How about being stuck on a road in a snowstorm without communication? There are reasons why we shouldn't disable people's phones. I would argue for nagware - every hour, have a message pop up telling you there is a safety issue and asking you to return your phone to a Verizon store for a free replacement or something. Seems like a good balance between keeping devices safe and people losing critical communication.
Besides, when you are trapped in the wilderness in the snow, you may need to use your phone to start a fire.
As far as software goes, isn't processing speed the only thing that matters? Adding more RAM, doing parallel computing, etc are just other ways of increasing the processing speed too.
On the contrary, software could go a long way to utilize the parallelism better. Heck, most consumer software if re-written carefully would achieve speedups well beyond a couple Moore's Law generations. Doing that re-writing properly would probably also cost more, which is why people have been happy to follow the hardware route for so long.
This is great and all so far as it goes, and IANAL, but now that you know you have a substantial risk of your phone catching fire, if/when it catches fire someone else is nearby and it injures them or their property they can probably sue you.
But the first three (all I have read) are excellent. Yes, it takes time to work through. But it is worth it. Knowing what has gone before helps in figuring out answers to new problems. Knowing whether something is a new problem saves a lot of time.
How does your statement if actually applied differ from mine in actual result? I said stupid stuff should not be passed. I understand your statement to mean you want things looked at for their merits. When upon examination of said merits, it is noticed it is stupid stuff, it should not be passed. This correlation holds for the vast majority of legistation I have ever read.
Unless your definition of "partisan asshole" equals someone who disagrees with you on the merits of the ideas. That does seem to be the defintiion shared by many people who can't understand why people who disagree with them won't just shut up and do what they want, instead of what the people who keep electing them apparently want.
Personally I'd tend to consider "partisan asshole" to apply to those who pass legislation knowing it is crap, but that by passing it they score a point for their party.
The highest service Congress can perform with a bad president is to not pass stupid stuff the president wants just to look like they are achieving something. Our constitutiion has checks and balances to try to limit damage from one branch going off the rails.
Whichever candidate gets elected this time around, an obstructionist congress would be an excellent thing to have.
Holding a job and sucking at it is not a credible qualification for a promotion. Even the Peter Principle in it's usual formulation implies that once you find the level someone is incompetent at you have promoted them sufficiently.
Does Pandora One come with the ability to download your songs for offline listening? That looks like the interesting piece to me, depending on what the limit is.
They can't tell whether the person is a passenger or the driver. A lot of parents will be very unhappy if their kids can't use their electronic devices on long road trips.
Something being the best on technical grounds is not what wins in the OS market. Microsoft has proven that barely good enough is just fine. It is the other parts of the bussiness that engineers usually don't pay as much attention to that lead to wins, and that is why we never understand why sucky stuff wins.
I have no complaints with slamming the logo changes, however there is often a different reason for a "Greatest Hits" album.
If a band ditches one record company for another, the old record company will often throw together a "Greatest Hits" album with the stuff they have the rights to publish. This lets them squeeze a bit more money out, while simultanously sending the message that it's time to look to other bands for new hits.
If they managed to get a stake worth $7 billion from spending $2 billion, that $2 billion is arguably well spent, even if the actually places the money went look silly.
The syndication runs are often edited- run faster and/or trimmed to get more commercials in. Skipping the commercials (or worse, watching them) is also more annoying than watching on the DVD. So the DVD box sets often are the sweet spot.
Depends on the parachute, but it isn't unusual as part of the deal that if the board wants one sticks around exactly as long as desired and then acts like one left of ones own free will.
A lot of researchers are using GPUs for things very different than graphics. A professor was telling me just last week that the boundary between a machine learning training algorithm being interesting was to train to deal with a problem in a week or less [note one trained it does its job much faster, that's just the get-it-ready-to-go time], and that GPUs were often used for that training. The bit width requirements are modest, but the amount of data to process is huge. Of course, he went on to show how the approaches his students had come up with were faster and more power efficient by orders of magnitude for many common algorithms, but still they were trying to improve a normal way of doing things, which is to get up and running fast using GPUs are a source of number crunch.
In summary, people who don't actually need so more horsepower buying it helps keep it being developed for the smaller number of people who get it who are actually doing something useful with it.
You obviously haven't watched enough silly TV, or you'd realize the third option is that you will haunt your phone until someone does a documentary about it.
Slashdot Mirror
How about being stuck on a road in a snowstorm without communication? There are reasons why we shouldn't disable people's phones. I would argue for nagware - every hour, have a message pop up telling you there is a safety issue and asking you to return your phone to a Verizon store for a free replacement or something. Seems like a good balance between keeping devices safe and people losing critical communication.
Besides, when you are trapped in the wilderness in the snow, you may need to use your phone to start a fire.
