I just got in fine with Firefox on Fedora 29 and I'm not spoofing the user agent or anything.
It seems this was fixed within a few hours at most of the source article going up, and it's not clear exactly what user agent string got the error, or for how long, or even if that was definitely the thing that broke it. This is nothing.
I suppose what you mean is closer to "I miss the days where they didn't couple incremental upgrades with useless, mandatory, horribly expensive features I don't want in the first place." In which case I'm with you. If I could buy the 2018 MBP in the body of the 2015 without paying $400 for a touch bar, I'd still use a MacBook Pro. Instead, I moved on.
Though still, it seems to me to only be the one cycle (the introduction of the touch bar) you (we, lots of us) really have a problem with. The Retina only moved the price for one year, and it was worth it. I bought one, you bought one, they pretty much leapfrogged everything else on the market that year and then the price came back down.
Eh, the days we're in now don't seem that different from the past, at least as far as Apple laptops go. The current touch bar models are abominations that got me off the Mac after more than a decade, but they've had the same design for several years and gone through multiple incremental updates.
Over that decade it was Powerbook, then MacBook Pro, then unibody MacBook Pro, then Retina. The pace seems about the same to me. I'm not sure what days you're missing?
This is exactly what's supposed to happen. Over time, mining *new* coins gets more expensive. Of the coins mined, I'm pretty sure a very small percentage were from this year. The many others that were mined earlier for much less cost still "exist" in the sense that bitcoin is "found" when mined.
The system is working exactly as intended, nothing more to see here.
Bitcoin may be worthless, or it may go to $40k this year, either way, this has much less to do with it one way or the other than this article seems to think.
I . . . don't think they can? The fixes from Intel are applied via microcode updates, generally delivered by OS vendors and having nothing to do with BIOS updates.
Maybe I just didn't read enough, but it seems like he doesn't say anywhere exactly what happened. He implies it was a billing issue. That's all. Without knowing exactly what went on, it's very hard to care. I imagine it's something like "well the credit card details changed, oh, and we were 107 days overdue."
Also, millions of dollars are on the line for short downtime and you're billing to a credit card?
I think the numbers are getting confused. Perhaps they were confusing it with the often thrown around concurrent users number, which has been around 15 million.
These movies are not "fast food." That doesn't make it fine dining either, but the economics involved are way more complicated than that analogy allows.
Fast food is all about stream lining and getting cheaper over time and scale. These movies keep getting bigger and more expensive. If their aim were simply a short term investment to maximize profits on a single project, why bother? And why bother taking a risk like Black Panther?
They are not following an 80/20 rule. They are playing an elaborate game to build a 20+ year continuity of movies with merchandising, theme parks, crossovers, and book/TV tie-ins. And they have to, because all of their risk is put up in one big project. I believe Black Panther cost ~$300 million.
Reality TV is a better comparison to fast food. Big budget movies don't really compare.
I'm not saying it's all good and sexism is over, but this is being characterized as flamebait by a lot of comments, and it repeatedly contains things like:
“Biases are there because at many places some people feel women aren’t good enough to code. But I haven’t encountered any such bias because the Linux kernel community is really good,” she adds.
And this woman stating directly that having a baby was a bigger barrier than any of her male counterparts, but her modern office in India was very accommodating:
“Sometimes I feel, when they (women) are in this field they are more aggressive because they want to prove that they are as good as their male counterparts,” she says, adding she has not faced gender bias at work yet.
“I don’t have any complaints. I feel girls are not short on talent, it’s just that they have to stick around. Sometimes it becomes difficult if you have a maternity leave, you’re disconnected for six months from everything and you cannot complain about it because the child needs you,” she says.
How did she cope? “I took my child to office with me, and my office supported that,” Deshpande-Dalal says.
Those parts quoted in the article certainly exist and are important, but you know, RTFA.
They seem important here because I suspect you are comparing four very US focused things (the NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL) to _all_ of global publishing. Children's books, newspapers, even books about sports, are being included in your total. If you were to compare them to just the more relevant adult fiction in the same market, it would not come out nearly as well for your case.
If the fundamental problem is that in starting jobs with no salary information, women get paid less than men, and that follows them through a career, how will having no salary information at every turn be better? Seems to me it may just as easily be worse. Is the idea that the starting salary problem has gone away and this is only following older, experienced women?
Are there other controls in place like a limit on how big the potential salary range can be?
I've been in tech in some way for almost twenty years now, from programming and IT heavy classes in high school through today. The way I see it, we bred this attitude, and should all have a little compassion for this writer.
In the late 90s and early 2000s, I never heard anyone suggest the all male or nearly all male CS and IT classes I was in were full of sexist men keeping the women out. Just the opposite, I constantly heard they were full of loser boys, women weren't there because they had better ways to spend their time. These guys were nerds, and were on the fringes where they belonged. (The notion that "nerd" and "geek" were positive words was just barely beginning to become a thing.)
