Yes, but even with them expanding their offerings, very little of Netflix's content is self-produced. The vast majority is third-party material the owners of which licensed to Netflix for distribution. There's no reason that the local content producers couldn't just license said content and let the customers chose what they want to watch, whether than have one language... ANY language... imposed on them by legal force.
And it's not like Netflix is a monocle-polishing, mustachio-twriling conquistador that mandates "no language but 'murken". I don't go looking for French or German or whatever usually. But Netflix (In the US) has no shortage of content in Japanese, Korean, and Chinese. And I was even just able to find a few titles in Tagalog. I'd be fairly PO'd if the government were to up and decide that I should have access to none of that... and force Netflix take it away... because english MUST reign supreme because US culture MUST reign supreme.
Sorry bub. But if you want a shred of credibility on NSA whistleblowing... or anything, really... you might try citing someone who's not a fox "news" propagandist and former George Bush staffer writing for a far-right-wing "think tank" that plays host to the ilk of Dick Cheney, Paul Ryan, and John Yoo.
For the years when it was accepted that the even-numbers Star Trek movies were the good ones, adjusted for inflation:
The Wrath of Khan made $195,813,803 from a budget of $27,791,563. The Voyage Home made $240,072,498 from a budget of $45,951,859. The Undiscovered Country made $170,579,218 from a budget of $52,816,901. First Contact made $222,943,340 from a budget of $68,702,290.
Well, it sounds like you're a enthusiast. You do your research, and know what to buy so as to keep it safe.
But the majority of the population isn't into the nitty-gritty of the electronics and automatic safety features of every product they own and every substance they consume. That's why we have Underwriters Labs and Conformity Europeenne. That's why the FDA regulates drugs and medical equipment.
If you ever see one of these, run. There will likely be a blue police box nearby. You can take refuge inside. Don't worry, it's larger on the inside than on the outside.
Women are definitely underrepresented. But if the article's numbers are accurate; 47% white with the remainder consisting of minorities is within a reasonable margin to the demographics of the community.
As of the 2010 census, whites make up 52.5% of the Bay Area's population, with the remainder again consisting of various minorities. A 5.5% discrepancy is not unreasonable, and quite possibly within the combined margin of error of the census and the study. Asians appear to be somewhat overrepresented, but I would guess that would come from the Indian-American population self-reporting as Asian.
There's a world of difference in the QC and testing processes between these sorts of devices. How many of these "vape pens" are built, tested, and certified durable medical equipment? Since we're talking about semi-legitimate grey-market kit and chems that are sold in head shops and gas station quickie marts; I'll go out on a limb and guess very few, if any at all. How many are even vetted and certified by Underwriters Labs and Conformity Europeenne? The first couple pages of my own googling turned up none; just a "vape pen" perfidiously named the "CE-4" so as to bait google searches for a conforming and certified device.
Legitimate and mainstream consumer electronics (And their batteries.) must meet UL or CE standards to be sold in retailers other than fly-by-night and unscrupulous types. And DME, which is where these devices logically fit, must meet even more stringent standards. While none of these are 100% fool-proof; all three speak to a higher level of confidence in their safety and reliability then sketchy and untested devices but in the darkest unmonitored pits of China. So yeah, until and unless the "vape" industry goes legit, it's entirely appropriate to restrict the devices more stringently than mainstream electronics.
Hell. I get myself vaccinated against anything for which my doctor will let me, even if the disease is not common in the US. Sure, we don't get Japanese Encephalitis here. But what if I decide on a whim I want to go on vacation to Vietnam or Thailand, or to visit a friend in the Philippines, and I don't want to sit in a hotel room in the city the whole time? Better to just have everything taken care of in advance so I don't have to worry about either organizing my travel plans around a vaccination schedule (The hep A and B vaccines are really annoying in this way.) or take the chance of a debilitating illness.
It may be a good movie, but it's still 20-years too late for an HIV tragedy movie to be relevant. With modern therapy, HIV patients actually have a longer life expectancy than smokers (2012 study by Marie Helleberg of Copenhagen University). And with the proven effectiveness of PrEP, we could very well be looking at the end of the disease within a generation. The only thing holding us back from the latter are the health plans that still treat Truvada like some experimental voodoo and refuse to add it to their tier-1 formularies.
