There is a huge difference in that Ethanol is mobile, pumping water uphill is not. You can't run a car or a truck or airplane or boat on water pumped up a hill*, but you can on ethanol.
* Unless you use that to charge batteries and then discharge in the vehicle, but by this point you are WAY below in efficiency, not to mention the cost of producing all of those battery vehicles. For the most part, cars and trucks and boats can burn ethanol with very little modification.
What did you think they were doing, going to all the expense of taking photos and fingerprints then throwing them away at the end of the day? Why would they ever do this? The whole point of taking photos and prints at the border is to look the individual up in databases.
I don't know if this is supposed to be a joke, but such a plan would never, ever happen, for a plethora of reasons - not the least of which is that many major airlines use iPads as Infotainment devices *on the flight itself*, and pilots and attendants also routinely use tablets. Flight manuals nowadays are all on tablets. Passenger lists, all moving to tablets.
I won't even get into the amount of calls to congresscritters that would happen if you tried to tell the global business community they could no longer use their phones or laptops on flights (yes most modern thin laptops nowadays do not have removable batteries)
Or you could, you know, simply allow some developers to come in and build some decent high rises in this city, thus loosening the market for quality real estate and in tandem causing rents across the board to drop. But no, that is too easy.
Blame Zoning, Not Tech, for San Francisco's Housing Crisis
The whole housing shortage in the bay area is entirely self-created. If the city would allow developers to come in downtown and build a few giant condo buildings they would do so in a heartbeat, because the market is obviously red hot. But the city does not want to allow the market to solve the problem.
Your overly pedantic definition doesn't change at all why your original comment, that HPs sales decline is a "consequence of Moore's law" is inaccurate. HPs sales are dropping because the need for personal computing power has reached a plateau. Simple as that. It's the exact same reason Smartphone sales are slowing. You need killer apps to drive hardware sales, people only care about "faster" to a point.
Moore's law is not what is dying. What is dying is people's desire for "faster", at least on the personal front. I am typing this on a 4 year old MacBook air. Every single application I run on this thing launches in under a second. I can play HD video without lag. It runs anything I want to do fine because most of the heavy lifting nowadays is up in the cloud - so, why would I buy a new PC? This is the reality most people live in now.
Until some big new wave of high-demand workloads on-premise arises (VR perhaps? Holography?), demand for PCs and Tabets will continue to fall off a cliff, because people simply don't need them. This has nothing at all to do with Moore's law at all - you could build a PC 2X as fast for 1/2 the cost, people still won't buy it if they don't have a use for it.
I am guessing this guy tried to blackmail Samsung for lots of money. Which actually makes the whole story suspect. You would think The Verge could do better reporting.
It's not a corporations job to optimize anything for human benefit. That is the job of government, or it is SUPPOSED to be, unfortunately what you have in the United States is a horribly broken system that is no longer democracy.
Indeed, the biggest problem with this article is that it starts out from a base assumption that is flawed - that for some unknown reason, human "moral judgement" is superior to that of an algorithm based on big data, without giving any logical reason WHY we should trust humans more.
However, given the way humans act around the world globally - on average I would take a machine's judgement over a human's judgement any day of the weekm
The UK will import more from the EU regardless of what happens with Brexit, because it is economically infeasible for them to import as much from Asia or America as it is to import from across the channel.
"Ultimately, the convenience of paying with phones..."
What is more convenient about paying with my phone vs paying with my contactless credit card again?
My credit card needs no wireless coverage in the middle of the giant faraday cage that is the local big box retailer. It also does not need a charged battery. I also don't have to unlock it to use it to pay. All of these things are true for mobile wallets.
The simple truth is mobile payments are LESS convenient than contactless credit cards, and that is not going to change. The only thing that is going to make mobile payments and digital wallets really take off is if it happens in tandem with a new e currency like Bitcoin being natively accepted everywhere.
Actually what would be best would be spending more resources in combating the economic and social issues that are causing the crime to arise in the first place. Dollars spent on social programs reduce far more crime than dollars spent on police.
I am getting really sick of the media and others bashiing self-driving technology when they can't see the forest for the trees - no new technology is ever perfect. When commercial air travel first started in the 20s, crashes happened all the time - it was extremely dangerous by modern standards, and even more dangerous than current car travel. Air travel is now by orders of magnitude the safest way to travel on earth - how did that come to be? It came to be because the regulation ensured that accidents were investigated, root cause analysis done, and whatever deficiency was found was addressed.
This is the exact same thing that will happen with self-driving technology, except that it will happen at an EXPONENTIALLY faster pace.
Yes, people will get into accidents with self-driving cars. Yes, people will die. Anyone who does not think this is going to happen is living behind a reality distortion field. However, what happens with self-driving technology is that every single accident gives the opportunity to push software updates out to make EVERY CAR instantly safer. This is simply not the case with human drivers - when a human driver causes an accident, there is no feedback loop that makes all other human drivers safer.
