Thanks for taking a look. I wish Google would apply some level of logic to this. It's incredibly distracting when using the map. I understand that they may be "official names" that someone applied for and got granted by the city, and therefore in the official record, but it should be possible to correlate these names with some kind of culture significance to filter our the housing development names (as you say) from legitimate cultural districts.
The risk in not doing this is that you lose all context. For instance, South Mountain you called out definitely appears to be a real identifiable place - bounded by a river on the north, a mountain range on the south, and S 28th and S 47th on the west and east. However, the moment you zoom into the neighborhood, you get ~100 (!) additional neighborhood names. "South Mountain Village" (apparently the village center of South Mountain) is still on the map, but it's given no significance vs "Knox Ranch" which appears to be one street of 14 houses.
Has anyone else noticed that the Phoenix area seems a bit over the top with the neighborhood names? I live in NYC and don't know Phoenix well, but it seems like every 30 - 100 houses have their own name. People can't really use these, right? Just take a look Pueblo Hermoso, for instance, looks like it's about one building, and appears to be some kind of a strip mall. I'm used to NYC, where even a small ("newer," some would say fictional) neighborhood like NoHo might have 5,000 residents, and 100+ buildings, with stores and restaurants in it. Obviously, this is because of the density of Manhattan. However, in Phoenix, are people even using these names? Would a local even know where "Henry Leo Place" is? Would love to have a local weigh in.
3) It shortens my card statement by dozens of items so I don't need to spend so much time later checking through against the retained receipts in case someone somewhere has got my card details and is using my account. Perhaps you don't bother doing that.
This used to be a big deal to me, but not really anymore. I find that I can check my credit card bill in about 3-5 minutes. Maybe I could cut this down to 1-2 minutes if I removed a bunch of transactions like you have. In general, I scan for all the merchants that I frequent, and as long as there's no double charges (or charges on the same day), and it's about what I remember, then I call it good. I am not matching all my receipts against my purchases. I can imagine if you do this, having dozens and dozens of sub $20 charges on your card monthly would be a pretty big hassle. I bet someone could sneak in a few Amazon.com transactions here and there and I'd have no idea if they were small in amount.
Not sure what you mean by "No, that goes away." I understand the rest of your post. I agree it's wasted goods for the store, but they're not going to turn around and give it to you for free because you tell them you don't have a card.
While I can't speak to all of these places, the one cashless place that I frequent actually has it on the door on the way you walk in, and on the "sneeze guard" divider where you start your order. It's readily apparent for someone paying attention. I would not be surprised if they have to turn away one or fewer people per day.
I have credit cards, but I never use them for food - using the simple principle of "if I can't see it when I pay the bill, it doesn't belong on the card". I should be able to take my bill, and physically see what was bought - tickets to an event (I have stubs), items, etc. Thus, consumables that will not last until bill day can't go on the credit card.
I find this interesting, but totally arbitrary. Why create this division? What if you go to a theme park? What if you stay at a hotel? Are these cash or credit expenses? You can't see the good - both are experiences (and both generally would be pretty good candidates to have on a credit card). You'll have receipts, but nothing stops you from saving your receipt from the burrito you bought for lunch either. As someone who uses a credit card in most places, I don't really understand why someone would prefer cash unless it's for spending control/budgetary reasons.
At the kind of restaurants (grab and go, counter service, fast food) that are described in this article, almost exclusively yes.
These are the places where you order your food from a person at a register (or a kiosk!) and then pay. You might get a number or a buzzer, and a few minutes later, your food is ready. At the salad chains mentioned in the article, you watch them build your salad as you go down the line and then you pay at the very end right before they give it to you. They simply won't let you transact if you don't have a card.
"For starters, upscale Millennials -- among the most coveted of diners because of their youth and affluence -- prefer to pay in cash, according to Bankrate.com data."
I'm sorry, what? I'd love to meet these people. I'm in this demographic and there's 0 people I know who prefer cash. It seems like every time we go out, everyone is trying to throw down a card, occasionally there's a flurry of Venmo payments, but it's almost never cash. Upscale millennials are not unbanked, nor are they without access to technology or credit cards. Why would any one of them prefer cash?
