So what can we expect from a Joe Biden White House when it comes to tech? We'll try to answer that right now It’s day one of President Biden's administration, prompting the question: what can we expect when it comes to technology over the next four years? As expected, the Trump White House website has been archived and replaced with a new, and largely empty, Biden version. But it does contain details of what Biden’s top priorities …
One tech law that he could pass would be to prohibit devices (TVs, PVRs, computers, consoles etc) whose standby mode uses more than, say, 0.5w power. I don’t know how feasible that is right now - but I’m fairly sure it could be done given the willpower to do it. And the amount of power (and hence greenhouse gas emissions) that that would save would be astonishing.
For TVs, Computers, Consoles and so forth I can't see any downside to this. But what about home hubs for home automation tasks? What about PVRs - you can't turn them off or the flippin' things won't record your TV programmes.
Similarly, what about appliances like ovens or the hob? I'm not sure that I want to sure them off at the wall each time I've finished using them - equally, I don't want them to be guzzling power just to dimly show a clock.
The more you look, the more you find devices which don't have a true off, only a standby. In some cases I've put them on a little ring of their own with a switch that I turn off at night (because I got a bit obsessive when the house was being rewired a few years back) - but that doesn't work for all use-cases.
I'm not arguing against questioning sleep/instant-on type modes, but just wondering if the metrics used for arguments have been thoroughly calculated, or based on headline grabbing numbers.
I wonder if anyone has calculated total power consumption of instant-on (up to 1W standby consumption) vs hard off and consumption during bootup (especially on older non-SSD consoles) + starting a game.
Also their suggestion of "We have repeatedly urged Sony and Microsoft to include a dedicated low-power chip for video playback in their consoles, and this request is even more important today given the potential for long hours of 'binge watching' via the console." probably doesn't take into account the carbon cost of additional components.
>>ps5-and-xbox-series-x-energy-consumption
Is that not a corner case? The quoted 30-70W in 'standby' is high. But most items will not be drawing that. Also: Less on your heating bill, no?? ;-)
(Agree that Instant-on shouldn't be enabled by default. But I think heating and A/C are the bigger areas that need addressing.)
Both of my houses are well below the 50th parallel, and neither has, nor needs, air conditioning.
In any case, none of our standby devices dissipate noticeable heat, so none of them are wasting noticeable amounts of energy. The amount they use is orders of magnitude less than even one of our "high-efficiency" appliances. There are many more-sensible targets.
That's funny - I was under the impression that their logistics had hardly been affected by the pandemic, and that they've been absolutely raking it in as people stay at home and spend more of their money at Amazon because the shops are closed and they want to buy stuff. This has a massive feel of "please prioritise us so we can make even more money and here's a thin excuse why we should get it first" about it. And also possibly a bit of "if you don't give it to us first, we won't help".
It hasn't occurred to them to magnanimously offer this help until the moment a new president is sworn in, presumably because of a beef between the boss and the last guy who occupied the White House. Hopefully the incoming changes don't include a newfound urge to start doing favours for, and shovelling even more money at Jeff "I really haven't got enough yet because I haven't got it all yet" Bezos.
This has a massive feel of "please prioritise us so we can make even more money and here's a thin excuse why we should get it first" about it. And also possibly a bit of "if you don't give it to us first, we won't help".
I kinda wonder if it's because Bezos wants to immunise his meatbots and thus avoid any isolation shutdowns, if those meatbots become infected. I also wonder if his drone-control systems are smart enough to direct his pickers & packers so they stay 2m apart. But employee welfare hasn't typically appeared high on Amazon's list of priorities.
And I also wonder if this has anything to do with Amazon's plans to get into the drug dealing business and start offering pharmaceuticals online.
Bezos wants to immunise his meatbots
Amazon employees are sovereign individuals who own their own body and decide what goes into it. A vaccine might offer convenience,but there is no reason to mandate it. Amazon employees have performed their jobs well since the outbreak of Covid, despite having no vaccine available. Remember the current vaccines are considerably less than 100% effective, which means they offer less protection from airborn transmission than face masks with high rated air filters.
The virus can still be transmitted via touch / fomites by anyone, regardless of whether they are vaccinated.
Honest Q: do you think Bezos is actually money obsessed? I think he's much more "Amazon obsessed"; he thinks that anything can be made better if Amazon are doing it instead of anybody else.
If he was just money obsessed, he'd just sell his shares.
