You used to be able to buy long-lasting incandescent bulbs for slightly more and they did last longer. Sylvania LED bulbs seem to be especially unreliable. Are they a bad player or is this new normal?
Am I wrong to consider energy efficiency problem with light bulbs largely solved? LED bulb are affordable and efficient. Is there anything else left to do?
However, modern LED bulbs are not as reliable as an early models. I have very first Phillips LED bulb that was sold, it cost almost 80$ when it was new and it still works. About a year ago I purchased 20$ LED bulb and noticed it already intermittently fails to light. Such lack of reliability is a significant e-waste issue.
While it is appealing to support such move when Australia is so clearly in the wrong, just think through implications of corporations prevailing over governments. Do you think for a moment that corporations won't abuse such newfound power? If Australia can be subdued in this way, so can any Middle East, Africa, South America, Baltic, Scandinavian, non-China Asia, Canada and so on countries. This is more than a half of the world where rule of law potentially could be subverted. There is no way this would end well for citizens of there.
The only reasonable outcome to cheer and hope for is that compliance with this misguided proposed legislation would make these services awful, such as YouTube with only lolcats videos and 6 months+ review and approval queue to publish anything new.
Joe Rogan interview with Dorsy and Vijaya pretty much confirmed all the conspiracy theories. Go watch it, or just watch clips/highlights if you are still skeptical.
Our society cannot function when political views are actively suppressed by private entities with clear agenda. Social media has to be regulated as common carriers or we will not have any free speech left.
Being paranoid that Google will know everything about you because of a youtube premium subscription just shows a profound lack of understanding on the subject.
Categorically no. Even if Google knows everything about me, the data is noisy and likely thoroughly poisoned. I am not going to volunteer any confirmation of any data they might have on me, as I am sitting here at home at 123 Street Ave, City, Texas and eating my Cheetos and drinking Mountain Dew while feeding Purina to my dog.
You are probably right, they know all that stuff, but not in a legal way. That is, I didn't consensually offered it to them after signing EULA protecting them from liability.
However, they have no clue that I am a brony, listen to Nickelback and Justin Bieber on repeat, prefer Oracle databases, and space-delineate instead of tab-delineate my code. We all have our dirty secrets.
I would never get YouTube Premium, as I don't ever want Google to be able to profile me in such way. Subscribing means offering Google definitive identity and home address as a result of financial transaction of paying subscription.
Sure, but interrupting my shopping for flooblebuzzle to get me to buy fluddergunk is risky. What if I decide that I don't after all need flooblebuzzle?
That is, if I am already shopping, why show me commercials in hopes to get me to shop?
The brief video spots appear in response to search results on the shopping app, valuable space for advertisers since people searching for products on the app have a higher propensity to buy than those scrolling through Facebook or watching videos on Google’s YouTube.
So Amazon is planning to show video ads while I search for products to buy from them? This makes no sense, it is like shopping channel introducing commercial breaks.
Canada has robust merit-based immigration system but makes it very difficult to sponsor people for non-immigrant visas like H1B in US. As such, shifting jobs to Canada isn't about being able to import more cheap programmers from India.
This is just a bunch of feel-good nonsense. While nobody sets out to write inefficient code, most of the code is inefficient due to reuse of generic libraries and lack of compiler optimizations. If you think you are different, then when was the last time you looked at your gcc compiler flags and do you know what each one of them does?
There is significant processing to be done if we want it to actually work.
Alternative way looking at it, is that packaging is artificially cheap and is harmful for the environment. If we impose stricter requirements on what packaging is allowed, then we will reduce the cost to recycle it and will make the process more economical and more sustainable.
Why is there dozen plastic grades in packaging food? Why is plastic shells, that are hard to recycle, are used when biodegradable paper and cardboard can be used instead?
It goes much further than that. Those people often immerse themselves in a culture that views any attempt to improve one's own situation (e.g. education, job) as selling out, or becoming Uncle Tom. In doing so, these communities perpetuate the cycle of poverty and make it harder to do well in life.
You have to be willfully blind to ignore obvious facts that not all racialized communities do poorly in America. So it can't be entirely about being visible minority, or all of them would be worse-off.
This is not least because merit itself is, in large part, the result of luck.
This is a false narrative. Merit is not on large part the result of luck, unless you redefine luck to mean competence, ability, determination, and perseverance. Merit is small part of luck, that is, you can get drastically unlucky with life's circumstances and not have any opportunities to demonstrate your merit. However, opposite is not true - you can't get merit with pure luck. There are no people that got Nobel purely by luck, or invented or discovered something purely by luck, or gained competence and peer recognition purely by luck.
A better question to ask is why some people would try to present such obviously false narrative? The answer is rather devious - to undermine hierarchies built on competence. If they succeed and redefine merit to mean luck, then the next step is to take away from people with merit and give it to people without merit. Fundamentally, such dangerous views are against competence and advocate for equal outcomes.
This phenomena of sensationalism and extreme partisanship is a direct consequence of dwindling revenues. Consider the following - if Fox News offered balanced and critical coverage of Trump presidency, do you think they would remain profitable?
Fundamentally, people don't like getting bad news and are all too happy to shoot (financially) the messenger.
If only their kids were lucky to born as visible minorities, except for Asian, no bribing would be necessary. Maybe it is time to do a reverse Michael Jackson?
Slashdot Mirror
Does this phone ships with a Social Credit app preloaded?
I think it's equally important to recognize that both NASA and the astronauts are putting the mission first.
So will SJWs when they howl in outrage over invented sexism of this situation.
You used to be able to buy long-lasting incandescent bulbs for slightly more and they did last longer.