Your wanting goods or services are not a debt public or private. They can refuse to sell you something if you don't pay with a credit card, or bitcoin, or acorns, or rare gemstones from some asteroid.
The clause you're citing is if you owe someone money for something. For instance, if we have a contract that says you owe me $10 every time you post something insane on Slashdot. If you offer me 1000 pennies for this, and I say "no, I only take rare gemstones," then you can consider your debt satisfied in the eyes of the law. You offered legal currency, I refused.
Miami minimum daylight is 10:32/day in December. Maximum is 13:45 in June.
Boston, the northern most big (US) city in the eastern timezone, minimum daylight is 9:05/day in December, Maximum is 15:17 in June.
Pretty much everyone is in agreement that Florida shouldn't be shifting on and off of daylight time. Because the swing (~3.25h) isn't so big, they should pick a timezone and stick with it. What I was trying to point out in my original post was that it makes decent sense for them to be on central (standard) time, especially considering they'll create a 5th US timezone 4 months a year otherwise. This has the added benefit of making it so 90% of the population won't be going to school/work in the dark at 8am (in Miami) for 112 days a year (Nov 12 - Mar 4)
In general, daylight saving screws a lot of things up, but there's something to be said for more northerly climates where the swings are greater actually needing to adjust the clocks. It always seems insane to me that Boston and Detroit can be on the same timezone, since their dawns are generally about an hour apart. I don't know how to fix it, other than having Boston/NYC move to Atlantic Time, and have the rest of the country shift east with them, but allowing the border states to switch if they'd rather stay on their existing time zone. I know for sure that daylight saving time isn't doing anything to fix the problem.
Shouldn't Florida consider staying on standard time year round? (Panhandle excepted) With year round DST in Jacksonville (most populous) and Miami (highest GDP for metro), the sun won't come up until 8:15, or 8:25 in the early days of January. This seems like a major drawback to the morning commute. Florida is naturally blessed with longer days than most states due to its southern geography. It probably can "afford" to not have to start its days in darkness (like the northern states do). Further, if Florida decides to go to DST year round (or Atlantic Time as many have accurately pointed out) that will put it to the EAST of the Eastern Timezone for several months a year, putting it east of NYC/DC/Boston. This doesn't make a ton of logical geographical sense, but worse, it fragments the country to 5 major time zones (sorry HI/AK). It's hard to imagine this not hurting Florida economically, to be decoupled from the major economic centers. (I'm not sure entirely on this point, but there was a study a few months ago about how there would be economic benefit to getting the country down to 2 timezones.)
There's a lot of promises being made about 5G. Most of them are not just hype, but many will not be possible once the standard is in place, and some of the real world deployment scenarios are figured out.
I think the telcos are going to figure out how to get fixed mobile broadband working. There's too much to lose if they don't. They've fallen way behind on broadband access (except for areas where Verizon invested in FiOS) and the cable companies have taken a huge lead. T-Mobile specifically has so much to gain, because they don't have a current broadband presence.
It's likely that especially for rural areas, this will be a game changing moment. There will likely be three or four truly high speed options for internet in places that might not even have one today.
Internet demands are going to continue to grow. 30 Mbps in 2020 may feel like 5 Mbps today. Usable, but pokey. Unusable if you have multiple devices (or users). A typical "heavy usage" household in 2020 might have demands to stream 4K Netflix/Hulu on a TV (~15Mbps), concurrent with a 4K YouTube feed (user #2) (~15Mbps), and life streaming kind of appliances (think Amazon Echo Show on steroids). (~5 Mbps). If you're doing any kind of file syncing or web browsing concurrently (user #3), you're going to get squeezed out. By ~2022, I would not be surprised if the working definition of "high speed internet" is 100 Mbps. Is 5G going to deliver that? For everyone?