I used to be an ardent user of Hangouts for VOIP and video calls home. Depending on quality of the hotel wifi, it was spotty, but usually worked OK. One trip it was on the fritz, so I tried Facebook instead. The voice and video quality was noticeably better. I switched back and forth between thema few times after, and every time, Facebook had far better quality on average. I no longer use Hangouts at all. I am not sure if the difference is in the protocol stack or in the compression algorithm, but at the end of the day, as a user I don't really care - what I care about is seeing my family clearly and having them hear me clearly, and Facebook Messenger is pretty much the best alternative to Skype in this regard. The difference of course is nearly everyone in the world already has Messenger installed, whereas Skype is an extra thing to ask people to load.
Like I said, mine has been in use for 12 years already and I have never touched it. Its already paid for itself twice - I could throw it away this year and buy a new one, and still be ahead.
The energy use difference between an old washer and a modern energy star washer is so great that it would pay for the washer after only a few years of use assuming you pay the national average of 10 cents / kwh. Meanwhile, the energy star front loader I bought in 2005 still works fine over decade later, so I have made 2x my investment. But no, feel free to keep using your old inefficient model as long as you want.. I bet you also have a 1970's "beer fridge" in your garage that costs you a couple of dozen cases of beer a year in energy.
TBF, Chrome *does* sync your passwords *AND* browser history with Google by default after you have logged it in. You have to know enough to manually turn those features off.
The exchange of a first born child for the ability to access a social network would not be deemed as "adequate consideration" by any reasonable legal scholar, and thus the TOS and any contract surrounding it would be considered null and void.
Also considering the fact that Amazon has allowed this for at least two years with Prime Video, I don't see how it is considered "bild", if anything it is Netflix bowing to competitive pressure and playing catchup.
Unfortunately the very nature of services like Cortana, Alexa, and Google Now *require* you to send them your data in order for them to work. How is Google Now supposed to advise me of my flight tomorrow being delayed if it doesn't know about the flight in the first place.
These services are incredibly useful and powerful and get more useful and powerful all the time, yet, Apple has none of them. This is what analysts are concerned about. People will willingly sacrifice a bit of their data if it makes their lives infinitely simpler - I know I have no problem with it because Google Now is *just that good*.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a huge difference in that Ethanol is mobile, pumping water uphill is not. You can't run a car or a truck or airplane or boat on water pumped up a hill*, but you can on ethanol.
* Unless you use that to charge batteries and then discharge in the vehicle, but by this point you are WAY below in efficiency, not to mention the cost of producing all of those battery vehicles. For the most part, cars and trucks and boats can burn ethanol with very little modification.
Er... of course it ends up in a DB.
What did you think they were doing, going to all the expense of taking photos and fingerprints then throwing them away at the end of the day? Why would they ever do this? The whole point of taking photos and prints at the border is to look the individual up in databases.
I don't know if this is supposed to be a joke, but such a plan would never, ever happen, for a plethora of reasons - not the least of which is that many major airlines use iPads as Infotainment devices *on the flight itself*, and pilots and attendants also routinely use tablets. Flight manuals nowadays are all on tablets. Passenger lists, all moving to tablets.
I won't even get into the amount of calls to congresscritters that would happen if you tried to tell the global business community they could no longer use their phones or laptops on flights (yes most modern thin laptops nowadays do not have removable batteries)
Or you could, you know, simply allow some developers to come in and build some decent high rises in this city, thus loosening the market for quality real estate and in tandem causing rents across the board to drop. But no, that is too easy.
Blame Zoning, Not Tech, for San Francisco's Housing Crisis
http://www.citylab.com/housing...
.. and this is exactly the problem.
The whole housing shortage in the bay area is entirely self-created. If the city would allow developers to come in downtown and build a few giant condo buildings they would do so in a heartbeat, because the market is obviously red hot. But the city does not want to allow the market to solve the problem.
Your overly pedantic definition doesn't change at all why your original comment, that HPs sales decline is a "consequence of Moore's law" is inaccurate. HPs sales are dropping because the need for personal computing power has reached a plateau. Simple as that. It's the exact same reason Smartphone sales are slowing. You need killer apps to drive hardware sales, people only care about "faster" to a point.
Can I use this to jailbreak my own phone? Please share if so.
Moore's law is not what is dying. What is dying is people's desire for "faster", at least on the personal front. I am typing this on a 4 year old MacBook air. Every single application I run on this thing launches in under a second. I can play HD video without lag. It runs anything I want to do fine because most of the heavy lifting nowadays is up in the cloud - so, why would I buy a new PC? This is the reality most people live in now.
Until some big new wave of high-demand workloads on-premise arises (VR perhaps? Holography?), demand for PCs and Tabets will continue to fall off a cliff, because people simply don't need them. This has nothing at all to do with Moore's law at all - you could build a PC 2X as fast for 1/2 the cost, people still won't buy it if they don't have a use for it.