It seems like only two kinds of movies are made these days: "Blockbusters", which are fairly mindless, but usually fun, movies designed to make hundred of millions of dollars, but that the old farts who vote in the academy don't and never will like; and "oscar bait", movies which will get a limited release, have a low budget and may even still actually lose money, but are made specifically to cater to the academy members' pretentious tastes and sense of self-importance.
Every so often something like the LOTR Trilogy is so astoundingly popular AND well-done that they feel like they can't get away without acknowledging it. But they give oscars to those only grudgingly, and usually only for the last entry in the series. (I still maintain that Fellowship was a better movie than either TTT or ROTK. But ROTK was awarded the oscars.)
Seriously though, how is this even a problem for people? I've been asked to take a drug test for a job exactly once in my life. That was my first job out of college, in the 1990s, back on the east coast. And it was for a defense contractor, so you kind of expect them to have a stick up the ass about such things. And I don't have to look specifically for jobs that don't test or anything. Though I do avoid government contractors because I disliked the work environment when I worked for one. The topic has just never come up in my subsequent job searches.
I don't know what I'd do if a potential future employer wanted a drug test. I'd pass if I took one. But I also consider it an unwarranted violation of my privacy and person. And it speaks to me of a, by default, contentious and unsatisfactory employer/employee relationship and work environment.
Buffett is well-known to be pretty buddy-buddy with Microsoft, and specifically has pledged quite a lot of money to Bill Gates' "foundation". So it's fairly unlikely that anyone from Apple could count on him for any kind of favor. More likely, he simply sees Apple as a good investment.
Interesting. When I was typing my previous post, I checked on Orbitz and the cheapest LAX fare was $116 on Spirit. I see on Virgin's own site that you are indeed correct though. Still, that's a lot more than the cost of Ubering to the airport, which was the benchmark the person I was replying to set.
Also, Virgin is not long for this world. They're in the process of being purchased by Alaska Air. Damn shame too. They were one of the very few US-based carriers to at least make an effort at making the flying experience suck a little bit less. And when I have to fly, they're one I *really* try to use. So the elimination of Virgin is another tick in the "airline industry trying to make flying as miserable as possible" list.
Last time I flew, the Uber from home to SFO was $21.73. I don't think I could get a flight across the bay for that, much less across the state, country, or continent. The cheapest airfares I see with any regularity are the $99 tickets to Las Vegas. And seeing as I can't even fly to LA, or Sacramento for that matter, that cheaply, I have a strong suspicion that those are partly subsidized by the casinos.
Sure, at first. That's why I said "eventually". But do you really think the insurance companies *won't* get access? Already, some will give you a discount on your premiums if you plug a little widget which they supply into your OBD2 port, which sends your car's data back to them. There's even a "per mile" insurance company that uses that same data to charge you for only your true milage, not the guesstimate you make for a year when you first buy the policy. Self-driving data is probably too complex to pull from that port. But if it's not mandated yet, soon enough there will be a law requiring it to be accessible to the car's owner and third-party mechanics... the very reason for the OBD standard in the first place. For that matter, you know Google does in fact allow you to download the data they have on you, right?
And once the data is accessible to the owners, all it will take is a discount to get not a few of them to pass it along to their insurers. And that's how the ball starts rolling.
> 1. While self-driving cars may be safer and cheaper > A: Self-driving cars are nowhere near cheaper at the moment.
If self-driving cars are really as much safer as Google's data and claims indicate, they will very quickly become cheaper to own and operate, even if the initial purchase price is slightly higher.
Think actuarial tables. Every self-driving car is loaded with sensors and data recorders. All of this data will eventually get into the hands of the insurance companies. And if Google's claims on self-driving cars prove to be true (And have we been given reason to believe otherwise?), the actuaries will update their tables, and premiums for manual-driving cars will skyrocket.
If you're an enthusiast, you'll probably still be able to take your Miata out on weekends. Just keep the annual milage below 5000. But everyday commuting? Going out for a night on the town? It'll be significantly cheaper to use self-drivers.