One of the issues with saying d.s.t should be lowercase is that time zones are regularly capitalized. Eastern Standard Time becomes Eastern Daylight Time. Now people have in their heads that "Daylight" is a proper noun. I'm on board with dropping the "s" but I'll likely continue capitalizing. Until people start regularly following US GPO standard on capitalization of timezones, I think this is probably a fight lost.
I'm not certain Apple ever made much money on the cable aspect of their proprietary connectors. Sure, they have marked up cables available in every store and they brand them Apple so you know they're good, but they're not exactly making a ton of money on something like that. Consider the stocking cost, the manufacturing cost, the packaging cost - it's a lot more expensive to put a cable in the Apple Store on 59th St in NYC than it is for Monoprice to have it in their warehouse. They can still do the old certification gambit with "made for Apple" accessories, so I think they'll still get marginal revenue with USB-C.
The biggest disadvantage I can see if the lack of vendor lock in for the ecosystem. Who among us doesn't have a friend who bought the last iPhone because it "works with all my stuff' - by which they mean the 5 chargers, the custom built dock at their workstation, their car adapter, their soundsystem? Once the initial pain of transitioning to USB-C is over, the lock in is gone - here's the next gen Android phone and it uses the same port you know and love, Mr. Apple Fan Boy. The reverse is true too - people could switch from someone else to Apple more easily. I guess it depends what Apple is prioritizing - gaining market share, or avoiding losing it.
As an Android/Windows person, this makes me very happy, because in 2-3 years, people will simply ask: "Do you have a phone charger?" and literally everyone will have a USB-C cable. With the way the USB-C power spec works, it won't be unheard of to charge one phone from another - and that'll be a great way to top off a friend.
Just because I haven't done that job in the past doesn't mean I couldn't do it in the future. It doesn't mean I don't have the skills, or the knowledge to do it. It simply means that I was significantly less experienced than many other candidates - and arguably what they were looking for.
I completely agree with this. I was recently in the job market, and had this question asked everywhere. After not providing it for a bit, I realized it wouldn't hurt. It would frequently help. I specifically wanted a new job that was a good opportunity which also paid me about as much as my last jobs, which were great jobs. I didn't want to take a pay cut. I made it clear I wouldn't be accepting a pay cut. Using previous salary helped me weed out at least two companies that would have paid greater than 20% less than previous jobs.
Once, this totally backfired. I was interviewing for a job I was, arguably, underqualified for. It turns out they were looking for someone more senior, and wanted to pay 100% more than I had been paid at my previous job. When they found out how little I had been paid, they finally realized I was a bit too junior for the role.
Maybe I'm conditioned to this because I never need to stop for a bathroom break before the car runs out of fuel. It really bugs me when someone want's to go with me because I know they are going to need to stop much more often. Of course they're guzzling a 44oz soda while I sip water as needed.
This.
I usually do my 5-6 hour drive with no stops, or one quick bio break, but I recently took it with 2 other people and this forced 3 stops on us. One of the stops was 20+ min. This turned what should have been a 5.5 hour drive into a 6.25 hour drive. Absolutely horrible.
I'm no fan of distance driving, but it's a lot better to get it done and over with rather than add 10-15% to the total time.
Also, Phoenix to Spokane? Wow. Hope you don't have to do that more than twice a year.
I'm not lying. If I have a 350 mile drive, I only need an extra 50-75 miles to top off, in ideal conditions. How long will this take?
Superchargers do a better job when the battery is very low, and also, are only placed in certain spots. This means that when I drive from Philadelphia to Cape Cod (350 miles), I have a choice to make as to which supercharger to stop at. I probably can't make it 320 miles to the last Supercharger, so I need to stop somewhere earlier. I'll probably have to stop when there is 100 - 150 miles left on the current charge. This means slower charging to get to my 50 to 75 mile top up. While exact numbers aren't available from Tesla, it certainly looks like it will take 25-35 minutes to get that 50-75 miles top off.
My drive is specific to me. It may seem like I'm creating a scenario where I've set Tesla to fail, but it's just my real world scenario.