No doubt Amazon would in order to "help" distribute vaccine require the Feds to hand over as much personal information as possible regarding vaccine recipients, not just the names and addresses of every US citizen.
More climate rubbish, based on models, while reality goes its own way
More covid excuses for totalitarian clampdown, along with fear of 'the hard right' used to dismantle democracy.
More woke 'sensitive social justice' as an excuse for yet more control.
More money in the hands of fewer people, while the citizens go bankrupt.
Complete government control of the internet, to 'stop those nasty people spreading fake messages' so those nasty people can spread fake messages.
Isn't it nice to have a nice moral guy....
...as the puppet, instead of an out of control patriot
It wasn't the Democrats who incited a mob to storm the Capitol or tried to overturn the legitimate results of a democratic election.
Ah. Well.. Here's a quote-
Whilst men are linked together, they easily and speedily communicate the alarm of any evil design. They are enabled to fathom it with common counsel, and to oppose it with united strength. Whereas, when they lie dispersed, without concert, order, or discipline, communication is uncertain, counsel difficult, and resistance impracticable. Where men are not acquainted with each other’s principles, nor experienced in each other’s talents, nor at all practised in their mutual habitudes and dispositions by joint efforts in business; no personal confidence, no friendship, no common interest, subsisting among them; it is evidently impossible that they can act a public part with uniformity, perseverance, or efficacy. In a connection, the most inconsiderable man, by adding to the weight of the whole, has his value, and his use; out of it, the greatest talents are wholly unserviceable to the public. No man, who is not inflamed by vain-glory into enthusiasm, can flatter himself that his single, unsupported, desultory, unsystematic endeavours, are of power to defeat the subtle designs and united cabals of ambitious citizens. When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.
Which is generally abreviated along the lines that in order for evil to triumph, good men do nothing. Or perhaps not, but Burke wrote the longer quote in the 18th century at a time of political turmoil. But doing nothing can be useful politically as well. So another quote-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant_at_Arms_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives
As the chief law enforcement officer of the House, the Sergeant at Arms is responsible for security in the House wing of the United States Capitol, the House office buildings, and on adjacent grounds. Under the direction of the Speaker of the House or other presiding officer, the Sergeant at Arms plays an integral role in maintaining order and decorum in the House chamber.
Although both Capitol Sergeants, and chief of police either resigned or were forced to resign, it'll be interesting to see what any investigation says about the events of the 6th. After all, the protests were organised in advance, and apparently warnings were passed on.. But apparently Sund, Chief of the Capitol Police wanted the National Guard on standby, but Pelosi's Serjeant, Irving, rejected that plan.
In hindsight, Irving perhaps chose poorly.
>It wasn't the Democrats who incited a mob to storm the Capitol or tried to overturn the legitimate results of a democratic election.
So, the next time when a mob storms a government building in a far-away country to "overturn the legitimate election results", the US will refrain from supporting and aiding anti-government rebels, is this correct? Or “Restoring America’s Global Standing” means something different? Hopefully not "we'll make you go RAGS".
Go back to one of your demented fantasy based echo chambers with your fear mongering drivel that has no basis in fact or reality.
Oh, some of your most blatant insurrection social media has shut you out, reality bites for when you ignore it and base all your perception on fear of the other.
"the FCC is likely to act on getting more and faster broadband to people, and to finally improve the data maps that have consistently undermined efforts to force cable companies to do more"
I don't see any reason to assume the FCC will do any better now. The problems with a few providers having effective monopolies in most places, failing to roll out broadband, lying about coverage, and so on, are not things that only appeared in the last four years. America's comms companies and their regulation has been a dismal mess for decades. Trump's lot certainly didn't help improve things, but for the most part they just allowed the status quo to continue rather than actively making it worse. And as bad as having Pai in charge of the FCC was, it was Obama who actually appointed him as a commissioner to start with. Maybe we'll see some useful movement on net neutrality, but when it comes to things like coverage maps and actually forcing companies to provide broadband in areas they're been paid billions to do so, I wouldn't expect things to be any different now than they have been for at least the last couple of decades.
Maybe we'll see some useful movement on net neutrality,
Like banning POTUS accounts online again? Ok, that'll probably have less impact given Biden's not been a big social media user, but might upset the Whitehouse press team. This could be fun given a principle of 'net neutrality is that all content should be equal, and fears that a non-neutral 'net would lead to content being slowed down, or blocked. But then during the last days of the Empire, pro-neutrality entities like Apple, Google, Twitter etc terminated a lot of content. And some Dems, like AOC seem to think it didn't go far enough, and any content to the right of far-left should be banned.
