption was apple).
The mouse and WYSIWIG. (doug englebart showed us this in the mother of all demos).
and so on.
By the way if you have never watched Englebarts Mother of all Demos it's a mind blowing experience. His team basically invented everything computers did for the next 40 years. Only recently have we gone beyond polishing the patterns his team laid out.
But it was apple that pioneered to use cases that Englbart and then Parc never did. Then they settled the land by selling integrated soltuions for those use cases at the right price that individuals could buy them/
Over my life I've noticed that every sports specialty store gravitates from selling cool hardware to having most of its retail space filled with clothing. The same pattern has been replicated in the internet age too. Geek gear stores grow, expand into new products but the mature end-state is the clothing store.
The reason I think is the product of repeat-sales* volume * margins / up-front-inventory cost is the highest on clothing so once you discover how to include clothing in your store it just takes over like cancer.
Look at REI as great example.
iphones ate apple. And services will eat iphones.
But of course the reason you go to the store and not another clothing store is specialty items that are now set decorations. REI was originally formed to import specialty hardware not made in the USA at cheaper prices than individuals could get it. It still has all the drool worthy gear and expert displays but the prices are barely competitive and when you check out most of the most of the bill is for the clothing you happened to see while you were drooling over the brass candle lantern or the ultra light titanium coke spoon.
So the thing that's truly amazing about an Apple retail store is that it's still all about the hardware. Kinda amazing they do that. it shows you where there heart is and what their connection to the consumer is. Amazon and apple can both sell you music but, for some people at least, the lure is deep love of the fit and finish of the apple crafted gadgets.
So You will know that apple has lost the thread when it starts making most of it's money selling threads. For now, that's not the case.
Now when it comes to payments, pyschology is really important. There's two ways of looking at this that I think matter a lot in intent. One intent is to lure people to pay over time so they don't notice how expensive something is. The flip side of that intent is to allow them to get something now rather than save for it. Saving has the hazard that any accumulation of money becomes a temptation rather than a planned use later. So getting people into a home or a car now gets them something that is less of a waste of money and something they need. conversely 15 easy payments for the latest ginzu knife or thigh-master is just a trick.
For me, I buy ski passes rather than ski tickets. the goal is not to save money it's to not worry about money and enjoy the skiiing. When I have a pass I don't have to ski 9 to 4 to "get my money's worth". I ski 9 to 12 till the powder is all used up then I go home and leave the hard pack for the ticket buyers to suffer on to get their day's money's worth. I probably ski fewer hours in total when I'm buying passes but I sure as heck enjoy it more. The same is true with health insurance. I found that when I had high co-pays and high-deductibles that sometimes I put off seeing the doctor when I knew that was a risk. SO I now buy higher priced plans that lower those. Economically I pay more than if I tuffed out the deductibles.. But psychologically I'm motivated by by health needs not by my marginal costs.
My hand writing has become a scrawl.
The solution to any problem is a buzzword that you know a little bit about and others are afraid they don't.
thanks
there is a nice looping symmetry here.
1990 - ARM is founded as a spin-off from Acorn and Apple, after the two companies started collaborating on the ARM processor as part of the development of Apple's new Newton computer system.
Apple shed ARM after the newton failed. Then after tablets came back the ARM became the key. Now apple has made the best ARM hardware implementation.
Next step is for the tablet to grow a keyboard and it's the new Acorn-- a light weight computer. Someone should put an Acorn emulator app on it.
It's kinda like being your own grandpa.
could you explain this non-blocking versus blocking paradigm's implications more. Also I don't quite see why I'd want to have a server and UI on the same thread.
Macs are not for average people. They are for people whose time is valuable and thus who want computers that they don't have to screw around with. These people also are not concerned about repairing or putting win-modems or sound-blaster cards in their computers and having to screw around with choosing non-conflicting interrupts. Yes, I know those interrupt nighmare days are long past and windows isn't a joke anymore. But I'm just making the point there's always been a market for people who want their computer to be a reliable appliance not an experiment in itself. Macs are not overpriced for what they deliver. You just may not want one yourself.
I'm surprised you didn't point out that the apple one-button mouse is cheating since it it less of a system load than a 3 button mouse.
the benchmark is geekbench so it's going to be a non-trivial speed measurement and not just integers. But it is the geekbench cpu benchmark not the geekbench computer benchmark so it's trying to test the processor speed not the integrated computer speed or real-world calculation that uses other parts of the computer.