Fast forward 15-20 years, and that time they thought they were outcasts? They're now being told that no, quite the opposite, they were being privileged jerks. That whole time they thought they were being ostracized, they were actually gender bullies who now must take responsibility for all the women they've been keeping out of the field. The shift should be enough to make anyone's head spin, but It was a slow burn with no clear demarcation. It's easy to miss. It's not surprising some people who've been in this system feel unhappy, betrayed, angry, or a number of other things.
Twenty years may seem like a long time, but what other profession has changed so fast? "Changing a culture is hard, and it's often uncomfortable." Indeed.
I'm not saying this guy is right. I'm not even saying he's wrong. I'm saying we shouldn't be surprised quite a few of him exist. I'm surprised there aren't a lot more.
I can think of one good reason off the top of my head: security. I don't want a bunch of legacy subsystems, emulators, and compatibility layers on my devices, that can eventually become vectors. This isn't theoretical either, the PS Vita comes to mind first. I believe when it was first rooted, it was done so via its PSP emulator.
Besides, how far back do you mandate? More than five years?
Consider watching the documentary. I'm not saying it's good or bad, but it never claims Hogan is a billionaire. The mentioned billionaire is not Hogan, it's Peter Thiel and a few other wealthy people influencing media. The summary may not be very clear, but I'm pretty sure the filmmaker can count.
They don't seem to have established that we've actually lost anything. This basically just sounds like old people going "things are different and therefore bad."
I can't help but think they're just schilling the sites they link to. Glitch "hosts hundreds of simple web apps—everything from Tetris clones to databases and to-do lists—written using Javascript. " Wow, hundreds? Github and npm will be so jealous.
Oh I agree, like I said, 100 time more, maybe it's 10,000x more. The exact amount isn't the point. The point is that the question should be "which option is most likely to cause me the least grief?" The answer to that question isn't necessarily "which is the least vulnerable to remote gremlins being bad?" The original question is too focused on that. Your payment system may get compromised ten times, but not cost you a dime. Your Bitcoin or your cash getting compromised once, will most certainly cost you money you won't recover.
Rather than a longer rehash, I'll just leave this here.
Slashdot Mirror
I just got in fine with Firefox on Fedora 29 and I'm not spoofing the user agent or anything.
It seems this was fixed within a few hours at most of the source article going up, and it's not clear exactly what user agent string got the error, or for how long, or even if that was definitely the thing that broke it. This is nothing.
I suppose what you mean is closer to "I miss the days where they didn't couple incremental upgrades with useless, mandatory, horribly expensive features I don't want in the first place." In which case I'm with you. If I could buy the 2018 MBP in the body of the 2015 without paying $400 for a touch bar, I'd still use a MacBook Pro. Instead, I moved on.
Though still, it seems to me to only be the one cycle (the introduction of the touch bar) you (we, lots of us) really have a problem with. The Retina only moved the price for one year, and it was worth it. I bought one, you bought one, they pretty much leapfrogged everything else on the market that year and then the price came back down.
Eh, the days we're in now don't seem that different from the past, at least as far as Apple laptops go. The current touch bar models are abominations that got me off the Mac after more than a decade, but they've had the same design for several years and gone through multiple incremental updates.
Over that decade it was Powerbook, then MacBook Pro, then unibody MacBook Pro, then Retina. The pace seems about the same to me. I'm not sure what days you're missing?
This is exactly what's supposed to happen. Over time, mining *new* coins gets more expensive. Of the coins mined, I'm pretty sure a very small percentage were from this year. The many others that were mined earlier for much less cost still "exist" in the sense that bitcoin is "found" when mined.
The system is working exactly as intended, nothing more to see here.
Bitcoin may be worthless, or it may go to $40k this year, either way, this has much less to do with it one way or the other than this article seems to think.
Can a BIOS update address spectre or meltdown?
I . . . don't think they can? The fixes from Intel are applied via microcode updates, generally delivered by OS vendors and having nothing to do with BIOS updates.
Am I missing something?
Yeah, maybe we could regularly count votes or something.
It absolutely is. It's only a five minute video.
It's about three minutes in.
The iPhone was just the best single product from a very narrow list of products, not the best indicator.
Owning a passport was one of several better indicators.
And an Android phone is a 59% indicator. Come on /.
Maybe I just didn't read enough, but it seems like he doesn't say anywhere exactly what happened. He implies it was a billing issue. That's all. Without knowing exactly what went on, it's very hard to care. I imagine it's something like "well the credit card details changed, oh, and we were 107 days overdue."
Also, millions of dollars are on the line for short downtime and you're billing to a credit card?
I think the numbers are getting confused. Perhaps they were confusing it with the often thrown around concurrent users number, which has been around 15 million.
https://www.vinereport.com/art...
The actual total number of installed clients is much, much, much larger for sure.
There's more than one they. The DOJ specifically protested this law for the reasons you mention.
If only there were some kind of article, perhaps linked in the summary, that would say if they did.
(I kid, but come on.)
These movies are not "fast food." That doesn't make it fine dining either, but the economics involved are way more complicated than that analogy allows.
Fast food is all about stream lining and getting cheaper over time and scale. These movies keep getting bigger and more expensive. If their aim were simply a short term investment to maximize profits on a single project, why bother? And why bother taking a risk like Black Panther?
