America's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates roughly their recalls affect roughly 48 million people annually, according to the article, "with 128,000 hospitalized and 3,000 dying."
I think you meant to say:
America's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates roughly their recalls affect roughly 48 million people roughly annually, according to the article, "with roughly 128,000 hospitalized and roughly 3,000 dying."
IoT "Internet of Things" --> IoT "Intranet of Things"
Connect them to a local Intranet server, instead of trying to connect them to a server in China, or at Google, or to everyone in the world, and they are no longer a problem.
I know, I know, Crimes where also not committed through the use of cell phones back then?
Is this why, when drug dealers used to use pay phones and get incoming calls to them, there was a 100% clearance rate on crimes related to drug dealing?
With this move, won't SpaceX be competing with their own clients like Iridium?
I think you mean Dysprosium (there are only 66 satellites in that constellation, not the originally planned 77 to get it to the right number for Iridium).
Motorola hasn't been lofting more satellites into the constellation since the late 1990's, and at one point was threatening to de-orbit the whole system. And they've already had in-orbit failures which can't be corrected by the in-orbit spares, so in some cases: coverage is pretty spotty. Although Iridium NEXT was supposed to start launching via SpaceX's Falcon 9, with some launches by Russia's ISC Kosmotras Dnepr.
So far, technical issues and insurance issues have kept Iridium NEXT from happening.
Also: SpaceX is proposing non-polar orbits for their satellite constellation, so they are unlikely to compete for space real estate, either, since the Motorola system is polar orbiting (which is why they want to launch Iridium NEXT from Vandenburg).
"Thiel further angered First Amendment supporters by bankrolling the Hulk Hogan lawsuit that brought down Gawker"
I'm pretty sure the only people who felt angered at this as a first amendment issue were the folks at Gawker.
Everyone else was pretty happy to see the Silicon Valley Version of TMZ (Thirty Mile Zone) go away, and quit outing the sexual orientation of businessmen whose only possible reason for being considered "public persons" was having been promoted as such by Gawker in the first place.
Peter Thiel and Hulk Hogan: I personally cheered for the verdict in this case, and am glad Thiel backed it.
You very, very rarely go from "transition team" to "cabinet position". It's a somewhat meaningless post, other than access to give advice. Who thinks Trump will be taking most of the advice he gets, rather than acknowledging it, then ignoring it and doing what he wants to do anyway?
It's not free to buy, install, and maintain the solar cells and the charging station around it.
No, it's not; that's pretty much a fixed one-time cost for most of what you are talking about, and the rest can be amortized over time into the cost of the vehicles.
It's not free when it hasn't been raining all week and the system needs to rely on grid power.
I think you mean "when it's been raining" (solar cells do not operate on rain as fuel).
According to Solar City, with net metering, which is the law in most states (except Nevada, where it was recently discontinued), you can use the grid as a battery, and pay back your "debt" over time, by having sufficient generating capacity to handle net output exceeding net demand, including rain days.
Not all superchargers have solar cell arrays, and even those that do only get a proportion of their power from them.
Perhaps they are locked into a contract with Solar City, and they can't get their solar cells upgraded to the higher output solar cell for the next 20 years because of the contract, even though those cells are available today.
Apart from anything else, there's not much solar power available at night.
Someone needs to tell Elon Musk about "powerwall" batteries...
The real oddity is that more companies don't move to the cheaper cities in the US: Same infrastructure, but you can pay a much lower salary and still give your employees as higher quality of life.
By "same infrastructure", you obviously are not including "major technical universities" and "lots of tech workers with high job mobility available to be hired away from the massive number of other companies also in your area".
Because, seriously: there are not 300 VC firms and 500,000 tech workers at 750 technology companies in Wichita, Kansas.
Walmart tried locating "Walmart Labs" in the middle of F'ing nowhere initially. No one wanted to move there to work:
1. Investment in a house was not transferrable to a comparable house in a more desirable place to live upon retirement 2. You couldn't walk out if you didn't like your manager, and walk into another company literally a block away and have a new job 3. You could never leave, because the capital expenditure would exhaust all the cash value, so it was "Hotel California"
Walmart eventually gave up and relocated to Silicon Valley, with everyone else.
There is a huge amount of value to employees in being able to tell your boss "screw you", knowing that you can have another job in less than a week (assuming you don't take any time off).
If you have a 3BR house in Detroit today, and want to "move to where the jobs are", good luck getting more than $10,000 or so, if you can find a buyer, to get you establish in a crackerbox apartment in an area that has jobs. Assuming that you are even qualified for the jobs.