As far as software goes, isn't processing speed the only thing that matters? Adding more RAM, doing parallel computing, etc are just other ways of increasing the processing speed too.
On the contrary, software could go a long way to utilize the parallelism better. Heck, most consumer software if re-written carefully would achieve speedups well beyond a couple Moore's Law generations.
Doing that re-writing properly would probably also cost more, which is why people have been happy to follow the hardware route for so long.
This is great and all so far as it goes, and IANAL, but now that you know you have a substantial risk of your phone catching fire, if/when it catches fire someone else is nearby and it injures them or their property they can probably sue you.
Presumably such an event was newsworthy.
But the first three (all I have read) are excellent. Yes, it takes time to work through. But it is worth it. Knowing what has gone before helps in figuring out answers to new problems. Knowing whether something is a new problem saves a lot of time.
I keep meaning to jump back in and catch up.
That's right because IBM never sold anything to NAZI Germany before WWII.
Much as if I were in their shoes, I hope I would not have sold things to NAZI Germany, I think you have it backwards.
Selling to anyone who will pay == Not getting involved with politics
Refusing to sell to someone because of their government is a subset of { Getting involved with politics }
There is good and bad to taking politics into account in your decision making.
That depends largly on whether you play better or worse while drunk. The NTP server tweak will be a secondary effect at best.
That implies two things:
1. The quality of Facebook has increased substantially.
2. We're screwed.
How does your statement if actually applied differ from mine in actual result? I said stupid stuff should not be passed. I understand your statement to mean you want things looked at for their merits. When upon examination of said merits, it is noticed it is stupid stuff, it should not be passed. This correlation holds for the vast majority of legistation I have ever read.
Unless your definition of "partisan asshole" equals someone who disagrees with you on the merits of the ideas. That does seem to be the defintiion shared by many people who can't understand why people who disagree with them won't just shut up and do what they want, instead of what the people who keep electing them apparently want.
Personally I'd tend to consider "partisan asshole" to apply to those who pass legislation knowing it is crap, but that by passing it they score a point for their party.
The highest service Congress can perform with a bad president is to not pass stupid stuff the president wants just to look like they are achieving something. Our constitutiion has checks and balances to try to limit damage from one branch going off the rails.
Whichever candidate gets elected this time around, an obstructionist congress would be an excellent thing to have.
Don't you mean ++++++++++Lie
Holding a job and sucking at it is not a credible qualification for a promotion. Even the Peter Principle in it's usual formulation implies that once you find the level someone is incompetent at you have promoted them sufficiently.
But if we're talking fashion, then arguing utility is silly.
Does Pandora One come with the ability to download your songs for offline listening? That looks like the interesting piece to me, depending on what the limit is.
You know of course that the next step will be to program arrogance and disdain for human life into the AIs as an expensive optional feature?
They can't tell whether the person is a passenger or the driver. A lot of parents will be very unhappy if their kids can't use their electronic devices on long road trips.
Something being the best on technical grounds is not what wins in the OS market. Microsoft has proven that barely good enough is just fine. It is the other parts of the bussiness that engineers usually don't pay as much attention to that lead to wins, and that is why we never understand why sucky stuff wins.
I have no complaints with slamming the logo changes, however there is often a different reason for a "Greatest Hits" album.
If a band ditches one record company for another, the old record company will often throw together a "Greatest Hits" album with the stuff they have the rights to publish. This lets them squeeze a bit more money out, while simultanously sending the message that it's time to look to other bands for new hits.
Even more painful will be the discovery that all the interesting bits have been redacted.
They are the most valuable commodity that facebook sells to the advertisers that are their true customers.
If they managed to get a stake worth $7 billion from spending $2 billion, that $2 billion is arguably well spent, even if the actually places the money went look silly.
The syndication runs are often edited- run faster and/or trimmed to get more commercials in. Skipping the commercials (or worse, watching them) is also more annoying than watching on the DVD. So the DVD box sets often are the sweet spot.
Depends on the parachute, but it isn't unusual as part of the deal that if the board wants one sticks around exactly as long as desired and then acts like one left of ones own free will.
A lot of researchers are using GPUs for things very different than graphics. A professor was telling me just last week that the boundary between a machine learning training algorithm being interesting was to train to deal with a problem in a week or less [note one trained it does its job much faster, that's just the get-it-ready-to-go time], and that GPUs were often used for that training. The bit width requirements are modest, but the amount of data to process is huge.
Of course, he went on to show how the approaches his students had come up with were faster and more power efficient by orders of magnitude for many common algorithms, but still they were trying to improve a normal way of doing things, which is to get up and running fast using GPUs are a source of number crunch.
In summary, people who don't actually need so more horsepower buying it helps keep it being developed for the smaller number of people who get it who are actually doing something useful with it.
You obviously haven't watched enough silly TV, or you'd realize the third option is that you will haunt your phone until someone does a documentary about it.