Let's say the web were to lose all advertisements tomorrow. What replacement for the lost revenue would you prefer as a way to cover the cost of writing and hosting the articles that you read?
A. Paywalls on most websites, causing your web searches to result in a lot more clicks on the back button B. Shutting down commercial websites in favor of those run on hobbyists' pocket money C. Some other option, which you plan to explain
B. This was the internet before 1999 and it was a great place before everyone else showed up.
Your missing the point. The point of the 'dynamic range' bits of the summary are to say "just because the video didn't show enough light doesn't mean there actually wasn't enough light".
When driving a car with normal headlights, can you genuinely not see what's the next lane over 150 feet ahead? If not, you need new headlights. Or new eyes.
No, you generally can't unless you have high beams on or it is a high visibility object. A human, wearing black, not looking at the car is not a high visibility object. Also, this was a different situation as the woman crossed into the road from the median, she wasn't just sitting in the adjacent lane. It is actually quite similar to accidents involving deer walking in front of the car, which most people respond very poorly since we don't expect things to walk in front of our cars.
I drive a lot at night in non-lit areas and have found that once you get to about 45 mph, normal headlights do not throw light far enough to see obstacles with enough time to stop. Note that most obstacles are not shiny, they are dark and hard to see. Also, different cars throw different amounts of light to the side, so the visibility can really depend on the car type.
If you want to do a better job, you simply have to have high beams on (which is not always practical) or xenon lights (which are blue enough that they ruin my night vision, so you can't see anything that is not illuminated).
Do tariffs ever work long term? It's basically a tax, which is funny because Republicans are supposed to be anti-tax, pro free-market. Both of which a tariff is not.
I have the same feeling. This tit-for-tat response comes across as immature, un-nuanced, and reactive. Frankly, it's also disrespectful to other countries in the way it is being presented, which essentially forces a hostile response. This is not how to do diplomacy.
China is far more strategic with their use of subsidies AND tariffs. They will use tariffs to discourage Chinese consumers from buying foreign products when comparable domestic products are available, but they will also use subsidies to make their domestic products more competitive abroad. Their approach is carefully thought out, in many cases, to bankrupt foreign capabilities and to give China a strategic advantage. (Take their approach to rare earth metals for instance.) They also don't blatantly discuss it with the media.
I would like to see the US government take a more proactive and less reactive stance on this (and most other) issues. What subsidy/tariff approach is strategically best (for the country, not for Trump)? How can you implement it without making it seem like a punishment to both China and to the US taxpayers? Can you attempt to negotiate with the foreign powers before just kicking off a trade war? Paying attention to these subtleties is essentially the difference between being a diplomat and a petty tyrant.
That's the real way to "win" here by boosting the desired sectors and saving diplomatic face. China has basically said they are going to issue retaliatory tariffs against Trump's base voters otherwise.
Zuckerberg, as the founder and CEO, is a very big part of Facebook's brand. And keeping him as a likeable trustworthy figure means that people are more likely to trust the company as a whole.
What?!
Likeable? Trustworthy?
Are these still possible descriptors that can be applied to him? Really?
No one is programming a car that way. The first rule is to anticipate and slow down before anything could happen. The second rule is to brake. And the third is to stay on your lane. Except you have a spare lane going same direction.
The problem is that Apple is no longer throttling the processor because everyone complained about that.
I know you guys aren't very tech savvy here, so I will give you a short and simplified explanation: So the non-throttled processor is pushing out the text message soooooooo fast that the graphics chip can't keep up. Thus the animation lags behind the text. See? Simple. If things were being throttled (properly), it all would have been OK.
So really, you have all done this to yourselves and it's your fault and not Apple's. You should have just bought a new iPhone, like Apple wanted!
Also, this commercial helped me understand why all the millennial that work for me expect their work to just do itself when they just look at it. I have never understood why they had that expectation before.
The best part of this whole thing is that other companies laughed at Amazon for losing massive amounts of money during its first 7 or so years of existence and used its early performance as an excuse why they should avoid moving to internet sales.
5% of their employees who can actually get the job done. This will involve having hard skills like coding, thinking, and knowing how to actually back up your hard drive.
Once they have those 5% of hard-skill employees doing 95% of their department's actual work, they will then hire 95% more employees to pad out their workforce with soft tasks like PR, product development, HR, sub-level managers, and other overhead.
The boss will use these soft-skill hires to demonstrate that they are successfully building an organization and will be promoted. The 5% of hard skill workers will never be promoted because they will be overworked, grumpy, and their colleagues will resent their capability. They will eventually leave for new jobs, retire, or be let go. The 95% of soft-skill employees will remain (or just churn over) and will eventually grow to 100% soft-skill employees as the hard-skill workers leave.