This is why Detroit, Fergusson, and Baltimore people keep complaining they "can't afford to leave".
The people "living in a cesspool thousands of miles away for pennies on the dollar" are not H1-B's.
H1-B's "live in cook county in the suburbs of chicago".
Why are people so confused between H1-B workers -- who are moved into the U.S. -- and manufacturing outsourcing -- where the jobs move to the "cesspool" where people can live "for pennies on the dollar", are paid less, and the finished products are shipped to the U.S.?
Cluebat: An outsourced job does not require an H1-B. They don't have to live in the U.S. "to take yer jerbs".
Forty to fifty years ago, Japan was known for making crappy products. Then they (among other things) revolutionized how cars were built and anything made in Detroit after 1980 or so looked like absolute crap compared to Japanese cars. Only in the last fifteen years or so have the American cars caught up.
This is almost wholly attributable to the American W. Edwards Deming.
Deming gave a speech at the Hakone Convention Center in Tokyo in 1950 on "Statistical Product Quality Administration".
The Japanese immediately embraced his philosophy, while Deming was still not getting traction at home:
1. Better design of products lowers service costs 2. Higher uniform product quality 3. Improved product testing in both research and manufacture 4. Greater sales through side markets ("halo effect")
Part of the problem was the UAW (United Auto Workers), since the union pretty much controlled staffing levels in Detroit, regardless of what staffing levels were actually needed/required, and inflated wages far above the value of the work produced.
Another part of the problem was profit-taking: instead of reinvesting, Detroit companies paid dividends to stockholders (stockholders liked this, but it didn't benefit the long term interests of the company to have them as high as they were). This was mainly driven by executives having large stock positions themselves, which means you can guess how the votes went, when it was "for or against an increased dividend".
A lot of Deming's ideas still have yet to be adopted by U.S. industries (those industries which are left, not having been shipped to China or the Maquiladoras, just of the U.S./Mexico border to take advantage of taxes, labor costs, and NAFTA lack of Tariffs).
Unless you bought off the guy arguing against the feature in the bug report, he was so obviously adamantly opposed to the idea that it would not happen.
Some developers can be bought off, but that guy was adamant enough that he's certainly got editorial control enough to rip the changes back out.
That's not a fair interpretation of what the grandparent poster wrote. Should we interpret your response to be anti-business because you didn't mention that non-developing users can hire developers? Of course not, that wouldn't be fair because you didn't say any such thing.
It's perfectly fair.
Hiring a developer, unless they are in sole editorial control of the section of code you are interested in having modified, doesn't guarantee editorial control over the project direction.
With that, the project is free to reject the patches of the hired gun, and you are left with a fork of the project, and no one to maintain it going forward.
Worse, even if you were "made of money", and could afford a hired gun to port forward the changes for each new release of Mozilla, without the patches in the tree, there's every possibility that a structural or architectural change may preclude an easy port forward of the code: the developers in the main Mozilla project have no vested interest in not modifying internal APIs willy-nilly.
In fact: they've modified internal APIs willy-nilly in the past, so their track record in this regard isn't so great.
So no: it's generally not a good idea to hire a developer to make the changes you want, if they're not going to be accepted back into the project.
From the bug report, and the caustic relationship present, and the main developer's insistence that it's not a problem unless your machine is compromised anyway (totally ignoring all "security in depth" arguments) -- it's pretty damn sure that a fork was the only option.
Or are you saying these patches will likely make it back into the main line Mozilla?
Obviously you need to inform them what it'll cost in time, resources and risk and to push back when they make unreasonable demands for changes - like do we all - but I doubt it's really "that simple".
They got that: having a different BGA is going to cost them 9 months (minimum) of not selling their chip on Microsoft Surface or Apple MacBook products.
Whine about thin form factors not allowing for it all you want, but you're wrong.
So because you can't get your shit together and keep you BGA layout the same, I have to make up for it by making a separate carrier card that rearranges the pins so that they are the same again on an edge connector?
It's not goddamned rocket science.
I agree: if you want a PCIe interface, then export one at the BGA level, and don't make me add cost to my product because you are too lazy to route the pins yourself.
Or, you know, I could just use your older product that I know already doesn't suck, and you can just wait a year to 10 months for the product referesh to start selling your chips.
all 4 of those USB Type-C ports also function as Thunderbolt numb nuts.
You are talking about thunderbolt 3, numb nuts.