They are not following an 80/20 rule. They are playing an elaborate game to build a 20+ year continuity of movies with merchandising, theme parks, crossovers, and book/TV tie-ins. And they have to, because all of their risk is put up in one big project. I believe Black Panther cost ~$300 million.
Reality TV is a better comparison to fast food. Big budget movies don't really compare.
There's an excellent Planet Money episode about this:
https://www.npr.org/sections/m...
I mean isn't this true of every unsandboxed PC (or Mac) app ever?
Does the sandbox promise to change this?
I'm not saying it's all good and sexism is over, but this is being characterized as flamebait by a lot of comments, and it repeatedly contains things like:
“Biases are there because at many places some people feel women aren’t good enough to code. But I haven’t encountered any such bias because the Linux kernel community is really good,” she adds.
And this woman stating directly that having a baby was a bigger barrier than any of her male counterparts, but her modern office in India was very accommodating:
“Sometimes I feel, when they (women) are in this field they are more aggressive because they want to prove that they are as good as their male counterparts,” she says, adding she has not faced gender bias at work yet.
“I don’t have any complaints. I feel girls are not short on talent, it’s just that they have to stick around. Sometimes it becomes difficult if you have a maternity leave, you’re disconnected for six months from everything and you cannot complain about it because the child needs you,” she says.
How did she cope? “I took my child to office with me, and my office supported that,” Deshpande-Dalal says.
Those parts quoted in the article certainly exist and are important, but you know, RTFA.
Perhaps my math is wrong, but isn't "first time since 2015" the same as saying "so it's been up and down 50% of the time in the last four years?"
2015: down
2016: up
2017: up
2018: down
But hey, blockchain! cryptocurrency! news!
Citations?
They seem important here because I suspect you are comparing four very US focused things (the NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL) to _all_ of global publishing. Children's books, newspapers, even books about sports, are being included in your total. If you were to compare them to just the more relevant adult fiction in the same market, it would not come out nearly as well for your case.
Anyway, back to my book . . .
I have never seen a "good" commercial for children.
Counterpoint:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
If the fundamental problem is that in starting jobs with no salary information, women get paid less than men, and that follows them through a career, how will having no salary information at every turn be better? Seems to me it may just as easily be worse. Is the idea that the starting salary problem has gone away and this is only following older, experienced women?
Are there other controls in place like a limit on how big the potential salary range can be?
I've been in tech in some way for almost twenty years now, from programming and IT heavy classes in high school through today. The way I see it, we bred this attitude, and should all have a little compassion for this writer.
In the late 90s and early 2000s, I never heard anyone suggest the all male or nearly all male CS and IT classes I was in were full of sexist men keeping the women out. Just the opposite, I constantly heard they were full of loser boys, women weren't there because they had better ways to spend their time. These guys were nerds, and were on the fringes where they belonged. (The notion that "nerd" and "geek" were positive words was just barely beginning to become a thing.)
Fast forward 15-20 years, and that time they thought they were outcasts? They're now being told that no, quite the opposite, they were being privileged jerks. That whole time they thought they were being ostracized, they were actually gender bullies who now must take responsibility for all the women they've been keeping out of the field. The shift should be enough to make anyone's head spin, but It was a slow burn with no clear demarcation. It's easy to miss. It's not surprising some people who've been in this system feel unhappy, betrayed, angry, or a number of other things.
Twenty years may seem like a long time, but what other profession has changed so fast? "Changing a culture is hard, and it's often uncomfortable." Indeed.
I'm not saying this guy is right. I'm not even saying he's wrong. I'm saying we shouldn't be surprised quite a few of him exist. I'm surprised there aren't a lot more.
I can think of one good reason off the top of my head: security. I don't want a bunch of legacy subsystems, emulators, and compatibility layers on my devices, that can eventually become vectors. This isn't theoretical either, the PS Vita comes to mind first. I believe when it was first rooted, it was done so via its PSP emulator. Besides, how far back do you mandate? More than five years?
Consider watching the documentary. I'm not saying it's good or bad, but it never claims Hogan is a billionaire. The mentioned billionaire is not Hogan, it's Peter Thiel and a few other wealthy people influencing media. The summary may not be very clear, but I'm pretty sure the filmmaker can count.
They don't seem to have established that we've actually lost anything. This basically just sounds like old people going "things are different and therefore bad."
I can't help but think they're just schilling the sites they link to. Glitch "hosts hundreds of simple web apps—everything from Tetris clones to databases and to-do lists—written using Javascript. " Wow, hundreds? Github and npm will be so jealous.
Oh I agree, like I said, 100 time more, maybe it's 10,000x more. The exact amount isn't the point. The point is that the question should be "which option is most likely to cause me the least grief?" The answer to that question isn't necessarily "which is the least vulnerable to remote gremlins being bad?" The original question is too focused on that. Your payment system may get compromised ten times, but not cost you a dime. Your Bitcoin or your cash getting compromised once, will most certainly cost you money you won't recover.
Rather than a longer rehash, I'll just leave this here.
https://www.xkcd.com/538/