Re: Planned obsolescence
Generally that plan is set for five years. 18 months seems a bit ambitious to me, and some people just might notice. Oh, wait . . .
19000 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Apr 2007
China basically has every important weapon type the rest of the world has. Including nukes, but not aircraft carriers (unless I'm mistaken).
Chinese weapons not battle-tested ? If the jets fly, they'll reach a target. I have no doubt the Chinese are as intent on testing and training as any other Air Force, and nobody has ever said that Chinese are dumb.
But all this is rhetoric. We've passed the stage where a major country could declare war on another major country - we all know that such a war will be devastating, maybe to the point of annihilation. China, like Russia, will continue to be treated with the utmost caution so as to not push them too far.
As for the US, who knows what the Orange One will consider is "too far" ?
On the one hand, obviously it is a good thing that China be cracking down on all the fake Vuitton and the rest, no denying that.
On the other hand though, China is now going to be courted by the likes of RIAA and MPAA, who will no doubt "educate" the Chinese on "proper" DRM measures, trying to continue spreading their infectious influence and brain-dead ideas to the far reaches of the globe. That I appreciate a lot less.
What money it makes is based on advertisement, it already doesn't make enough and specifically plans to not make enough in the future.
A company that "may eventually break into the black" is not a company I'm interested in, and I can't see how anyone who wants to make money will be.
A $3 billion IPO ? We'll see how that crashes and burns (unless, of course, the Internet proves once again how stupid the collective can get).
Congratulations. Thanks to you everything seems so much more simple. You should go and teach all those scientists who have dedicated their career to this field.
Unfortunately, I am a more literal person. Artificial Intelligence, for me, means that we can "make" a construct that, when activated, is capable of learning and deciding on it's own. Like a teenager, if you will.
At this point in time, you can spout weighted phrases all you want, but there is no AI that will decide it wants a cigarette despite all the medical data that weighs against that.
A true AI would be capable of going beyond the data, because it would decide that it wanted to know what it was like to smoke. So maybe intelligence is partly defined by emotion - in which case AI is even farther away than we imagine it to be.
That may be the case, but there's a lot of people not looking at the wall. I know a fair number of financial organizations that are still heavily invested in VB - not to mention a few governmental ones I have visited in the last few years.
Microsoft may eventually state that it is stopping development and/or maintenance on VB, but just like Window XP, it doesn't decide when people finally stop using the damn thing.
So much for the constitutional separation of judicial and executive powers. Well at least the AG won't get shot, which is just about the only difference between Trump and your run-of-the-mill tinpot dictator.
Brill can say whatever she wants, and she can even believe it, but nothing is safe from Trump at this point in time.
"GPU's are catching up fast, and should allow the resolutions needed which are the only key problem right now"
I beg to differ. VR has a certain number of issues, not the least being weight and freedom of movement. I have cognitive dissonance when told about how immersive it is - you're immobile in a chair and tethered by a cord. A good friend of mine told me it was pretty good though, so I have to think that there is a future for it beyond medical applications.
For gaming, however, I think that VR will only really be immersive when you have a sphere around you in which you can walk, run, roll and jump. That, along with whatever headset tech exists at that time, and then you can talk about immersive. Until then, my 26" Iiyama is plenty immersive to me when sitting at my desk.
That said, I am keeping tabs on this newfangled toy. I'm sure that, one day, the tech will advance enough to win me over. Not yet there, though.
For me, Albany was a city. Thanks to your remark, instead of making a snarky comment on how New York could possibly be called Albany, I now have to thank you for teaching me that Albany is a cornucopia of different places and the USA has more Albany than the entire rest of the world put together.
Any day I learn something is a good day, so thank you.
It was a US police station. You really think there's a chance that they're running Linux ? Because if they were, the story would be a lot bigger since there would be a vulnerability exposed in Linux.
No, this is a bog-standard Windows environment, likely running with Outlook email. If they're lucky, they've got funds for an Exchange server.
Which means they're about as secure as a whore who never uses condoms, and the consequence is inevitable.
In passing, maybe it might have been worth 4 fucking Bitcoins to ensure that a single accused person (not to mention the dozens that might be implicated) could have his innocence proven ?
Oh, sorry. This is the US of NSA - an arrest means YOU'RE FUCKING GUILTY, YOU PIECE OF TRASH.
Amen to that.
I have often been encumbered by excessive reporting structures - often in environments that are more administratively oriented than productive (meaning a small company doesn't have the time to waste on this shit, they want the result, not the report).