So you can connect with a thunderbolt 32 dongle, yes. But it's a chipset feature, and it's going to put us in the same position HDMI put us in, where not all ports behave the same with all possible peripherals and dongles.
Can I use the dongle with a USB-C on some third party SOC chipset to get Thunderbolt 2? No, I can't. Can I plug a Thunderbolt 3 device into any USB C port? Yes, I can... but the damn thing isn't going to work.
The only reason it's there in the new MacBooks is to handle legacy switchover.
Intel has failed to sell the industry on Thunderbolt.
That's all there is to it.
There will likely be USB C displays.
There's unlikely to be a hell of a lot of Thunderbolt 3 peripherals, apart from Thunderbolt 2 conversion dongles.
Say you were selling a commercial video editing deck -- you know, the kind that have historically used FireWire 800. Are you going to bring out a Thunderbolt 3 version, or will it be USB-C?
Exactly, numb nuts. No one in their right mind will do anything with Thunderbolt 3 except plug in a converted to use their legacy Thunderbolt devices, and that includes Apple continuing to sell Thunderbolt displays.
Apple still need huge-ass displays for their iMac line. They need large amounts of real estate, with zero dead pixels. The only way to drive that going forward is economy of scale. They just won't be connected via Thunderbolt 3.
It's be like distributing Mac OS X Sierra on DVD. Will Mac OS X Sierra run on machines that have DVD drives? Yes, there are some where it will still run fine. Should Apple distribute on DVD, just because some older hardware that runs Sierra has a "DVD port" on it? No, no more than they should continue to ship Thunderbolt displays.
Thunderbolt is dead. Thunderbolt 3 exists sole to allow you to utilize earlier Thunderbolt devices at a considerable penalty (dongle/cable cost).
Slashdot Mirror
So right after their value gets depressed?
Not suspicious at all...
America's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates roughly their recalls affect roughly 48 million people annually, according to the article, "with 128,000 hospitalized and 3,000 dying."
I think you meant to say:
America's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates roughly their recalls affect roughly 48 million people roughly annually, according to the article, "with roughly 128,000 hospitalized and roughly 3,000 dying."
Yes. With a single acronym change.
IoT "Internet of Things" --> IoT "Intranet of Things"
Connect them to a local Intranet server, instead of trying to connect them to a server in China, or at Google, or to everyone in the world, and they are no longer a problem.
I think I speak for Turkey when I say YES.
It will be much easier to find and jail all the dissidents who make fun of the beloved leader.
I know, I know, Crimes where also not committed through the use of cell phones back then?
Is this why, when drug dealers used to use pay phones and get incoming calls to them, there was a 100% clearance rate on crimes related to drug dealing?
>*crickets*<
Thought so...
"ACID doesn't matter... your first install is free!"
Corrected headline:
"Persons Immune System Discovers Antibody That Neutralizes 98% of HIV Strains; Scientists Take Credit"
Betting pool on how long it takes to patent, and who gets the patent, starts now...
Sadly, I had a friend who used homeopathy.
He forgot to take it one day, and OD'ed.
Colonoscopies will continue until morale improves. That is all.
With this move, won't SpaceX be competing with their own clients like Iridium?
I think you mean Dysprosium (there are only 66 satellites in that constellation, not the originally planned 77 to get it to the right number for Iridium).
Motorola hasn't been lofting more satellites into the constellation since the late 1990's, and at one point was threatening to de-orbit the whole system. And they've already had in-orbit failures which can't be corrected by the in-orbit spares, so in some cases: coverage is pretty spotty. Although Iridium NEXT was supposed to start launching via SpaceX's Falcon 9, with some launches by Russia's ISC Kosmotras Dnepr.
So far, technical issues and insurance issues have kept Iridium NEXT from happening.
Also: SpaceX is proposing non-polar orbits for their satellite constellation, so they are unlikely to compete for space real estate, either, since the Motorola system is polar orbiting (which is why they want to launch Iridium NEXT from Vandenburg).
"Thiel further angered First Amendment supporters by bankrolling the Hulk Hogan lawsuit that brought down Gawker"
I'm pretty sure the only people who felt angered at this as a first amendment issue were the folks at Gawker.
Everyone else was pretty happy to see the Silicon Valley Version of TMZ (Thirty Mile Zone) go away, and quit outing the sexual orientation of businessmen whose only possible reason for being considered "public persons" was having been promoted as such by Gawker in the first place.
Peter Thiel and Hulk Hogan: I personally cheered for the verdict in this case, and am glad Thiel backed it.