Sylvania LED bulbs seem to be especially unreliable. Are they a bad player or is this new normal?
I see you are grinding your Social Credit.
Am I wrong to consider energy efficiency problem with light bulbs largely solved? LED bulb are affordable and efficient. Is there anything else left to do?
However, modern LED bulbs are not as reliable as an early models. I have very first Phillips LED bulb that was sold, it cost almost 80$ when it was new and it still works. About a year ago I purchased 20$ LED bulb and noticed it already intermittently fails to light. Such lack of reliability is a significant e-waste issue.
While it is appealing to support such move when Australia is so clearly in the wrong, just think through implications of corporations prevailing over governments. Do you think for a moment that corporations won't abuse such newfound power? If Australia can be subdued in this way, so can any Middle East, Africa, South America, Baltic, Scandinavian, non-China Asia, Canada and so on countries. This is more than a half of the world where rule of law potentially could be subverted. There is no way this would end well for citizens of there.
The only reasonable outcome to cheer and hope for is that compliance with this misguided proposed legislation would make these services awful, such as YouTube with only lolcats videos and 6 months+ review and approval queue to publish anything new.
They key difference is that TV manufacturer doesn't block content they find offensive.
While lawsuit is unlikely to succeed due to Nunes being public figure, the merits of it are much closer to suing a tabloid for spreading false news.
Joe Rogan interview with Dorsy and Vijaya pretty much confirmed all the conspiracy theories. Go watch it, or just watch clips/highlights if you are still skeptical.
Our society cannot function when political views are actively suppressed by private entities with clear agenda. Social media has to be regulated as common carriers or we will not have any free speech left.
Being paranoid that Google will know everything about you because of a youtube premium subscription just shows a profound lack of understanding on the subject.
Categorically no. Even if Google knows everything about me, the data is noisy and likely thoroughly poisoned. I am not going to volunteer any confirmation of any data they might have on me, as I am sitting here at home at 123 Street Ave, City, Texas and eating my Cheetos and drinking Mountain Dew while feeding Purina to my dog.
You are probably right, they know all that stuff, but not in a legal way. That is, I didn't consensually offered it to them after signing EULA protecting them from liability.
However, they have no clue that I am a brony, listen to Nickelback and Justin Bieber on repeat, prefer Oracle databases, and space-delineate instead of tab-delineate my code. We all have our dirty secrets.
I would never get YouTube Premium, as I don't ever want Google to be able to profile me in such way. Subscribing means offering Google definitive identity and home address as a result of financial transaction of paying subscription.
Sure, but interrupting my shopping for flooblebuzzle to get me to buy fluddergunk is risky. What if I decide that I don't after all need flooblebuzzle?
That is, if I am already shopping, why show me commercials in hopes to get me to shop?
So Amazon is planning to show video ads while I search for products to buy from them? This makes no sense, it is like shopping channel introducing commercial breaks.
Canada has robust merit-based immigration system but makes it very difficult to sponsor people for non-immigrant visas like H1B in US. As such, shifting jobs to Canada isn't about being able to import more cheap programmers from India.
Absolutely, but I didn't want to start with "your code sux".
This is just a bunch of feel-good nonsense. While nobody sets out to write inefficient code, most of the code is inefficient due to reuse of generic libraries and lack of compiler optimizations. If you think you are different, then when was the last time you looked at your gcc compiler flags and do you know what each one of them does?
Unfortunately, despite this being a RTFM issue at its core, a safer design and more robust sensor system needs to be implemented.
Repeated overrides should always lead to automatic disseminating of an automated control system.
There is significant processing to be done if we want it to actually work.
Alternative way looking at it, is that packaging is artificially cheap and is harmful for the environment. If we impose stricter requirements on what packaging is allowed, then we will reduce the cost to recycle it and will make the process more economical and more sustainable.
Why is there dozen plastic grades in packaging food? Why is plastic shells, that are hard to recycle, are used when biodegradable paper and cardboard can be used instead?
It goes much further than that. Those people often immerse themselves in a culture that views any attempt to improve one's own situation (e.g. education, job) as selling out, or becoming Uncle Tom. In doing so, these communities perpetuate the cycle of poverty and make it harder to do well in life.
You have to be willfully blind to ignore obvious facts that not all racialized communities do poorly in America. So it can't be entirely about being visible minority, or all of them would be worse-off.
This is a false narrative. Merit is not on large part the result of luck, unless you redefine luck to mean competence, ability, determination, and perseverance. Merit is small part of luck, that is, you can get drastically unlucky with life's circumstances and not have any opportunities to demonstrate your merit. However, opposite is not true - you can't get merit with pure luck. There are no people that got Nobel purely by luck, or invented or discovered something purely by luck, or gained competence and peer recognition purely by luck.
A better question to ask is why some people would try to present such obviously false narrative? The answer is rather devious - to undermine hierarchies built on competence. If they succeed and redefine merit to mean luck, then the next step is to take away from people with merit and give it to people without merit. Fundamentally, such dangerous views are against competence and advocate for equal outcomes.
This phenomena of sensationalism and extreme partisanship is a direct consequence of dwindling revenues. Consider the following - if Fox News offered balanced and critical coverage of Trump presidency, do you think they would remain profitable?
Fundamentally, people don't like getting bad news and are all too happy to shoot (financially) the messenger.
If only their kids were lucky to born as visible minorities, except for Asian, no bribing would be necessary. Maybe it is time to do a reverse Michael Jackson?
Will they ever learn that nagware will just get people to turn off updates?
I also assume at this point that pedantism here is fully consensual.