There are much easier, lower risk strategies that security can't address that there is no point in this type of complexity. Anything can be brought onboard for a price.
Not for me— four social security scams, two Chinese consulate scams, but only one or two outright hang ups. Similar situation, same number 17 years.
And for the jackass that screwed up his email address with mine for Mass Goalies, please tell them they need an unsubscribe function! They aren’t as fun as the ones from Irish politicians.
While we are at it, how about home, office, secretary. Oh, and the same for all the other carriers, land and wireless. I sense a good Kickstarter coming.
Configuration profiles offer a lot of control of a device, and can pose asecurity risk. Nothing really prevents a developer from distributing the app and configuration profile independently though, just makes it harder for the end user. If all the functionality is really in the profile though, it becomes easy to bypass the sales mechanism.
It isn’t meant to save the planet— steps 1 and 2 are Reduce and Reuse.
But, the true purpose of recycling is to extend the life of landfills. Sanitary landfills are expensive and inefficient, and with properly separated recyclables you can effectively divert a lot of material from the landfill.
What essentially needs to happen is to eliminate the idea of human sorting while simplifying the process enough for people for things to make sense. The myth of single stream over-simplified things too much. You can’t really recycle mixed paper and cardboard from single stream. The best bet today is to separate things enough to make burning easy— no glass or metal, keep plastics separate, etc.
Duracell batteries have killed two multimeters, two wireless keyboards, one wireless track pad, a Leica Disto, and countless flashlights for me in the past ~3 years, total value around $1k. My wife now throws out all batteries when storing something because it is so annoying.
Energizer hasn’t failed on me, nor have Amazon Basics. Energizer seems to last a little longer, but not a huge delta
I rode the monorail once. Kind of a useless routing for me, as I usually stay on the west side of the strip. I have to think that making the monorail viable would do wonders for traffic in the area, but Vegas politics don’t really go that direction.
Rivian will do very well, and despite being Tesla shareholder, if I ever wanted to own a car I would likely go that route. I am skeptical as to when Rivian will hit mass production, but they are led by a sharp CEO that has built a great team.
At the same time, most of the market isn’t after an off-road vehicle— their most likely aspirations are to be able to get up a hill in the snow. The Model Y is well situated to serve that market.
Apple has an unfair advantage over Spotify’s current advertising and spamming approach to get users to upgrade to a paid account. That is all.
They can require users to set up an account on their website, and gather the data there, and manage payments there. It is just another step for users though, which will draw people away.
And the percentage of Spotify users that maintain the free tier of service, giving nothing to Apple? Apple’s argument is essentially that it averages out, and that makes it fair for everyone.
Unfortunately they were a victim of market forces in deciding to re-engine. They had to make a response to Airbus, and a clean sheet airplane would have pushed their biggest client to Airbus due to fuel costs, as it would take about 3 year longer.
That said, the solution is miserable and should not have been certifiable based on what we are hearing now. For Boeing’s sake, I hope they didn’t realize just how bad it was before the first unit was handed over.
Your $0.162 is likely made up of about $0.07 in energy costs and the remainder is distribution costs, based either on peak demand or bundled into energy cost depending on your tariff. What should happen is that the extra $0.07 helps to offset generation (solar/wind are about $0.04-5 currently, when available), and/or a transmission costs. It could potentially add up to $0.02 to your rate over time, but it just depends on your exact situation. (That extra is essentially providing increased availability, which you may or may not see value in.)
Battery storage currently adds about $0.07/kWh, and should drop by half or better in the next 15 years as cell cost and cycle life improve. When you add grid benefits, the consumer cost can be substantially lower as it offsets transmission premiums.
They would have to certify it as a new aircraft entirely, and comply with all current requirements as I understand it— it would be a new plane, without any of the benefits of being a new plane. Boeing really needs to go clean-sheet, but they did t have the time once Airbus announced the NEO.
Unfortunately they designed to certification limits. They can’t just make the plane a modern fly-by-wire system with proper automation redundancy, and market conditions prevented them from designing a new plane. So, instead they tried (badly) to make the automation force the new plane to work like the old one. Badly.