It's the transition team, people.
You very, very rarely go from "transition team" to "cabinet position". It's a somewhat meaningless post, other than access to give advice. Who thinks Trump will be taking most of the advice he gets, rather than acknowledging it, then ignoring it and doing what he wants to do anyway?
Oh sure...
It can explain "Dark Matter"; but can it explain other TV series, like "Killjoys", and all the time travel series?
It's not free to buy, install, and maintain the solar cells and the charging station around it.
No, it's not; that's pretty much a fixed one-time cost for most of what you are talking about, and the rest can be amortized over time into the cost of the vehicles.
It's not free when it hasn't been raining all week and the system needs to rely on grid power.
I think you mean "when it's been raining" (solar cells do not operate on rain as fuel).
According to Solar City, with net metering, which is the law in most states (except Nevada, where it was recently discontinued), you can use the grid as a battery, and pay back your "debt" over time, by having sufficient generating capacity to handle net output exceeding net demand, including rain days.
Not all superchargers have solar cell arrays, and even those that do only get a proportion of their power from them.
Perhaps they are locked into a contract with Solar City, and they can't get their solar cells upgraded to the higher output solar cell for the next 20 years because of the contract, even though those cells are available today.
Apart from anything else, there's not much solar power available at night.
Someone needs to tell Elon Musk about "powerwall" batteries...
"...based on the cost of electricity..."
Someone really needs to tell Elon Musk about solar cells... he could offer it for free again.
The real oddity is that more companies don't move to the cheaper cities in the US: Same infrastructure, but you can pay a much lower salary and still give your employees as higher quality of life.
By "same infrastructure", you obviously are not including "major technical universities" and "lots of tech workers with high job mobility available to be hired away from the massive number of other companies also in your area".
Because, seriously: there are not 300 VC firms and 500,000 tech workers at 750 technology companies in Wichita, Kansas.
Walmart tried locating "Walmart Labs" in the middle of F'ing nowhere initially. No one wanted to move there to work:
1. Investment in a house was not transferrable to a comparable house in a more desirable place to live upon retirement
2. You couldn't walk out if you didn't like your manager, and walk into another company literally a block away and have a new job
3. You could never leave, because the capital expenditure would exhaust all the cash value, so it was "Hotel California"
Walmart eventually gave up and relocated to Silicon Valley, with everyone else.
There is a huge amount of value to employees in being able to tell your boss "screw you", knowing that you can have another job in less than a week (assuming you don't take any time off).
If you have a 3BR house in Detroit today, and want to "move to where the jobs are", good luck getting more than $10,000 or so, if you can find a buyer, to get you establish in a crackerbox apartment in an area that has jobs. Assuming that you are even qualified for the jobs.
This is why Detroit, Fergusson, and Baltimore people keep complaining they "can't afford to leave".
The people "living in a cesspool thousands of miles away for pennies on the dollar" are not H1-B's.
H1-B's "live in cook county in the suburbs of chicago".
Why are people so confused between H1-B workers -- who are moved into the U.S. -- and manufacturing outsourcing -- where the jobs move to the "cesspool" where people can live "for pennies on the dollar", are paid less, and the finished products are shipped to the U.S.?
Cluebat: An outsourced job does not require an H1-B. They don't have to live in the U.S. "to take yer jerbs".
Forty to fifty years ago, Japan was known for making crappy products. Then they (among other things) revolutionized how cars were built and anything made in Detroit after 1980 or so looked like absolute crap compared to Japanese cars. Only in the last fifteen years or so have the American cars caught up.
This is almost wholly attributable to the American W. Edwards Deming.
Deming gave a speech at the Hakone Convention Center in Tokyo in 1950 on "Statistical Product Quality Administration".
The Japanese immediately embraced his philosophy, while Deming was still not getting traction at home:
1. Better design of products lowers service costs
2. Higher uniform product quality
3. Improved product testing in both research and manufacture
4. Greater sales through side markets ("halo effect")
Part of the problem was the UAW (United Auto Workers), since the union pretty much controlled staffing levels in Detroit, regardless of what staffing levels were actually needed/required, and inflated wages far above the value of the work produced.
Another part of the problem was profit-taking: instead of reinvesting, Detroit companies paid dividends to stockholders (stockholders liked this, but it didn't benefit the long term interests of the company to have them as high as they were). This was mainly driven by executives having large stock positions themselves, which means you can guess how the votes went, when it was "for or against an increased dividend".