Over the last couple of decades the airline industry has been going well out of their way to make sure that flying is unpleasant an experience as possible. Granted, they've had no small amount of cooperation from the government. But I've not a doubt in the world that some properly-directed lobbying and cries of "impacting the bottom line" would have returned the TSA thugs to their former jobs delivering pizza and greeting people at walmart ten or more years ago, if the airlines weren't complicit. And even aside from the TSA goons, they've reduced seat pitch, cut amenities, overbooked flights, run flights behind schedule or cancelled them,, eliminated meal services, and started nickel-and-diming with every sort of added fee imaginable, all 100% on their own initiative.
I've no bloody sympathy for them at all. A pox upon their houses.
How is this different from any other retailer that opens up a shop on or near campus? An "invasion" implies that they're unwelcome interlopers forcing themselves in. If 40% of the packages coming into the school are already being ordered from Amazon, it's more like a significant portion of the student body has invited them in. And invoking the tobacco industry is sleazy sensationalism, and totally un-called for. They're not pushing an addictive and deadly drug onto an unwitting populace. They're providing a more convenient way to buy stuff you'd be buying anyway.
Of if a manager looked the cost of the engineering time to lock down the hardware and allow 3rd-part firmware vs. just locking down the firmware; and demanded that engineering just lock out alternate firmwares. The best engineers in the world can be crippled by a PHB.
The "good guy" can win though. See, for example, In N Out Burger. Employees are paid well above the fast-food average and get PTO and medical benefits. Store managers can clear six figures. They use much higher quality ingredients than other chains. They enough people on staff not only to keep the food coming, but to keep the dining area consistently cleaned and bussed. The food is a bit on the pricy side compared to McDonalds or Burger King or Wendys. They're even slower than average because they cook everything to order (No lukewarm or soggy fries!). But there's consistently a packed dining room with a line out the door and a drive-through line that winds up extending onto the street.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but even with them expanding their offerings, very little of Netflix's content is self-produced. The vast majority is third-party material the owners of which licensed to Netflix for distribution. There's no reason that the local content producers couldn't just license said content and let the customers chose what they want to watch, whether than have one language... ANY language... imposed on them by legal force.
And it's not like Netflix is a monocle-polishing, mustachio-twriling conquistador that mandates "no language but 'murken". I don't go looking for French or German or whatever usually. But Netflix (In the US) has no shortage of content in Japanese, Korean, and Chinese. And I was even just able to find a few titles in Tagalog. I'd be fairly PO'd if the government were to up and decide that I should have access to none of that... and force Netflix take it away... because english MUST reign supreme because US culture MUST reign supreme.
Sorry bub. But if you want a shred of credibility on NSA whistleblowing... or anything, really... you might try citing someone who's not a fox "news" propagandist and former George Bush staffer writing for a far-right-wing "think tank" that plays host to the ilk of Dick Cheney, Paul Ryan, and John Yoo.
For the years when it was accepted that the even-numbers Star Trek movies were the good ones, adjusted for inflation:
The Wrath of Khan made $195,813,803 from a budget of $27,791,563.
The Voyage Home made $240,072,498 from a budget of $45,951,859.
The Undiscovered Country made $170,579,218 from a budget of $52,816,901.
First Contact made $222,943,340 from a budget of $68,702,290.
(Those numbers come from Boxofficemojo and Wikipedia, adjusted for inflation via http://www.davemanuel.com/infl...)
Granted, that's not Star Wars or Avengers money. But those are very respectable... and profitable... figures.
So there's a silver lining then, is what you're saying? Any action that finally kills off Tomcat can't be all bad, after all.
Every time I have to install Java or Tomcat or .net or Mono or Flash or silverlight, I die a little bit on the inside.
That's the best you could yo for a comparison?
Doesn't anyone else thing that this thing looks like what you'd get if you were to mate a Dalek with an iPod?
Well, it sounds like you're a enthusiast. You do your research, and know what to buy so as to keep it safe.
But the majority of the population isn't into the nitty-gritty of the electronics and automatic safety features of every product they own and every substance they consume. That's why we have Underwriters Labs and Conformity Europeenne. That's why the FDA regulates drugs and medical equipment.
I'm pretty sure these things want to shoot everyone on sight. Extermination is equal opportunity.
If you ever see one of these, run. There will likely be a blue police box nearby. You can take refuge inside. Don't worry, it's larger on the inside than on the outside.