The department will then die as its output plummets. A new potential boss will recognize the opportunity to fill the void and the cycle will repeat.
This is the life cycle of all professional organizations.
Writing isn't going away even in some far flung future - but it's understandable why kids don't want to use it constantly anymore compared with alternatives.
That particular kind of bone pain involved with mashing those wrist bones into shapes is validly a thing that makes you not want to practice writing.
If it hurts to write, you are actually doing it incorrectly. I only learned the proper technique as an adult for calligraphy, after I got frustrated with having had poor handwriting for my entire life. Here are some tips: 1. Your back should be upright and straight. 2. Your table should be adjusted to be just below your hand when your elbow is at a 90 degree angle and ideally, slightly sloped upward. 3. Your wrist, forearm, and finger joints should not actually move at all (or as little as possible) when writing. Your shoulder, arm, chest, and back muscles should be doing all of the work. 4. Ballpoint pens are horrible as they require you to push too hard. Rollerballs aren't much better. Use a pencil, felt tip marker, or fountain pen. 5. You should only be writing over a very limited area (about 1/4 the length of a piece of paper) so you don't need to adjust your posture or arm angle. Move the paper as you write to keep your pencil in this area.
They don't teach these things in school (at least not to me) and these modifications can be difficult to implement if you have a lifetime of bad writing habits, but will make a world of difference reducing your finger/wrist pain and also improving your technique. Also, writing properly actually requires you to improve your core muscles to be able to hold good posture, so it is overall beneficial.
Amen, I am actually cool with this practice. I have always been in favour of some kind of micropayment for enjoying commercially produced content. I am just offended by advertising. I always wanted to pay something like $0.02 per page. Paying about 1X10E-4 or E-5 Watt-hour instead sounds like a great compromise.
Yes, but Salon will want you to pay $1 per page. Or to let them mine on your CPU for an hour after each page view.
Remember that most of us are blocking ads, not because we oppose ads, but because we oppose ads that are animated, noisy, computationally/bandwith intensive and hosted by a different (unsafe) server than the webhost we are visiting. What Salon is doing here is simply equivalent by utilizing your computer's "free" CPU power.
They could just stop hosting annoying ads and then 90% of people would probably allow their ads to show.
I deleted facebook on my phone a week ago and dont think I'll ever reinstall it. those times of idle where i would scroll thru mindlessly are now spent observing the world around me and thinking about things that actually matter in my life.
Well, it's good to see that posting on/. made the cut.
If a phone is thinner than 3.5mm, it's difficult to hold anyway.
According to hardware designers I've talked to, the thickness of the 3.5mm plug isn't the issue. The problem is its volume and placement. It consumes 240 mm^3 on an outer edge, on one end of the phone, which is incredibly valuable real estate in a modern phone, because that's pretty much where the antennas have to be -- and phones have a lot of antennas, because they have a lot of radios (e.g. LTE requires 8 radios, and most phones support 5+ bands, plus Wifi, bluetooth, GPSr and NFC). It's also where speakers have to be, and they also require some depth, so significant volume. And where the charging/data port has to be.
If any of that were true, how was it a hobbyist (Scotty Allen) was able to retrofit a 3.5mm jack into his iPhone 7?
Errr-merrr-gerd, my phone is 5-6mm thick, but I can replace the battery in 15 seconds, add storage using an SD card, and use any set of headphones made in the last few decades.
Exactly, do you see the problem?
How can we profit off of you if you don't need to replace your phone every year?
Slashdot Mirror
Let's say the web were to lose all advertisements tomorrow. What replacement for the lost revenue would you prefer as a way to cover the cost of writing and hosting the articles that you read?
A. Paywalls on most websites, causing your web searches to result in a lot more clicks on the back button
B. Shutting down commercial websites in favor of those run on hobbyists' pocket money
C. Some other option, which you plan to explain
B. This was the internet before 1999 and it was a great place before everyone else showed up.
Your missing the point. The point of the 'dynamic range' bits of the summary are to say "just because the video didn't show enough light doesn't mean there actually wasn't enough light".
When driving a car with normal headlights, can you genuinely not see what's the next lane over 150 feet ahead? If not, you need new headlights. Or new eyes.
No, you generally can't unless you have high beams on or it is a high visibility object. A human, wearing black, not looking at the car is not a high visibility object. Also, this was a different situation as the woman crossed into the road from the median, she wasn't just sitting in the adjacent lane. It is actually quite similar to accidents involving deer walking in front of the car, which most people respond very poorly since we don't expect things to walk in front of our cars.