We aren’t talking rocket science here— yesterday I went into the Netflix app, noticed I couldn’t change billing info, so I went to their website. If you can’t figure that out then life has bigger challenges.
I am curious if it would be construed as more anti-competitive if large developers got better rates on in-app purchases and subscriptions. 30% is a big hit to large players, but less so for mid sized and small developers.
While Musk does have his own Reality Distortion Field, I'm not entirely sure this is as bad as most of the comments make it out to be.
The radar, ultrasonic, and cameras that Tesla uses are likely to be able to solve "full self driving" in a comparable time to LIDAR. They have a penalty in terms of processing time and power required vs LIDAR, but it shouldn't be a deal-killer.
But. the overly negative tone really seems to be more manipulation.
Wider adoption, poorer quality. Hard to know where the trade off ends. At 75% recovery for 3x participation, it might not be a bad deal.
What gets me is the variability by region. One place wants anything they can’t burn to be considered hazardous waste, another is obsessed over bottle caps compared to the town next door; it simply isn’t a logical process.
Hopefully education can help address indifference by many people.
Fair enough; I would add 25% to the $/SF cost for excluding the parking area, and another 30% for the construction cost delta with San Francisco, but it is still lower than what I would have expected even giving something for escalation.
The problem is that new high-rise apartments are expensive to build and have high operating costs. You aren’t going to be able to build a building for less than $700/Square Foot (SF), which will work out to $3.50/SF in rent, plus you have about $1.5/SF of operating expenses for a total of $5/SF at the lower end. You also have land costs, but they can factor out with enough stories.
So, 6-700SF gets you to $3,690. If you want the cost cut in half you need to either reduce unit size, or dramatically reduce construction cost. The typical approach there is the wood-framed 6-story building, which can be built for around $300/SF, but your land cost in San Francisco basically washes out with the cost savings.
Slashdot Mirror
There are much easier, lower risk strategies that security can't address that there is no point in this type of complexity. Anything can be brought onboard for a price.
Not for me— four social security scams, two Chinese consulate scams, but only one or two outright hang ups. Similar situation, same number 17 years.
And for the jackass that screwed up his email address with mine for Mass Goalies, please tell them they need an unsubscribe function! They aren’t as fun as the ones from Irish politicians.
While we are at it, how about home, office, secretary. Oh, and the same for all the other carriers, land and wireless. I sense a good Kickstarter coming.
Configuration profiles offer a lot of control of a device, and can pose asecurity risk. Nothing really prevents a developer from distributing the app and configuration profile independently though, just makes it harder for the end user. If all the functionality is really in the profile though, it becomes easy to bypass the sales mechanism.
First link I found on the subject: https://www.howtogeek.com/1761...
It isn’t meant to save the planet— steps 1 and 2 are Reduce and Reuse.
But, the true purpose of recycling is to extend the life of landfills. Sanitary landfills are expensive and inefficient, and with properly separated recyclables you can effectively divert a lot of material from the landfill.
What essentially needs to happen is to eliminate the idea of human sorting while simplifying the process enough for people for things to make sense. The myth of single stream over-simplified things too much. You can’t really recycle mixed paper and cardboard from single stream. The best bet today is to separate things enough to make burning easy— no glass or metal, keep plastics separate, etc.
With BIM we easily max out 64GB when working with point clouds.
Duracell batteries have killed two multimeters, two wireless keyboards, one wireless track pad, a Leica Disto, and countless flashlights for me in the past ~3 years, total value around $1k. My wife now throws out all batteries when storing something because it is so annoying.
Energizer hasn’t failed on me, nor have Amazon Basics. Energizer seems to last a little longer, but not a huge delta
I rode the monorail once. Kind of a useless routing for me, as I usually stay on the west side of the strip. I have to think that making the monorail viable would do wonders for traffic in the area, but Vegas politics don’t really go that direction.
Rivian will do very well, and despite being Tesla shareholder, if I ever wanted to own a car I would likely go that route. I am skeptical as to when Rivian will hit mass production, but they are led by a sharp CEO that has built a great team.
At the same time, most of the market isn’t after an off-road vehicle— their most likely aspirations are to be able to get up a hill in the snow. The Model Y is well situated to serve that market.