I am guessing this guy tried to blackmail Samsung for lots of money. Which actually makes the whole story suspect. You would think The Verge could do better reporting.
It's not a corporations job to optimize anything for human benefit. That is the job of government, or it is SUPPOSED to be, unfortunately what you have in the United States is a horribly broken system that is no longer democracy.
Indeed, the biggest problem with this article is that it starts out from a base assumption that is flawed - that for some unknown reason, human "moral judgement" is superior to that of an algorithm based on big data, without giving any logical reason WHY we should trust humans more.
However, given the way humans act around the world globally - on average I would take a machine's judgement over a human's judgement any day of the weekm
The UK will import more from the EU regardless of what happens with Brexit, because it is economically infeasible for them to import as much from Asia or America as it is to import from across the channel.
Their position is irrelevant. Any employment contract that inhibits mobilitybis null and void in California.
This suit will be thrown out before the ink dries. Employee mobility is very strongly enforced in California.
"Ultimately, the convenience of paying with phones..."
What is more convenient about paying with my phone vs paying with my contactless credit card again?
My credit card needs no wireless coverage in the
middle of the giant faraday cage that is the local big box retailer. It also does not need a charged battery. I also don't have to unlock it to use it to pay. All of these things are true for mobile wallets.
The simple truth is mobile payments are LESS convenient than contactless credit cards, and that is not going to change. The only thing that is going to make mobile payments and digital wallets really take off is if it happens in tandem with a new e currency like Bitcoin being natively accepted everywhere.
Actually what would be best would be spending more resources in combating the economic and social issues that are causing the crime to arise in the first place. Dollars spent on social programs reduce far more crime than dollars spent on police.
I am getting really sick of the media and others bashiing self-driving technology when they can't see the forest for the trees - no new technology is ever perfect. When commercial air travel first started in the 20s, crashes happened all the time - it was extremely dangerous by modern standards, and even more dangerous than current car travel. Air travel is now by orders of magnitude the safest way to travel on earth - how did that come to be? It came to be because the regulation ensured that accidents were investigated, root cause analysis done, and whatever deficiency was found was addressed.
This is the exact same thing that will happen with self-driving technology, except that it will happen at an EXPONENTIALLY faster pace.
Yes, people will get into accidents with self-driving cars. Yes, people will die. Anyone who does not think this is going to happen is living behind a reality distortion field. However, what happens with self-driving technology is that every single accident gives the opportunity to push software updates out to make EVERY CAR instantly safer. This is simply not the case with human drivers - when a human driver causes an accident, there is no feedback loop that makes all other human drivers safer.
I used to be an ardent user of Hangouts for VOIP and video calls home. Depending on quality of the hotel wifi, it was spotty, but usually worked OK. One trip it was on the fritz, so I tried Facebook instead. The voice and video quality was noticeably better. I switched back and forth between thema few times after, and every time, Facebook had far better quality on average. I no longer use Hangouts at all. I am not sure if the difference is in the protocol stack or in the compression algorithm, but at the end of the day, as a user I don't really care - what I care about is seeing my family clearly and having them hear me clearly, and Facebook Messenger is pretty much the best alternative to Skype in this regard. The difference of course is nearly everyone in the world already has Messenger installed, whereas Skype is an extra thing to ask people to load.
Like I said, mine has been in use for 12 years already and I have never touched it. Its already paid for itself twice - I could throw it away this year and buy a new one, and still be ahead.
You don't need 20 years. You only need 3 - 5.
The energy use difference between an old washer and a modern energy star washer is so great that it would pay for the washer after only a few years of use assuming you pay the national average of 10 cents / kwh. Meanwhile, the energy star front loader I bought in 2005 still works fine over decade later, so I have made 2x my investment. But no, feel free to keep using your old inefficient model as long as you want.. I bet you also have a 1970's "beer fridge" in your garage that costs you a couple of dozen cases of beer a year in energy.
TBF, Chrome *does* sync your passwords *AND* browser history with Google by default after you have logged it in. You have to know enough to manually turn those features off.
The exchange of a first born child for the ability to access a social network would not be deemed as "adequate consideration" by any reasonable legal scholar, and thus the TOS and any contract surrounding it would be considered null and void.
Also considering the fact that Amazon has allowed this for at least two years with Prime Video, I don't see how it is considered "bild", if anything it is Netflix bowing to competitive pressure and playing catchup.
... for two years or so...
Bold move indeed...
Unfortunately the very nature of services like Cortana, Alexa, and Google Now *require* you to send them your data in order for them to work. How is Google Now supposed to advise me of my flight tomorrow being delayed if it doesn't know about the flight in the first place.
These services are incredibly useful and powerful and get more useful and powerful all the time, yet, Apple has none of them. This is what analysts are concerned about. People will willingly sacrifice a bit of their data if it makes their lives infinitely simpler - I know I have no problem with it because Google Now is *just that good*.