I drive a lot at night in non-lit areas and have found that once you get to about 45 mph, normal headlights do not throw light far enough to see obstacles with enough time to stop. Note that most obstacles are not shiny, they are dark and hard to see. Also, different cars throw different amounts of light to the side, so the visibility can really depend on the car type.
If you want to do a better job, you simply have to have high beams on (which is not always practical) or xenon lights (which are blue enough that they ruin my night vision, so you can't see anything that is not illuminated).
Can’t be sad about this one.
Do tariffs ever work long term? It's basically a tax, which is funny because Republicans are supposed to be anti-tax, pro free-market. Both of which a tariff is not.
I have the same feeling. This tit-for-tat response comes across as immature, un-nuanced, and reactive. Frankly, it's also disrespectful to other countries in the way it is being presented, which essentially forces a hostile response. This is not how to do diplomacy.
China is far more strategic with their use of subsidies AND tariffs. They will use tariffs to discourage Chinese consumers from buying foreign products when comparable domestic products are available, but they will also use subsidies to make their domestic products more competitive abroad. Their approach is carefully thought out, in many cases, to bankrupt foreign capabilities and to give China a strategic advantage. (Take their approach to rare earth metals for instance.) They also don't blatantly discuss it with the media.
I would like to see the US government take a more proactive and less reactive stance on this (and most other) issues. What subsidy/tariff approach is strategically best (for the country, not for Trump)? How can you implement it without making it seem like a punishment to both China and to the US taxpayers? Can you attempt to negotiate with the foreign powers before just kicking off a trade war? Paying attention to these subtleties is essentially the difference between being a diplomat and a petty tyrant.
That's the real way to "win" here by boosting the desired sectors and saving diplomatic face. China has basically said they are going to issue retaliatory tariffs against Trump's base voters otherwise.
...we don't trust you to run a virtual community, so why the hell would any of us want to live in a REAL community under your control?
Obviously, it will be better for you if they have more control over you. Have you not been listening to the government?
Google is increasingly made up of left leaning philosophies.
Google has always been made up of left leaning philosophies, like most of Silicon valley.
What you are seeing is them starting to play hardball in response to what they interpret to be an aggressive conservative agenda.
I'd expect to see more of it in the future given the way that US politics seems to be evolving.
This is a good example of why visual sensors are insufficient for autonomous driving.
In my experience, visual sensors don't work well for humans driving either!
Zuckerberg, as the founder and CEO, is a very big part of Facebook's brand. And keeping him as a likeable trustworthy figure means that people are more likely to trust the company as a whole.
What?!
Likeable? Trustworthy?
Are these still possible descriptors that can be applied to him? Really?
No one is programming a car that way.
The first rule is to anticipate and slow down before anything could happen.
The second rule is to brake.
And the third is to stay on your lane. Except you have a spare lane going same direction.
"I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."
The problem is that Apple is no longer throttling the processor because everyone complained about that.
I know you guys aren't very tech savvy here, so I will give you a short and simplified explanation: So the non-throttled processor is pushing out the text message soooooooo fast that the graphics chip can't keep up. Thus the animation lags behind the text. See? Simple. If things were being throttled (properly), it all would have been OK.
So really, you have all done this to yourselves and it's your fault and not Apple's. You should have just bought a new iPhone, like Apple wanted!
Also, this commercial helped me understand why all the millennial that work for me expect their work to just do itself when they just look at it. I have never understood why they had that expectation before.
It is straightforward to identify which posts are by the same AC. See my other post for details.
I showed you this wasn't the case in my last AC post. Please see it for details.
... and I dealt with it during my career. I'm a retired IT.
I held seminars, talked to employees one-on-one, and damned if we didn't still get hit.
It was a law firm and the staff never fell for phishing.
My problem was the fucking lawyers, especially the managing partner !
That bastard would click on anything.
Obviously, he was looking for someone to sue!
The upskirt images are not appropriate or legal, but it is legal to take images of people in public settings, isn't it?
We have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public, as the US government and the media industry has made quite clear.
Also, while it is amazing what some of these woman are wearing in public, presumably they were aware of their appearance when they left the house?
The best part of this whole thing is that other companies laughed at Amazon for losing massive amounts of money during its first 7 or so years of existence and used its early performance as an excuse why they should avoid moving to internet sales.
Who's laughing now?
(It's almost like Bezos planned it that way, eh?)
Refusal to give a refund is not generally a valid reason for a CC chargeback. For one thing, you still have the merchandise you paid for.
Most reputable credit card companies will issue the chargeback and have you send in the product to them.
It is amazing how the OP and linked article provide absolutely no information on what S mode is!
Why don't you move?
(I am not being snarky.)
Are you locked into the area due to your job?