Which could get interesting in how free speech/free expression is reconciled with neutrality, s.230 and any potential new legislation regarding hate speech etc. Which may just result in the can being kicked down the road for another 4yrs in the hope that it becomes someone else's problem.
but when it comes to things like coverage maps and actually forcing companies to provide broadband in areas they're been paid billions to do so, I wouldn't expect things to be any different now than they have been for at least the last couple of decades.
But coverage will soon be 100%. After all Starlink's been given $900m in subsidies to provide rural broadband. Then there's Project Kuiper and OneWeb. I kinda wonder if all the LEO megasatellite constellations will bring new meaning to excessive collisions causing service degradation. But as Douglas Adams once said, space is big.
But although 100% coverage is soon to be assured, it's satellite coverage. For fixed-line, I think the problem will still be around who pays into USO funds, and who benefits from those funds. That's where the regulatory gamesmanship gets played, ie the big providers pay into USO, but would prefer not to. The beneficiaries are supposed to use USO money to serve rural/more remote locations, but don't always do so given the costs. And mapping won't necessarily help unless GIS data also show infrastructure by type, ie a regen site can't usually accept customer connections, but service/access nodes could. I don't know if the FCC runs an availability checker, but could use their own mapping data to track requests against availability to prioritise subsidies.
The other challenge is who pays into USO, or the US USF (Universal Service Fund) administered by the FCC. Currently that's defined in Title II of the '96 Telecommunications Act, which exempts ISPs from paying into the fund. Obviously ISPs are opposed to changes to Title II, but as the market shifts from traditional wireline services that do pay USO, to Internet broadband that doesn't, USF revenues shrink.
I’m not sure that I want overworked and underpaid Amazon employees distributing vaccines. They’re not always careful with my packages, compared to the pros (FedEx, UPS) who actually have training programs for their drivers.
Biden is old school. Funny you say that. Everyone wants to go back to normal. What is that? Continued disassembly of the middle class and American dream? At least Trump, in his incompetence, slowed down the destruction of our rights.
I’m sure Biden will continue to push the liberal agenda and will not take on the real inequity, of the wealthy against everyone else.
Amazon driver took out one of our outhouses last week - not just a little prang, he hit the wall so hard that the brick plinth split from the foundations to the roof, and I heard it from 100m away, inside the main house. The whole wall is going to need replacing :/
The driver at first said it was just a little prang, mainly just damaged his van - no matey, those roof tiles aren't meant to be hanging off and the wall should be straight.. - and then complained that it was his bosses' fault for giving him such a big van, and he'd already had two prangs earlier that day - no matey, don't reverse at full beans, keep it on the black stuff instead of driving over the lawn, and maybe you won't hit so many things.
Amazon are paying for it, but only in as much as I get to find builders, get quotes, get them approved by their loss adjuster, get the builders to do the work, pay the builders up front and then submit a claim. Wonderful.
"Amazon are paying for it, but only in as much as I get to find builders, get quotes, get them approved by their loss adjuster, get the builders to do the work, pay the builders up front and then submit a claim. Wonderful."
Claim on your own insurance and let THEM claim the cash from Amazons insurers. Isn't that how it normally works?
FedEx are the pros? I am not so sure about it. If they are so much better than Amazon then why are they trying to emulate it - well, at least the dilvery part. Do you know that FedEx has intruduced the same gig-driver program as Amazon (called D3 at least in Canada). ... And when it comes to technology, there is no compare. FedEx is generations behind.
First the WH can set a policy, but its Congress which will make the law for Joe Biden to sign.
Its a subtle distinction, but outside of executive orders, he doesn't make the law.
Now for the fun part.
Joe Biden will do nothing w Tech.
Why? Because the first thing that will have to happen is the removal of Section 230 protections from Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook and Twitter.
Do you think that they will want that to happen?
No. So the best thing for Biden WH is to ignore Big Tech.
Heck Twitter just got sued because a John Doe wanted them to remove child pornography images of him when he was younger and got blackmailed into releasing them. (You can google for the story.) Twitter will most likely use the Section 230 protections to try and weasle out of the lawsuit. So they don't want it changed.
And you have to give it time for the former Big Tech execs who quit SFO to join his administration to get engaged...
And nothing will get passed in Congress. You don't have the 60 votes required.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
