Nope. When you go to bing/google, the offered service is free. That's why Ads are OK.
Here, basically you pay for an OS that still gives you ads (compared to a free OS that doesn't... really no question which one to install), but not only Ads, it also gets in the way when you try to install competing products. This is way nastier than having an ad in the corner of a web page because it means that Adware has ways to look at everything you are doing, vastly escaping the browser. This is a huge security issue.
So you could argue that it's just Microsoft pre-installing Adware on your system to pay for part of the OS (just like Lenovo/Toshiba/... have been always doing). Still, that's the main reason why I started re-advocating for everyone to install Linux -- Windows is just not safe for everyone to use.
Because 75% of the time what I am calling for is not even in the list and there is nobody to explain my situation to. Let's be clear : the only goal here is to save money.
As much as I agree with that theory, this discussion is completely ignoring Peering.
There is no such thing as a single tube to the internet. The situation is a bit more complicated and you could choose to have a ridiculously small link to someone you don't like and a huge link to someone you want to favor. No QoS, no routing rule, just... simple routing and.. an oriented hardware infrastructure.
And peering contracts is a never-ending battle between ISPs and service providers.
Maybe we should have some regulation on Peering since it is much more important than QoS.
I would insist on 4. In most European cities, you just don't want to drive to cities. Parking is very limited, expensive and limited in time as well, plus gas is expensive. Public transportation is fast, frequent and cheap.
In the 70s, traffic started to become really bad and the answer to that has been to remove lanes for cars and replace them by public transportation lanes (because those are carrying more people, hence are more efficient), make city centers car free, build parking lots outside the cities,... not widen the roads. Of course, many complained at first, but all appreciate the efficiency of the public transport now. And for inter-city transport, trains are used a lot, and to go to the train station, you better take public transportation.
So yes, the best way to have people use public transportation and initiate a virtuous circle is simple : make it attractive, and that usually means making the car less attractive : remove free parking, remove parking space, remove lanes, replace it with public transportation infrastructure.
Not going to happen in the US of course for all the other reasons you mention, plus a strong idea that taxes = public service = crappy service (which is, I must admit, true in the US but somehow not elsewhere in the world).
Apple’s car was traveling at less than 1 mile per hour, while the car that rear-ended it, a Nissan Leaf, was moving at about 15 miles per hour
Merging on Lawrence Expy at 1 mph ??? Either it was congested and the other car driver was distracted, or the Apple car was doing something really dangerous... the other car braked and ended up crashing at 15 mph (down from ?).
Actually, at the peak of the bitcoin bubble, a taxi driver in LA asked me whether he should invest in bitcoin (when I told him I was in tech). I was so surprised by that question... but then I realized how frustrating it is to realize you missed a bubble and could have gotten rich easily while you're struggling to make money every day.
Anyway, I told him that there is some genuine need for crypto-currency but it is an extremely risky investment and the value peaking looked like a bubble (not reflecting the normal growth due to the need for crypto currencies).
I don't know if he repeated that advice to other customers:-D
I doubt those company file for H1B if they're not 99% sure to get it. They have better to do than wasting their time and money on visa applications, so they pour a lot of money to get H1Bs and they need to be sure they'll get it.
Quite the opposite of consulting firms which business model *is* to flood the application system and get as many lambda person approved as they can. Those don't care who gets the visa, it's a matter of numbers only.
So finally H1Bs are used for their original purpose : get skilled workers. As much as I hate Trump's hate strategy, that might be a positive outcome.
Not mentioned in the article, but it could be an even increased risk of bad things happening very, very quickly (like a total collapse) for a very unknown reason.
Basically, the same problem of Machine Learning, just worse : tuning algorithms requires a lot of input data. We have a lot of input data that lets you tune everything in good or even in bubble cases where you have to make the bubble grow to make money (until it's too late).
Since we don't understand how those algorithms make their decisions, there is no guarantee they will converge to something that mathematically stable and overall good for people.
Also, we might not have much data however on the crashes which happen usually once. Algorithms will learn to handle those situations, only too late or after many huge problems.
That's why finance should be regulated in some cases ; some strategies need to be illegal otherwise bubbles and pyramids will cause major collapses that will hurt people (not the rich ones, more like the poor ones that have nothing to do with finance and are just taking the hit).
It would be stupid to write a browser without reusing some open-source code. Re-implementing the wheel is never a good idea and just asking for security issues.
However, it seems there is a disconnect between what they claim (fully homegrown) and what they do (start from chrome, at the point that they even forgot to remote some chrome licensed files).
Always funny to see the PR person respond to this by "but the users like it" which is the worst thing you can respond (because 1. it is not the question and 2. it's never true).
It's worse than that. They used wifi because that's what they had at hand. It had nothing to do with computers, only with having electromagnetic response on a certain spectrum.