And for the record: I *love* Tesla. I own stock. I want them to succeed. I badly want autopilot (specifically for this drive!). I test drove a Model S, and didn't love the huge sedan feel (I currently drive a coupe, and prefer the way it handles). I have range anxiety, which is the biggest thing that keeps me on a gas car. It sucks.
I think Tesla fans need a dose of reality when it comes to this Supercharger fantasy of breaking up a long drive by resting 1 hour every 4. You don't get a "nice dinner". You're sitting around and waiting, when you don't want to be. It's not good. That's really all I was saying in my original post.
I really love this argument of a "nice restaurant" while recharging. When I'm in the middle of a 350 mile, 7 hour drive up the traffic hellscape that is I-95, I'm definitely looking to add 30-60 minutes at a "nice restaurant" at the Darien rest stop. I have my choice between a McDonald's, a Pinkberry, a S'barros, and maybe a Subway, if I recall.
The point is not the lack of nice restaurants, it's the lack of me wanting to extend a trip an extra 30 min to squeak out an extra 50 miles.
Non Disclosures which release the car company from fault can't be that uncommon. My father had to sign one around 2000. He purchased a mid tier luxury car, and heard some weird knocking in the wheel well after less than a year. He took it in for maintenance, and the techs said there was no issue and while they could reproduce the knocking when turning, it wasn't an issue. A day later, he was driving down the street and the entire wheel, brake, etc fell off the car, the axle cracked (unclear if this happened first, or if it hit the road and snapped) and the car obviously had to be towed... right to the dealer. Their first offer was 50% off to fix it. When he said no to that offer, they gave him the next model year up that they had been using for test drives, with about 700 miles on it. He had to sign a document promising to not disclose the incident, and release the company from any future lawsuits regarding the accident.
I love the keyboard. I'm more accurate with it. I'm slightly slower than typing on glass (this wasn't the case 3 years ago, but I have gotten a lot better with glass). However, punctuation, acronyms (important for my job), spelling non standard things - stuff that would just destroy autocorrect - these things work better with a physical keyboard.
The hub (BB10) and email support is simply great. It all works. It's fast. It's easily accessible from any screen or app. I also have extensive experience with Android and I find the email (Gmail) to be better, but slower. The Exchange support in the Gmail app is a damn trainwreck. MailWise (the only other app my company allows) is better, but still doesn't handle invites very well. Attachments (images) don't always come through. It's slow.
The battery life is great. Maybe because it's underpowered compared to other power hungry processors, but I can get it to last 2 days if needed, and it always makes it through the day. There are times my Android doesn't make it past 3 PM.
The rest of BlackBerry isn't very good. The app support is dismal. It's beyond a joke. The Android runtime was a good idea, but poorly implemented (no Google services) and behind (Android 4.0.x, locked into BB10 OS build). Everything else is OK, but not really worth writing home about.
Why do sites insist I enter my town, state, then zipcode? If I enter my zipcode, you can get my state, and 99% of time, my town. I find this maddening. Country should be first, then zipcode, then state and town auto populated with an option to change.
Apple the corporation exists to enhance shareholder value. All corporations do.
Apple doesn't design attractive platforms for developers for entertainment, or because they love changing the world. They do it to increase shareholder value. Being perceived, by its customers, as qualitatively superior to Android and Windows, is a means to the end of increasing shareholder value.
Mod parent up. There is quite simply no other relevant measure of a CEO for a publicly traded company. These people are hired by the board, who have a responsibility to the shareholders, who want exactly one thing: long term appreciation of their assets.
AAPL is at a record high, up 99% since he took over. NASDAQ is up 93%, S&P500 up 77%. He's beating the market with the world's largest market cap. This is extraordinarily difficult.
I'll give him an A-, because GOOG is beating AAPL, up 137% in the same time period - and while there is a lot of difference between the two businesses, they seem to be the closest competitor. He's beating Samsung (83%), MSFT (87%), and HPQ (56%).