Apple has an unfair advantage over Spotify’s current advertising and spamming approach to get users to upgrade to a paid account. That is all.
They can require users to set up an account on their website, and gather the data there, and manage payments there. It is just another step for users though, which will draw people away.
And the percentage of Spotify users that maintain the free tier of service, giving nothing to Apple? Apple’s argument is essentially that it averages out, and that makes it fair for everyone.
Unfortunately they were a victim of market forces in deciding to re-engine. They had to make a response to Airbus, and a clean sheet airplane would have pushed their biggest client to Airbus due to fuel costs, as it would take about 3 year longer.
That said, the solution is miserable and should not have been certifiable based on what we are hearing now. For Boeing’s sake, I hope they didn’t realize just how bad it was before the first unit was handed over.
Your $0.162 is likely made up of about $0.07 in energy costs and the remainder is distribution costs, based either on peak demand or bundled into energy cost depending on your tariff. What should happen is that the extra $0.07 helps to offset generation (solar/wind are about $0.04-5 currently, when available), and/or a transmission costs. It could potentially add up to $0.02 to your rate over time, but it just depends on your exact situation. (That extra is essentially providing increased availability, which you may or may not see value in.)
I mostly use it for legacy reasons and personal storage, as my “real” Microsoft and google accounts are for work.
But, I will be migrating off of them now as they add no real value to me, and I currently have 7-8 devices linked up with occasional use on most.
At current price points, it seems like a pretty dumb move.
Battery storage currently adds about $0.07/kWh, and should drop by half or better in the next 15 years as cell cost and cycle life improve. When you add grid benefits, the consumer cost can be substantially lower as it offsets transmission premiums.
Small correction: lazy people, not stupid.
They would have to certify it as a new aircraft entirely, and comply with all current requirements as I understand it— it would be a new plane, without any of the benefits of being a new plane. Boeing really needs to go clean-sheet, but they did t have the time once Airbus announced the NEO.
Unfortunately they designed to certification limits. They can’t just make the plane a modern fly-by-wire system with proper automation redundancy, and market conditions prevented them from designing a new plane. So, instead they tried (badly) to make the automation force the new plane to work like the old one. Badly.
We aren’t talking rocket science here— yesterday I went into the Netflix app, noticed I couldn’t change billing info, so I went to their website. If you can’t figure that out then life has bigger challenges.
I am curious if it would be construed as more anti-competitive if large developers got better rates on in-app purchases and subscriptions. 30% is a big hit to large players, but less so for mid sized and small developers.
While Musk does have his own Reality Distortion Field, I'm not entirely sure this is as bad as most of the comments make it out to be.
The radar, ultrasonic, and cameras that Tesla uses are likely to be able to solve "full self driving" in a comparable time to LIDAR. They have a penalty in terms of processing time and power required vs LIDAR, but it shouldn't be a deal-killer.
But. the overly negative tone really seems to be more manipulation.
Wider adoption, poorer quality. Hard to know where the trade off ends. At 75% recovery for 3x participation, it might not be a bad deal.
What gets me is the variability by region. One place wants anything they can’t burn to be considered hazardous waste, another is obsessed over bottle caps compared to the town next door; it simply isn’t a logical process.
Hopefully education can help address indifference by many people.
Fair enough; I would add 25% to the $/SF cost for excluding the parking area, and another 30% for the construction cost delta with San Francisco, but it is still lower than what I would have expected even giving something for escalation.
Yes. That is why proper high-rise buildings have footings that go down to bedrock.
The problem is that new high-rise apartments are expensive to build and have high operating costs. You aren’t going to be able to build a building for less than $700/Square Foot (SF), which will work out to $3.50/SF in rent, plus you have about $1.5/SF of operating expenses for a total of $5/SF at the lower end. You also have land costs, but they can factor out with enough stories.
So, 6-700SF gets you to $3,690. If you want the cost cut in half you need to either reduce unit size, or dramatically reduce construction cost. The typical approach there is the wood-framed 6-story building, which can be built for around $300/SF, but your land cost in San Francisco basically washes out with the cost savings.
Build more land...
It isn’t theft, it is a perk.