5% of their employees who can actually get the job done. This will involve having hard skills like coding, thinking, and knowing how to actually back up your hard drive.
Once they have those 5% of hard-skill employees doing 95% of their department's actual work, they will then hire 95% more employees to pad out their workforce with soft tasks like PR, product development, HR, sub-level managers, and other overhead.
The boss will use these soft-skill hires to demonstrate that they are successfully building an organization and will be promoted. The 5% of hard skill workers will never be promoted because they will be overworked, grumpy, and their colleagues will resent their capability. They will eventually leave for new jobs, retire, or be let go. The 95% of soft-skill employees will remain (or just churn over) and will eventually grow to 100% soft-skill employees as the hard-skill workers leave.
The department will then die as its output plummets. A new potential boss will recognize the opportunity to fill the void and the cycle will repeat.
This is the life cycle of all professional organizations.
Writing isn't going away even in some far flung future - but it's understandable why kids don't want to use it constantly anymore compared with alternatives.
That particular kind of bone pain involved with mashing those wrist bones into shapes is validly a
thing that makes you not want to practice writing.
If it hurts to write, you are actually doing it incorrectly. I only learned the proper technique as an adult for calligraphy, after I got frustrated with having had poor handwriting for my entire life. Here are some tips:
1. Your back should be upright and straight.
2. Your table should be adjusted to be just below your hand when your elbow is at a 90 degree angle and ideally, slightly sloped upward.
3. Your wrist, forearm, and finger joints should not actually move at all (or as little as possible) when writing. Your shoulder, arm, chest, and back muscles should be doing all of the work.
4. Ballpoint pens are horrible as they require you to push too hard. Rollerballs aren't much better. Use a pencil, felt tip marker, or fountain pen.
5. You should only be writing over a very limited area (about 1/4 the length of a piece of paper) so you don't need to adjust your posture or arm angle. Move the paper as you write to keep your pencil in this area.
They don't teach these things in school (at least not to me) and these modifications can be difficult to implement if you have a lifetime of bad writing habits, but will make a world of difference reducing your finger/wrist pain and also improving your technique. Also, writing properly actually requires you to improve your core muscles to be able to hold good posture, so it is overall beneficial.
Amen, I am actually cool with this practice. I have always been in favour of some kind of micropayment for enjoying commercially produced content. I am just offended by advertising.
I always wanted to pay something like $0.02 per page. Paying about 1X10E-4 or E-5 Watt-hour instead sounds like a great compromise.
Yes, but Salon will want you to pay $1 per page. Or to let them mine on your CPU for an hour after each page view.
Remember that most of us are blocking ads, not because we oppose ads, but because we oppose ads that are animated, noisy, computationally/bandwith intensive and hosted by a different (unsafe) server than the webhost we are visiting. What Salon is doing here is simply equivalent by utilizing your computer's "free" CPU power.
They could just stop hosting annoying ads and then 90% of people would probably allow their ads to show.
This problem is not sufficiently bounded to solve from a mathematical perspective.
(That's the actual answer... You don't need to be over 18 if you are piloting the boat illegally and there may not even be a captain.)
Verizon and AT&T will sell other phones that were still made in China, but that have Americanized names.
Clearly these phones cannot contain spyware.
I deleted facebook on my phone a week ago and dont think I'll ever reinstall it. those times of idle where i would scroll thru mindlessly are now spent observing the world around me and thinking about things that actually matter in my life.
Well, it's good to see that posting on /. made the cut.
This sounds very unhealthy, why is he putting boundaries on a kid that is not even his?
Because he is in charge of Apple, and that's just what they do there.
Walled garden and such...
If a phone is thinner than 3.5mm, it's difficult to hold anyway.
According to hardware designers I've talked to, the thickness of the 3.5mm plug isn't the issue. The problem is its volume and placement. It consumes 240 mm^3 on an outer edge, on one end of the phone, which is incredibly valuable real estate in a modern phone, because that's pretty much where the antennas have to be -- and phones have a lot of antennas, because they have a lot of radios (e.g. LTE requires 8 radios, and most phones support 5+ bands, plus Wifi, bluetooth, GPSr and NFC). It's also where speakers have to be, and they also require some depth, so significant volume. And where the charging/data port has to be.
If any of that were true, how was it a hobbyist (Scotty Allen) was able to retrofit a 3.5mm jack into his iPhone 7?
No really, tell me.
Errr-merrr-gerd, my phone is 5-6mm thick, but I can replace the battery in 15 seconds, add storage using an SD card, and use any set of headphones made in the last few decades.
Exactly, do you see the problem?
How can we profit off of you if you don't need to replace your phone every year?