Home market, maybe, but both Xerox and IBM tried to sell low-end business computers (without much luck, at least at first), in the part because the micro upstarts were undercutting them on price. Thus, they did see a market for desktop biz and education computers.
And there is some evidence IBM's anti-trust lawsuits affected its behavior concerning how it competed in desktops.
"Gravity waves" seems misleading or confusing. Maybe it stuck for historical reasons?
Pond and sea waves involve multiple forces interacting in a rhythmic way. Labeling their cause as one force among multiple is problematic communication.
[plant fake leads in phone] Bonus points if you can capture video streams of the Feds digging up a park or walking into a storage locker filled with decorations.
Double points if they inadvertently find Jimmy Hoffa.
[burner phones]...Load them up with tantalizing information that wastes a ton of investigation time...Emails about stuff supposedly buried in parks, or sunk in lakes at specific GPS coordinates. Treasure-map fantasies
"Bob, that was slick how you snuck tiny chips with Snowden's current address in Trumpo's hair."
The demand for computers of ALL sizes is growing. Desktop PC sales may be flat, but server demand is growing, and x86 is still the best server chip.
However, the ARM architecture & licensing terms have largely democratized CPU manufacturing such that Intel does have more competition biting at their heels.
If there is a market for "big iron" AI servers, Intel wants to be part of it.
This is a group of people who are STILL fighting net neutrality. They want to be subjugated by corporate overlords.
Often they believe "the market will somehow find a way". The microcomputer making the IBM monopoly irrelevant is one example. However, that could take decades or more to play out. Big oligopolies collude to squash or buy away any little company that threatens their empires.
One of the reasons IBM didn't squash the microcomputer market is that they were already under legal pressure for their monopoly. Thus, government oversight helped spark the microcomputer revolution.
If they were left to be, they probably would have squashed Apple, Tandy, Commodore, etc. using patent lawsuits and product flooding. (The patent lawsuits don't have to be valid to be damaging. They merely have to slow down, drain resources, and hurt the stock of the smaller guy.)
I believe in the power competition, but oligopolies often squash it.
All systems of government decay into plutocracies over time.
I'd shorten that to "All systems of government decay". All countries and empires eventually fall one way or another, based on history (invaders, corruption, in-fighting, apathy, etc.). That doesn't mean we should at least TRY to delay the inevitable.
I'm pretty sure if you polled voters, even those in red states, they'd mostly be against this. So why did the Senate do this? Because they get campaign funds and free campaign ads from big telecoms.
If this is not plutocracy in action, I don't know what the hell is.
I know this is not fusion, but on that note, If Europe gets fusion to a practical level, it would be a yuuuuge embarrassment to the US, comparable to losing the space race. Plus, Europe will probably charge us for related patents, or at least they should: they shouldered most of the cost while we collectively denied global warming and bowed down to the Oil Gods.
Cloud particles gravitationally pull on each other such that if there is a disturbance in their movement, ripples form in the attraction movement pattern somewhat similar to ripples on a pond after tossing in a pebble: the particles bunch up and then some other force (???) pushes them back apart after a period of time. What's this other force? (On a pond, the weight of the peak of the wave pushes it back down.)
It seems we normally don't see these on Earth because our thicker atmosphere and magnetosphere overwhelm gravity's direct influence.
If this is the case, I'm surprised Mars cloud particles (mostly dust and ice) would have enough gravitational influence on each other. It's really a small amount of mass, and rather defused. Thus, I think I am missing a piece of the puzzle.
Argentina got in trouble larger for relying on a single product: oil. This mistake can happen in capitalism also, as the Irish potato famine showed. If anything, Adam Smith's "comparative advantage" encourages one to put too many eggs in one basket.
Greece got in trouble for overspending on lots of different things, including the Olympics. Politicians both left and right over-spend. Bush and Reagan were yuuuge spenders (and during non-slumps). I believe our military is too bloated, yet GOP wants to bloat it more.
I'm for a balanced budget amendment as long as it allows for stimuluses during slumps or emergencies. But that's nothing to do with capitalism versus socialism.
Self-reliance was great back in the day when you could (in theory) walk into the wilds and build your own civilization, but if you want a modern standard of living...
Many in the US are still more or less in this "live off the land" mentality, and that's why they consistently vote against larger-scale civilization and coordination.
Whether this rural viewpoint is realistic or good is another thing. But it's not going away any time soon. The culture wars burn on...
TFA: [A simulation] would require everything in the universe, at its smallest scale, has some definite property, some obvious state of yes or no. We already know that isn't true, explained Hossenfelder. There are few definite things in quantum mechanics, only probabilities. Elementary particles like electrons have a property called spin, for example. Quantum mechanics says that if we're not looking at the particles, we can't say what their spin value is, we can only model the probability of each spin value. That's what Schrodinger's cat is all about...
I don't see how that rules out simulation. Just because we "mortals" cannot see the probability computations doesn't mean they are not part of the simulation.
Further, some argue quantum physics supports the idea of simulation because it allows the details to remain fuzzy until somebody actually observes it. This is a common game strategy to avoid pre-building the details of an entire world: only fill in the details when the players get close to or enter something.
Speculating that God(s) created the universe is one thing, but saying God wants you to do this and that and not jack off while eating pork on Fridays or whatever is waaaay overstretching a mere possibility.