Women are definitely underrepresented. But if the article's numbers are accurate; 47% white with the remainder consisting of minorities is within a reasonable margin to the demographics of the community.
http://www.bayareacensus.ca.go...
As of the 2010 census, whites make up 52.5% of the Bay Area's population, with the remainder again consisting of various minorities. A 5.5% discrepancy is not unreasonable, and quite possibly within the combined margin of error of the census and the study. Asians appear to be somewhat overrepresented, but I would guess that would come from the Indian-American population self-reporting as Asian.
There's a world of difference in the QC and testing processes between these sorts of devices. How many of these "vape pens" are built, tested, and certified durable medical equipment? Since we're talking about semi-legitimate grey-market kit and chems that are sold in head shops and gas station quickie marts; I'll go out on a limb and guess very few, if any at all. How many are even vetted and certified by Underwriters Labs and Conformity Europeenne? The first couple pages of my own googling turned up none; just a "vape pen" perfidiously named the "CE-4" so as to bait google searches for a conforming and certified device.
Legitimate and mainstream consumer electronics (And their batteries.) must meet UL or CE standards to be sold in retailers other than fly-by-night and unscrupulous types. And DME, which is where these devices logically fit, must meet even more stringent standards. While none of these are 100% fool-proof; all three speak to a higher level of confidence in their safety and reliability then sketchy and untested devices but in the darkest unmonitored pits of China. So yeah, until and unless the "vape" industry goes legit, it's entirely appropriate to restrict the devices more stringently than mainstream electronics.
So... just get the injected vaccine instead.
Hell. I get myself vaccinated against anything for which my doctor will let me, even if the disease is not common in the US. Sure, we don't get Japanese Encephalitis here. But what if I decide on a whim I want to go on vacation to Vietnam or Thailand, or to visit a friend in the Philippines, and I don't want to sit in a hotel room in the city the whole time? Better to just have everything taken care of in advance so I don't have to worry about either organizing my travel plans around a vaccination schedule (The hep A and B vaccines are really annoying in this way.) or take the chance of a debilitating illness.
It may be a good movie, but it's still 20-years too late for an HIV tragedy movie to be relevant. With modern therapy, HIV patients actually have a longer life expectancy than smokers (2012 study by Marie Helleberg of Copenhagen University). And with the proven effectiveness of PrEP, we could very well be looking at the end of the disease within a generation. The only thing holding us back from the latter are the health plans that still treat Truvada like some experimental voodoo and refuse to add it to their tier-1 formularies.
It seems like only two kinds of movies are made these days: "Blockbusters", which are fairly mindless, but usually fun, movies designed to make hundred of millions of dollars, but that the old farts who vote in the academy don't and never will like; and "oscar bait", movies which will get a limited release, have a low budget and may even still actually lose money, but are made specifically to cater to the academy members' pretentious tastes and sense of self-importance.
Every so often something like the LOTR Trilogy is so astoundingly popular AND well-done that they feel like they can't get away without acknowledging it. But they give oscars to those only grudgingly, and usually only for the last entry in the series. (I still maintain that Fellowship was a better movie than either TTT or ROTK. But ROTK was awarded the oscars.)
Seriously though, how is this even a problem for people? I've been asked to take a drug test for a job exactly once in my life. That was my first job out of college, in the 1990s, back on the east coast. And it was for a defense contractor, so you kind of expect them to have a stick up the ass about such things. And I don't have to look specifically for jobs that don't test or anything. Though I do avoid government contractors because I disliked the work environment when I worked for one. The topic has just never come up in my subsequent job searches.
I don't know what I'd do if a potential future employer wanted a drug test. I'd pass if I took one. But I also consider it an unwarranted violation of my privacy and person. And it speaks to me of a, by default, contentious and unsatisfactory employer/employee relationship and work environment.
Buffett is well-known to be pretty buddy-buddy with Microsoft, and specifically has pledged quite a lot of money to Bill Gates' "foundation". So it's fairly unlikely that anyone from Apple could count on him for any kind of favor. More likely, he simply sees Apple as a good investment.
Interesting. When I was typing my previous post, I checked on Orbitz and the cheapest LAX fare was $116 on Spirit. I see on Virgin's own site that you are indeed correct though. Still, that's a lot more than the cost of Ubering to the airport, which was the benchmark the person I was replying to set.