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for taking a look. I wish Google would apply some level of logic to this. It's incredibly distracting when using the map. I understand that they may be "official names" that someone applied for and got granted by the city, and therefore in the official record, but it should be possible to correlate these names with some kind of culture significance to filter our the housing development names (as you say) from legitimate cultural districts.
The risk in not doing this is that you lose all context. For instance, South Mountain you called out definitely appears to be a real identifiable place - bounded by a river on the north, a mountain range on the south, and S 28th and S 47th on the west and east. However, the moment you zoom into the neighborhood, you get ~100 (!) additional neighborhood names. "South Mountain Village" (apparently the village center of South Mountain) is still on the map, but it's given no significance vs "Knox Ranch" which appears to be one street of 14 houses.
Has anyone else noticed that the Phoenix area seems a bit over the top with the neighborhood names? I live in NYC and don't know Phoenix well, but it seems like every 30 - 100 houses have their own name. People can't really use these, right? Just take a look Pueblo Hermoso, for instance, looks like it's about one building, and appears to be some kind of a strip mall. I'm used to NYC, where even a small ("newer," some would say fictional) neighborhood like NoHo might have 5,000 residents, and 100+ buildings, with stores and restaurants in it. Obviously, this is because of the density of Manhattan. However, in Phoenix, are people even using these names? Would a local even know where "Henry Leo Place" is? Would love to have a local weigh in.
3) It shortens my card statement by dozens of items so I don't need to spend so much time later checking through against the retained receipts in case someone somewhere has got my card details and is using my account. Perhaps you don't bother doing that.
This used to be a big deal to me, but not really anymore. I find that I can check my credit card bill in about 3-5 minutes. Maybe I could cut this down to 1-2 minutes if I removed a bunch of transactions like you have. In general, I scan for all the merchants that I frequent, and as long as there's no double charges (or charges on the same day), and it's about what I remember, then I call it good. I am not matching all my receipts against my purchases. I can imagine if you do this, having dozens and dozens of sub $20 charges on your card monthly would be a pretty big hassle. I bet someone could sneak in a few Amazon.com transactions here and there and I'd have no idea if they were small in amount.
Snopes seems to indicate that per the coinage act of 1965, coins are legal tender in this regard.
While I can't speak to all of these places, the one cashless place that I frequent actually has it on the door on the way you walk in, and on the "sneeze guard" divider where you start your order. It's readily apparent for someone paying attention. I would not be surprised if they have to turn away one or fewer people per day.
I have credit cards, but I never use them for food - using the simple principle of "if I can't see it when I pay the bill, it doesn't belong on the card". I should be able to take my bill, and physically see what was bought - tickets to an event (I have stubs), items, etc. Thus, consumables that will not last until bill day can't go on the credit card.
I find this interesting, but totally arbitrary. Why create this division? What if you go to a theme park? What if you stay at a hotel? Are these cash or credit expenses? You can't see the good - both are experiences (and both generally would be pretty good candidates to have on a credit card). You'll have receipts, but nothing stops you from saving your receipt from the burrito you bought for lunch either. As someone who uses a credit card in most places, I don't really understand why someone would prefer cash unless it's for spending control/budgetary reasons.
At the kind of restaurants (grab and go, counter service, fast food) that are described in this article, almost exclusively yes.
These are the places where you order your food from a person at a register (or a kiosk!) and then pay. You might get a number or a buzzer, and a few minutes later, your food is ready. At the salad chains mentioned in the article, you watch them build your salad as you go down the line and then you pay at the very end right before they give it to you. They simply won't let you transact if you don't have a card.
"For starters, upscale Millennials -- among the most coveted of diners because of their youth and affluence -- prefer to pay in cash, according to Bankrate.com data."
I'm sorry, what? I'd love to meet these people. I'm in this demographic and there's 0 people I know who prefer cash. It seems like every time we go out, everyone is trying to throw down a card, occasionally there's a flurry of Venmo payments, but it's almost never cash. Upscale millennials are not unbanked, nor are they without access to technology or credit cards. Why would any one of them prefer cash?