A lot of Deming's ideas still have yet to be adopted by U.S. industries (those industries which are left, not having been shipped to China or the Maquiladoras, just of the U.S./Mexico border to take advantage of taxes, labor costs, and NAFTA lack of Tariffs).
Unless you bought off the guy arguing against the feature in the bug report, he was so obviously adamantly opposed to the idea that it would not happen.
Some developers can be bought off, but that guy was adamant enough that he's certainly got editorial control enough to rip the changes back out.
That's not a fair interpretation of what the grandparent poster wrote. Should we interpret your response to be anti-business because you didn't mention that non-developing users can hire developers? Of course not, that wouldn't be fair because you didn't say any such thing.
It's perfectly fair.
Hiring a developer, unless they are in sole editorial control of the section of code you are interested in having modified, doesn't guarantee editorial control over the project direction.
With that, the project is free to reject the patches of the hired gun, and you are left with a fork of the project, and no one to maintain it going forward.
Worse, even if you were "made of money", and could afford a hired gun to port forward the changes for each new release of Mozilla, without the patches in the tree, there's every possibility that a structural or architectural change may preclude an easy port forward of the code: the developers in the main Mozilla project have no vested interest in not modifying internal APIs willy-nilly.
In fact: they've modified internal APIs willy-nilly in the past, so their track record in this regard isn't so great.
So no: it's generally not a good idea to hire a developer to make the changes you want, if they're not going to be accepted back into the project.
From the bug report, and the caustic relationship present, and the main developer's insistence that it's not a problem unless your machine is compromised anyway (totally ignoring all "security in depth" arguments) -- it's pretty damn sure that a fork was the only option.
Or are you saying these patches will likely make it back into the main line Mozilla?
The dev is a user; the users are devs.
And "users who are not devs can go fuck themselves"?
Because that's kind of what you are saying to non-dev users.
Obviously you need to inform them what it'll cost in time, resources and risk and to push back when they make unreasonable demands for changes - like do we all - but I doubt it's really "that simple".
They got that: having a different BGA is going to cost them 9 months (minimum) of not selling their chip on Microsoft Surface or Apple MacBook products.
One word: "daughtercard".
Whine about thin form factors not allowing for it all you want, but you're wrong.
So because you can't get your shit together and keep you BGA layout the same, I have to make up for it by making a separate carrier card that rearranges the pins so that they are the same again on an edge connector?
It's not goddamned rocket science.
I agree: if you want a PCIe interface, then export one at the BGA level, and don't make me add cost to my product because you are too lazy to route the pins yourself.
Or, you know, I could just use your older product that I know already doesn't suck, and you can just wait a year to 10 months for the product referesh to start selling your chips.
Pick one.
all 4 of those USB Type-C ports also function as Thunderbolt numb nuts.
You are talking about thunderbolt 3, numb nuts.
So you can connect with a thunderbolt 32 dongle, yes. But it's a chipset feature, and it's going to put us in the same position HDMI put us in, where not all ports behave the same with all possible peripherals and dongles.
Can I use the dongle with a USB-C on some third party SOC chipset to get Thunderbolt 2? No, I can't. Can I plug a Thunderbolt 3 device into any USB C port? Yes, I can ... but the damn thing isn't going to work.
The only reason it's there in the new MacBooks is to handle legacy switchover.
Intel has failed to sell the industry on Thunderbolt.
That's all there is to it.
There will likely be USB C displays.
There's unlikely to be a hell of a lot of Thunderbolt 3 peripherals, apart from Thunderbolt 2 conversion dongles.
Say you were selling a commercial video editing deck -- you know, the kind that have historically used FireWire 800. Are you going to bring out a Thunderbolt 3 version, or will it be USB-C?
Exactly, numb nuts. No one in their right mind will do anything with Thunderbolt 3 except plug in a converted to use their legacy Thunderbolt devices, and that includes Apple continuing to sell Thunderbolt displays.
Apple still need huge-ass displays for their iMac line. They need large amounts of real estate, with zero dead pixels. The only way to drive that going forward is economy of scale. They just won't be connected via Thunderbolt 3.
It's be like distributing Mac OS X Sierra on DVD. Will Mac OS X Sierra run on machines that have DVD drives? Yes, there are some where it will still run fine. Should Apple distribute on DVD, just because some older hardware that runs Sierra has a "DVD port" on it? No, no more than they should continue to ship Thunderbolt displays.
Thunderbolt is dead. Thunderbolt 3 exists sole to allow you to utilize earlier Thunderbolt devices at a considerable penalty (dongle/cable cost).