Also, Virgin is not long for this world. They're in the process of being purchased by Alaska Air. Damn shame too. They were one of the very few US-based carriers to at least make an effort at making the flying experience suck a little bit less. And when I have to fly, they're one I *really* try to use. So the elimination of Virgin is another tick in the "airline industry trying to make flying as miserable as possible" list.
Last time I flew, the Uber from home to SFO was $21.73. I don't think I could get a flight across the bay for that, much less across the state, country, or continent. The cheapest airfares I see with any regularity are the $99 tickets to Las Vegas. And seeing as I can't even fly to LA, or Sacramento for that matter, that cheaply, I have a strong suspicion that those are partly subsidized by the casinos.
Sure, at first. That's why I said "eventually". But do you really think the insurance companies *won't* get access? Already, some will give you a discount on your premiums if you plug a little widget which they supply into your OBD2 port, which sends your car's data back to them. There's even a "per mile" insurance company that uses that same data to charge you for only your true milage, not the guesstimate you make for a year when you first buy the policy. Self-driving data is probably too complex to pull from that port. But if it's not mandated yet, soon enough there will be a law requiring it to be accessible to the car's owner and third-party mechanics... the very reason for the OBD standard in the first place. For that matter, you know Google does in fact allow you to download the data they have on you, right?
And once the data is accessible to the owners, all it will take is a discount to get not a few of them to pass it along to their insurers. And that's how the ball starts rolling.
> 1. While self-driving cars may be safer and cheaper
> A: Self-driving cars are nowhere near cheaper at the moment.
If self-driving cars are really as much safer as Google's data and claims indicate, they will very quickly become cheaper to own and operate, even if the initial purchase price is slightly higher.
Think actuarial tables. Every self-driving car is loaded with sensors and data recorders. All of this data will eventually get into the hands of the insurance companies. And if Google's claims on self-driving cars prove to be true (And have we been given reason to believe otherwise?), the actuaries will update their tables, and premiums for manual-driving cars will skyrocket.
If you're an enthusiast, you'll probably still be able to take your Miata out on weekends. Just keep the annual milage below 5000. But everyday commuting? Going out for a night on the town? It'll be significantly cheaper to use self-drivers.
Oh wait... not weeping... the other thing.
Over the last couple of decades the airline industry has been going well out of their way to make sure that flying is unpleasant an experience as possible. Granted, they've had no small amount of cooperation from the government. But I've not a doubt in the world that some properly-directed lobbying and cries of "impacting the bottom line" would have returned the TSA thugs to their former jobs delivering pizza and greeting people at walmart ten or more years ago, if the airlines weren't complicit. And even aside from the TSA goons, they've reduced seat pitch, cut amenities, overbooked flights, run flights behind schedule or cancelled them,, eliminated meal services, and started nickel-and-diming with every sort of added fee imaginable, all 100% on their own initiative.
I've no bloody sympathy for them at all. A pox upon their houses.
"Invades"? "They want to hook you"? Really?
How is this different from any other retailer that opens up a shop on or near campus? An "invasion" implies that they're unwelcome interlopers forcing themselves in. If 40% of the packages coming into the school are already being ordered from Amazon, it's more like a significant portion of the student body has invited them in. And invoking the tobacco industry is sleazy sensationalism, and totally un-called for. They're not pushing an addictive and deadly drug onto an unwitting populace. They're providing a more convenient way to buy stuff you'd be buying anyway.
Specifically, Intel and the invention and development of the microprocessor. Pretty much our entire world is now built upon that keystone.
Of if a manager looked the cost of the engineering time to lock down the hardware and allow 3rd-part firmware vs. just locking down the firmware; and demanded that engineering just lock out alternate firmwares. The best engineers in the world can be crippled by a PHB.
The "good guy" can win though. See, for example, In N Out Burger. Employees are paid well above the fast-food average and get PTO and medical benefits. Store managers can clear six figures. They use much higher quality ingredients than other chains. They enough people on staff not only to keep the food coming, but to keep the dining area consistently cleaned and bussed. The food is a bit on the pricy side compared to McDonalds or Burger King or Wendys. They're even slower than average because they cook everything to order (No lukewarm or soggy fries!). But there's consistently a packed dining room with a line out the door and a drive-through line that winds up extending onto the street.
I don't know