Your wanting goods or services are not a debt public or private. They can refuse to sell you something if you don't pay with a credit card, or bitcoin, or acorns, or rare gemstones from some asteroid.
The clause you're citing is if you owe someone money for something. For instance, if we have a contract that says you owe me $10 every time you post something insane on Slashdot. If you offer me 1000 pennies for this, and I say "no, I only take rare gemstones," then you can consider your debt satisfied in the eyes of the law. You offered legal currency, I refused.
Point taken.
Miami minimum daylight is 10:32/day in December. Maximum is 13:45 in June.
Boston, the northern most big (US) city in the eastern timezone, minimum daylight is 9:05/day in December, Maximum is 15:17 in June.
Pretty much everyone is in agreement that Florida shouldn't be shifting on and off of daylight time. Because the swing (~3.25h) isn't so big, they should pick a timezone and stick with it. What I was trying to point out in my original post was that it makes decent sense for them to be on central (standard) time, especially considering they'll create a 5th US timezone 4 months a year otherwise. This has the added benefit of making it so 90% of the population won't be going to school/work in the dark at 8am (in Miami) for 112 days a year (Nov 12 - Mar 4)
In general, daylight saving screws a lot of things up, but there's something to be said for more northerly climates where the swings are greater actually needing to adjust the clocks. It always seems insane to me that Boston and Detroit can be on the same timezone, since their dawns are generally about an hour apart. I don't know how to fix it, other than having Boston/NYC move to Atlantic Time, and have the rest of the country shift east with them, but allowing the border states to switch if they'd rather stay on their existing time zone. I know for sure that daylight saving time isn't doing anything to fix the problem.
Shouldn't Florida consider staying on standard time year round? (Panhandle excepted) With year round DST in Jacksonville (most populous) and Miami (highest GDP for metro), the sun won't come up until 8:15, or 8:25 in the early days of January. This seems like a major drawback to the morning commute. Florida is naturally blessed with longer days than most states due to its southern geography. It probably can "afford" to not have to start its days in darkness (like the northern states do). Further, if Florida decides to go to DST year round (or Atlantic Time as many have accurately pointed out) that will put it to the EAST of the Eastern Timezone for several months a year, putting it east of NYC/DC/Boston. This doesn't make a ton of logical geographical sense, but worse, it fragments the country to 5 major time zones (sorry HI/AK). It's hard to imagine this not hurting Florida economically, to be decoupled from the major economic centers. (I'm not sure entirely on this point, but there was a study a few months ago about how there would be economic benefit to getting the country down to 2 timezones.)
There's a lot of promises being made about 5G. Most of them are not just hype, but many will not be possible once the standard is in place, and some of the real world deployment scenarios are figured out.
I think the telcos are going to figure out how to get fixed mobile broadband working. There's too much to lose if they don't. They've fallen way behind on broadband access (except for areas where Verizon invested in FiOS) and the cable companies have taken a huge lead. T-Mobile specifically has so much to gain, because they don't have a current broadband presence.
It's likely that especially for rural areas, this will be a game changing moment. There will likely be three or four truly high speed options for internet in places that might not even have one today.
Internet demands are going to continue to grow. 30 Mbps in 2020 may feel like 5 Mbps today. Usable, but pokey. Unusable if you have multiple devices (or users). A typical "heavy usage" household in 2020 might have demands to stream 4K Netflix/Hulu on a TV (~15Mbps), concurrent with a 4K YouTube feed (user #2) (~15Mbps), and life streaming kind of appliances (think Amazon Echo Show on steroids). (~5 Mbps). If you're doing any kind of file syncing or web browsing concurrently (user #3), you're going to get squeezed out. By ~2022, I would not be surprised if the working definition of "high speed internet" is 100 Mbps. Is 5G going to deliver that? For everyone?
One of the issues with saying d.s.t should be lowercase is that time zones are regularly capitalized. Eastern Standard Time becomes Eastern Daylight Time. Now people have in their heads that "Daylight" is a proper noun. I'm on board with dropping the "s" but I'll likely continue capitalizing. Until people start regularly following US GPO standard on capitalization of timezones, I think this is probably a fight lost.