The article doesn't understand anything about the practicality of the study, nor the real technologies, and don't care a bit because they want clickbait articles to make money. The fact that this study is relayed (out of maybe hundred of others) is actually because they used wifi devices for their experiments, which people know and use everyday -- and will then freak out every time they are in a room with wifi.
As usual : scientist perform experiments ; journalists pick the 3 words they recognized and write crazy articles.
Yeah, those who don't have a job deserve less privacy than others. It's not bad enough to not have a job ; you need to be punished for that, because it's your fault, lazy parasite.
Same for phones. I wouldn't mind paying my phone cheaper but paying a monthly fee for security (and feature) updates. That would give some incentive to companies to actually maintain products, make them more durable and repairable.
And it's perfectly fine to make jokes between colleagues. Just that, when your colleagues become millions of people from all around the world, you might want to remove some private jokes from the doc as it's no longer funny.
I prefer no idiocy at all. Reading this kind of jokes in the libc documentation could be confusing for many non-english speakers and really is out of place.
I'm not talking about people sensibility or SJW anything, just trying to have the documentation do what it's supposed to do in the most efficient way.
That was fun for some times and persons, I smiled reading it, but really it seems childish.. and even more from RMS to now oppose the removal.
RMS saying that he, by himself, can oppose the change is the real joke here. Even if he created the GNU libc in the first place, it doesn't belong to him any more and he doesn't have any power to do that. Most of the work has been done by others ; it belongs to the community. If the community want to remove that joke they can. If he insists that he owns the place (which is quite at adds with the principles of GNU) then people will just move over to somewhere else. For good.
So does that mean some hotels will close and be reconverted as apartments, driving rent down ? Sound like life and death of competing business models...
This seems like an answer to Google's TPU. Nothing like a general purpose CPU they'd want to sell to anyone, more like a dedicated piece of hardware to accelerate ultra common deep learning workloads (like, image recognition).
Just like Google, Facebook has to process immense volumes of images. GPUs are much more efficient at doing that than CPUs, but so there is still a bit of room for improvement when doing very specific tasks.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. When you go to bing/google, the offered service is free. That's why Ads are OK.
Here, basically you pay for an OS that still gives you ads (compared to a free OS that doesn't ... really no question which one to install), but not only Ads, it also gets in the way when you try to install competing products. This is way nastier than having an ad in the corner of a web page because it means that Adware has ways to look at everything you are doing, vastly escaping the browser. This is a huge security issue.
So you could argue that it's just Microsoft pre-installing Adware on your system to pay for part of the OS (just like Lenovo/Toshiba/... have been always doing). Still, that's the main reason why I started re-advocating for everyone to install Linux -- Windows is just not safe for everyone to use.
Because 75% of the time what I am calling for is not even in the list and there is nobody to explain my situation to. Let's be clear : the only goal here is to save money.
As much as I agree with that theory, this discussion is completely ignoring Peering.
There is no such thing as a single tube to the internet. The situation is a bit more complicated and you could choose to have a ridiculously small link to someone you don't like and a huge link to someone you want to favor. No QoS, no routing rule, just ... simple routing and .. an oriented hardware infrastructure.
And peering contracts is a never-ending battle between ISPs and service providers.
Maybe we should have some regulation on Peering since it is much more important than QoS.
Thanks ! Very interesting.
I would insist on 4. In most European cities, you just don't want to drive to cities. Parking is very limited, expensive and limited in time as well, plus gas is expensive. Public transportation is fast, frequent and cheap.
In the 70s, traffic started to become really bad and the answer to that has been to remove lanes for cars and replace them by public transportation lanes (because those are carrying more people, hence are more efficient), make city centers car free, build parking lots outside the cities, ... not widen the roads. Of course, many complained at first, but all appreciate the efficiency of the public transport now. And for inter-city transport, trains are used a lot, and to go to the train station, you better take public transportation.
So yes, the best way to have people use public transportation and initiate a virtuous circle is simple : make it attractive, and that usually means making the car less attractive : remove free parking, remove parking space, remove lanes, replace it with public transportation infrastructure.
Not going to happen in the US of course for all the other reasons you mention, plus a strong idea that taxes = public service = crappy service (which is, I must admit, true in the US but somehow not elsewhere in the world).
Nothing to add. Exactly my thoughts.
Apple’s car was traveling at less than 1 mile per hour, while the car that rear-ended it, a Nissan Leaf, was moving at about 15 miles per hour
Merging on Lawrence Expy at 1 mph ??? Either it was congested and the other car driver was distracted, or the Apple car was doing something really dangerous ... the other car braked and ended up crashing at 15 mph (down from ?).
Actually sometimes it's also they don't want to burn a different number for each part. That costs money, especially for dirt-cheap products.