Slashdot Mirror
Capitalism made the same mistake when Ireland relied too heavily on potatoes because they grew so well and were profitable ... until they all got sick.
Lesson: don't put all your economy in one basket, whether you are commies, socialists, capitalists, or some mix.
Isn't a disaster next week better than a disaster tomorrow?
If Uber is limiting its customer base, that's good for traditional taxi co's: Uber is leaving many markets untouched.
Do you have evidence of this that you can present?
Home market, maybe, but both Xerox and IBM tried to sell low-end business computers (without much luck, at least at first), in the part because the micro upstarts were undercutting them on price. Thus, they did see a market for desktop biz and education computers.
And there is some evidence IBM's anti-trust lawsuits affected its behavior concerning how it competed in desktops.
When you see "launchSpam();" clock out for the day.
or security admins who misuse McAfee
"Gravity waves" seems misleading or confusing. Maybe it stuck for historical reasons?
Pond and sea waves involve multiple forces interacting in a rhythmic way. Labeling their cause as one force among multiple is problematic communication.
Double points if they inadvertently find Jimmy Hoffa.
"Bob, that was slick how you snuck tiny chips with Snowden's current address in Trumpo's hair."
Mr. Perry will hopefully forget to cut his own Dept., if the debates were any indication.
The demand for computers of ALL sizes is growing. Desktop PC sales may be flat, but server demand is growing, and x86 is still the best server chip.
However, the ARM architecture & licensing terms have largely democratized CPU manufacturing such that Intel does have more competition biting at their heels.
If there is a market for "big iron" AI servers, Intel wants to be part of it.
Often they believe "the market will somehow find a way". The microcomputer making the IBM monopoly irrelevant is one example. However, that could take decades or more to play out. Big oligopolies collude to squash or buy away any little company that threatens their empires.
One of the reasons IBM didn't squash the microcomputer market is that they were already under legal pressure for their monopoly. Thus, government oversight helped spark the microcomputer revolution.
If they were left to be, they probably would have squashed Apple, Tandy, Commodore, etc. using patent lawsuits and product flooding. (The patent lawsuits don't have to be valid to be damaging. They merely have to slow down, drain resources, and hurt the stock of the smaller guy.)
I believe in the power competition, but oligopolies often squash it.
I'd shorten that to "All systems of government decay". All countries and empires eventually fall one way or another, based on history (invaders, corruption, in-fighting, apathy, etc.). That doesn't mean we should at least TRY to delay the inevitable.
While you do have a point about gov't snooping; gov't snooping and corporate snooping are mostly two different issues. Both are problems.
I'm pretty sure if you polled voters, even those in red states, they'd mostly be against this. So why did the Senate do this? Because they get campaign funds and free campaign ads from big telecoms.
If this is not plutocracy in action, I don't know what the hell is.
Excellent: hookem up to an EM-drive, and we be trekkin', baby!
I know this is not fusion, but on that note, If Europe gets fusion to a practical level, it would be a yuuuuge embarrassment to the US, comparable to losing the space race. Plus, Europe will probably charge us for related patents, or at least they should: they shouldered most of the cost while we collectively denied global warming and bowed down to the Oil Gods.
Let's see if I got this straight:
Cloud particles gravitationally pull on each other such that if there is a disturbance in their movement, ripples form in the attraction movement pattern somewhat similar to ripples on a pond after tossing in a pebble: the particles bunch up and then some other force (???) pushes them back apart after a period of time. What's this other force? (On a pond, the weight of the peak of the wave pushes it back down.)
It seems we normally don't see these on Earth because our thicker atmosphere and magnetosphere overwhelm gravity's direct influence.
If this is the case, I'm surprised Mars cloud particles (mostly dust and ice) would have enough gravitational influence on each other. It's really a small amount of mass, and rather defused. Thus, I think I am missing a piece of the puzzle.
Mars is a yuuuge commie plot funded by the UK secret police and Hollywood gangsters, who film all the fake rovers in Lena Dunham's basement.
Argentina got in trouble larger for relying on a single product: oil. This mistake can happen in capitalism also, as the Irish potato famine showed. If anything, Adam Smith's "comparative advantage" encourages one to put too many eggs in one basket.
Greece got in trouble for overspending on lots of different things, including the Olympics. Politicians both left and right over-spend. Bush and Reagan were yuuuge spenders (and during non-slumps). I believe our military is too bloated, yet GOP wants to bloat it more.
I'm for a balanced budget amendment as long as it allows for stimuluses during slumps or emergencies. But that's nothing to do with capitalism versus socialism.
Many in the US are still more or less in this "live off the land" mentality, and that's why they consistently vote against larger-scale civilization and coordination.
Whether this rural viewpoint is realistic or good is another thing. But it's not going away any time soon. The culture wars burn on...
Consumers tend to be short-term thinkers. I'm just the messenger.
I don't see how that rules out simulation. Just because we "mortals" cannot see the probability computations doesn't mean they are not part of the simulation.
Further, some argue quantum physics supports the idea of simulation because it allows the details to remain fuzzy until somebody actually observes it. This is a common game strategy to avoid pre-building the details of an entire world: only fill in the details when the players get close to or enter something.
Speculating that God(s) created the universe is one thing, but saying God wants you to do this and that and not jack off while eating pork on Fridays or whatever is waaaay overstretching a mere possibility.