I'm not certain Apple ever made much money on the cable aspect of their proprietary connectors. Sure, they have marked up cables available in every store and they brand them Apple so you know they're good, but they're not exactly making a ton of money on something like that. Consider the stocking cost, the manufacturing cost, the packaging cost - it's a lot more expensive to put a cable in the Apple Store on 59th St in NYC than it is for Monoprice to have it in their warehouse. They can still do the old certification gambit with "made for Apple" accessories, so I think they'll still get marginal revenue with USB-C.
The biggest disadvantage I can see if the lack of vendor lock in for the ecosystem. Who among us doesn't have a friend who bought the last iPhone because it "works with all my stuff' - by which they mean the 5 chargers, the custom built dock at their workstation, their car adapter, their soundsystem? Once the initial pain of transitioning to USB-C is over, the lock in is gone - here's the next gen Android phone and it uses the same port you know and love, Mr. Apple Fan Boy. The reverse is true too - people could switch from someone else to Apple more easily. I guess it depends what Apple is prioritizing - gaining market share, or avoiding losing it.
As an Android/Windows person, this makes me very happy, because in 2-3 years, people will simply ask: "Do you have a phone charger?" and literally everyone will have a USB-C cable. With the way the USB-C power spec works, it won't be unheard of to charge one phone from another - and that'll be a great way to top off a friend.
Just because I haven't done that job in the past doesn't mean I couldn't do it in the future. It doesn't mean I don't have the skills, or the knowledge to do it. It simply means that I was significantly less experienced than many other candidates - and arguably what they were looking for.
I completely agree with this. I was recently in the job market, and had this question asked everywhere. After not providing it for a bit, I realized it wouldn't hurt. It would frequently help. I specifically wanted a new job that was a good opportunity which also paid me about as much as my last jobs, which were great jobs. I didn't want to take a pay cut. I made it clear I wouldn't be accepting a pay cut. Using previous salary helped me weed out at least two companies that would have paid greater than 20% less than previous jobs.
Once, this totally backfired. I was interviewing for a job I was, arguably, underqualified for. It turns out they were looking for someone more senior, and wanted to pay 100% more than I had been paid at my previous job. When they found out how little I had been paid, they finally realized I was a bit too junior for the role.
Time Warner is not Time Warner Cable. AT&T is not trying to buy their way into the ISP/Phone/Video space - they are already there with Uverse/DirecTV.
Time Warner creates and owns content.
I mean, it wasn't quite 5 seconds, but I think that Belkin has you covered here, per this Engadget post.
Maybe I'm conditioned to this because I never need to stop for a bathroom break before the car runs out of fuel. It really bugs me when someone want's to go with me because I know they are going to need to stop much more often. Of course they're guzzling a 44oz soda while I sip water as needed.
This.
I usually do my 5-6 hour drive with no stops, or one quick bio break, but I recently took it with 2 other people and this forced 3 stops on us. One of the stops was 20+ min. This turned what should have been a 5.5 hour drive into a 6.25 hour drive. Absolutely horrible.
I'm no fan of distance driving, but it's a lot better to get it done and over with rather than add 10-15% to the total time.
Also, Phoenix to Spokane? Wow. Hope you don't have to do that more than twice a year.
I'm not lying. If I have a 350 mile drive, I only need an extra 50-75 miles to top off, in ideal conditions. How long will this take? Superchargers do a better job when the battery is very low, and also, are only placed in certain spots. This means that when I drive from Philadelphia to Cape Cod (350 miles), I have a choice to make as to which supercharger to stop at. I probably can't make it 320 miles to the last Supercharger, so I need to stop somewhere earlier. I'll probably have to stop when there is 100 - 150 miles left on the current charge. This means slower charging to get to my 50 to 75 mile top up. While exact numbers aren't available from Tesla, it certainly looks like it will take 25-35 minutes to get that 50-75 miles top off. My drive is specific to me. It may seem like I'm creating a scenario where I've set Tesla to fail, but it's just my real world scenario. And for the record: I *love* Tesla. I own stock. I want them to succeed. I badly want autopilot (specifically for this drive!). I test drove a Model S, and didn't love the huge sedan feel (I currently drive a coupe, and prefer the way it handles). I have range anxiety, which is the biggest thing that keeps me on a gas car. It sucks. I think Tesla fans need a dose of reality when it comes to this Supercharger fantasy of breaking up a long drive by resting 1 hour every 4. You don't get a "nice dinner". You're sitting around and waiting, when you don't want to be. It's not good. That's really all I was saying in my original post.