Actually, at the peak of the bitcoin bubble, a taxi driver in LA asked me whether he should invest in bitcoin (when I told him I was in tech). I was so surprised by that question ... but then I realized how frustrating it is to realize you missed a bubble and could have gotten rich easily while you're struggling to make money every day.
Anyway, I told him that there is some genuine need for crypto-currency but it is an extremely risky investment and the value peaking looked like a bubble (not reflecting the normal growth due to the need for crypto currencies).
I don't know if he repeated that advice to other customers :-D
I doubt those company file for H1B if they're not 99% sure to get it. They have better to do than wasting their time and money on visa applications, so they pour a lot of money to get H1Bs and they need to be sure they'll get it.
Quite the opposite of consulting firms which business model *is* to flood the application system and get as many lambda person approved as they can. Those don't care who gets the visa, it's a matter of numbers only.
So finally H1Bs are used for their original purpose : get skilled workers. As much as I hate Trump's hate strategy, that might be a positive outcome.
Not mentioned in the article, but it could be an even increased risk of bad things happening very, very quickly (like a total collapse) for a very unknown reason.
Basically, the same problem of Machine Learning, just worse : tuning algorithms requires a lot of input data. We have a lot of input data that lets you tune everything in good or even in bubble cases where you have to make the bubble grow to make money (until it's too late).
Since we don't understand how those algorithms make their decisions, there is no guarantee they will converge to something that mathematically stable and overall good for people.
Also, we might not have much data however on the crashes which happen usually once. Algorithms will learn to handle those situations, only too late or after many huge problems.
That's why finance should be regulated in some cases ; some strategies need to be illegal otherwise bubbles and pyramids will cause major collapses that will hurt people (not the rich ones, more like the poor ones that have nothing to do with finance and are just taking the hit).
+1.
It would be stupid to write a browser without reusing some open-source code. Re-implementing the wheel is never a good idea and just asking for security issues.
However, it seems there is a disconnect between what they claim (fully homegrown) and what they do (start from chrome, at the point that they even forgot to remote some chrome licensed files).
Always funny to see the PR person respond to this by "but the users like it" which is the worst thing you can respond (because 1. it is not the question and 2. it's never true).
It's worse than that. They used wifi because that's what they had at hand. It had nothing to do with computers, only with having electromagnetic response on a certain spectrum.
The article doesn't understand anything about the practicality of the study, nor the real technologies, and don't care a bit because they want clickbait articles to make money. The fact that this study is relayed (out of maybe hundred of others) is actually because they used wifi devices for their experiments, which people know and use everyday -- and will then freak out every time they are in a room with wifi.
As usual : scientist perform experiments ; journalists pick the 3 words they recognized and write crazy articles.
Yeah, those who don't have a job deserve less privacy than others. It's not bad enough to not have a job ; you need to be punished for that, because it's your fault, lazy parasite.
Is that a troll ?
I'm OK to pay a monthly fee if :
Same for phones. I wouldn't mind paying my phone cheaper but paying a monthly fee for security (and feature) updates. That would give some incentive to companies to actually maintain products, make them more durable and repairable.
I won't ; I read man pages, which do not have that joke.
He might get away with this once. Otherwise, wait for the fork ...
And it's perfectly fine to make jokes between colleagues. Just that, when your colleagues become millions of people from all around the world, you might want to remove some private jokes from the doc as it's no longer funny.
It's not a joke. It's a very useful feature which has a very well chosen name (although a little bit humorous).
I prefer no idiocy at all. Reading this kind of jokes in the libc documentation could be confusing for many non-english speakers and really is out of place.
I'm not talking about people sensibility or SJW anything, just trying to have the documentation do what it's supposed to do in the most efficient way.
That was fun for some times and persons, I smiled reading it, but really it seems childish .. and even more from RMS to now oppose the removal.
This.
RMS saying that he, by himself, can oppose the change is the real joke here. Even if he created the GNU libc in the first place, it doesn't belong to him any more and he doesn't have any power to do that. Most of the work has been done by others ; it belongs to the community. If the community want to remove that joke they can. If he insists that he owns the place (which is quite at adds with the principles of GNU) then people will just move over to somewhere else. For good.
This comment is making such little sense that I am hesitating if this should be modded as Troll or Funny.
So does that mean some hotels will close and be reconverted as apartments, driving rent down ? Sound like life and death of competing business models ...
Power outages are still a thing in the States. Not sure about the UK.
A funny answer to a troll. Love it.
This seems like an answer to Google's TPU. Nothing like a general purpose CPU they'd want to sell to anyone, more like a dedicated piece of hardware to accelerate ultra common deep learning workloads (like, image recognition).
Just like Google, Facebook has to process immense volumes of images. GPUs are much more efficient at doing that than CPUs, but so there is still a bit of room for improvement when doing very specific tasks.