I really love this argument of a "nice restaurant" while recharging. When I'm in the middle of a 350 mile, 7 hour drive up the traffic hellscape that is I-95, I'm definitely looking to add 30-60 minutes at a "nice restaurant" at the Darien rest stop. I have my choice between a McDonald's, a Pinkberry, a S'barros, and maybe a Subway, if I recall. The point is not the lack of nice restaurants, it's the lack of me wanting to extend a trip an extra 30 min to squeak out an extra 50 miles.
Non Disclosures which release the car company from fault can't be that uncommon. My father had to sign one around 2000. He purchased a mid tier luxury car, and heard some weird knocking in the wheel well after less than a year. He took it in for maintenance, and the techs said there was no issue and while they could reproduce the knocking when turning, it wasn't an issue. A day later, he was driving down the street and the entire wheel, brake, etc fell off the car, the axle cracked (unclear if this happened first, or if it hit the road and snapped) and the car obviously had to be towed... right to the dealer. Their first offer was 50% off to fix it. When he said no to that offer, they gave him the next model year up that they had been using for test drives, with about 700 miles on it. He had to sign a document promising to not disclose the incident, and release the company from any future lawsuits regarding the accident.
Could it be, because I like it?
I love the keyboard. I'm more accurate with it. I'm slightly slower than typing on glass (this wasn't the case 3 years ago, but I have gotten a lot better with glass). However, punctuation, acronyms (important for my job), spelling non standard things - stuff that would just destroy autocorrect - these things work better with a physical keyboard.
The hub (BB10) and email support is simply great. It all works. It's fast. It's easily accessible from any screen or app. I also have extensive experience with Android and I find the email (Gmail) to be better, but slower. The Exchange support in the Gmail app is a damn trainwreck. MailWise (the only other app my company allows) is better, but still doesn't handle invites very well. Attachments (images) don't always come through. It's slow.
The battery life is great. Maybe because it's underpowered compared to other power hungry processors, but I can get it to last 2 days if needed, and it always makes it through the day. There are times my Android doesn't make it past 3 PM.
The rest of BlackBerry isn't very good. The app support is dismal. It's beyond a joke. The Android runtime was a good idea, but poorly implemented (no Google services) and behind (Android 4.0.x, locked into BB10 OS build). Everything else is OK, but not really worth writing home about.
Why do sites insist I enter my town, state, then zipcode? If I enter my zipcode, you can get my state, and 99% of time, my town. I find this maddening. Country should be first, then zipcode, then state and town auto populated with an option to change.
Apple the corporation exists to enhance shareholder value. All corporations do.
Apple doesn't design attractive platforms for developers for entertainment, or because they love changing the world. They do it to increase shareholder value. Being perceived, by its customers, as qualitatively superior to Android and Windows, is a means to the end of increasing shareholder value.
Mod parent up. There is quite simply no other relevant measure of a CEO for a publicly traded company. These people are hired by the board, who have a responsibility to the shareholders, who want exactly one thing: long term appreciation of their assets.
AAPL is at a record high, up 99% since he took over. NASDAQ is up 93%, S&P500 up 77%. He's beating the market with the world's largest market cap. This is extraordinarily difficult.
I'll give him an A-, because GOOG is beating AAPL, up 137% in the same time period - and while there is a lot of difference between the two businesses, they seem to be the closest competitor. He's beating Samsung (83%), MSFT (87%), and HPQ (56%).