The gem in this collection was when I was consulting in a bank which had a guy working on a time reporting tool for the IT department developed in . . . Access. Between the multi-user issues and what I must suppose was either bad programming or a truckload of specification requirements, it took one hour every day to fill out the timesheet for the day. To the point that everyone was specifically filling a 1-hour slot with the title "Time Reporting".
Just starting the frakkin interface took 5 minutes.
Thankfully my contract ended shortly after this abomination was put in place.
It takes a looooong time to educate people and the only way they really learn is with pain. So let them live the pain of this ReplyAll hell that they have inflicted on themselves - it builds character, as I once heard.
Seriously though, what organization is stupid enough to let the Reply All function remain available ? I remember one large administration that actually had the balls to put a check on that button. It was greyed out, but you could still click it. If you did click it, you got a popup asking you to confirm that really, really wanted to be singled out for replying to everyone instead of just the sender. If you insisted, you could hardly pretend that you had done so by accident, so it was your ass if you did it wrong.
For my part, I think the Reply All button should be tightly controlled in a company, with only managerial-level staff being able to use it. And even then, lower-level staff would be excluded from the catfight.
In truth, if you do not agree with something someone sent, you answer that person and you leave everyone else the fuck out of the argument until it is solved, in which case you could eventually send a notice out to everyone with the final decision.
But everyone has to treat mail like a frakkin soapbox and broadcast their opinion to all and sundry.
Learn to speak when you have something important to say, and shut the fuck up if you just want to spout off. There's 4chan for that.
You insist on shoveling the Start button into a phone UI, then you turn around and insist on taking it away from a full-fledged PC ?
Is the MS design department based in Colorado, by any chance ? Or was it the MS design department that managed to lobby hard enough to have their weed decriminalized ?
Which schizophrenic idiot approved all this ?
Of course, silly me, there must have been hundreds of idiots on the managerial merry-go-round. No way you can so totally lose the plot with a single, coherent corporate vision. This just proves that MS never, ever had any vision whatsoever. It started by stealing someone else's code, and continued blindly flailing about the two sole products that ever brought in the money.
Success is overrated.
"Which would seem to be a bit of a showstopper [..] for, like self-drive cars"
I think we're going to see about that in the years to come. Then again, I'm against calling that AI. It's just reams of code developed for a specific purpose. Highly complex code to be sure, with a boatload of requirements such as we have never seen before, but specialized code nonetheless. You won't be able to put it up against Kasparov in a game of chess, which is something a true AI could do.
It uses VMs, downloads malware by the dozen, and doesn't even have to root the phone.
And you still want us to not install adblockers ?
Thank goodness those Play stores are so severely scrutinized and controlled to avoid letting a copy of something Google wants to keep for itself piece of malware through.
(yes, I did read that they removed the offending apps - it still means that had to remove them instead of blocking them at submission, which is what a proper control should have done)
I've always wondered about countries that keep a financial count that requires their banking statements to be a foot wide. I understand that it is quite pleasant to see that one's salary is in the million range, but I would personally prefer the currency to be at least dollar in that case.
What is it that keeps countries with a currency that you need to count in hundreds just for a loaf of bread ? Is there an economic justification to all those zeros, or is it just social pressure ?
And you won't be laying anyone off either, right ? Oh wait, I get it, that was true for 2016.
Now that we're in 2017, they can axe away with a clear . . nope, doesn't apply either.
Ah, to live in the lofty spheres of existence where other lives are just numbers on a spreadsheet to be jumbled about while sipping a drink until the desired result is obtained . . .
Although I generally agree with your point, there is the issue of identifying said research "athletes". Not an easy thing to do because research is, by definition, a domain where nobody really knows where they'll end up.
It's not because you say that you're looking for room-temperature superconductive materials that that's what you'll find. You can just as easily find nothing, or something completely different.
That is why funding has to be less selective - you never know which horse to bet on to finish the race, nor do you know if the money you spend on one thing isn't going to show results in a totally different area a few years (or decades) later.
Not having them can be more expensive. Think lost business because not trustworthy.
It's about building a chain of trust and showing that you are among those who make the effort. Of course, the fact that there are self-signed certificates kinda defeats the point, but then again, it can be argued that self-signed are just as valid as CA-signed, especially when CAs goof up and do stupid things. Errare humanum est and all that. For Joe User it must be impossibly confusing.
The fact remains that we are in dire need of knowing who to trust and who to be cautious about in the Wild Wild Intertubes. This certificate thing could help in the long run.
Well that's a new one, for sure. A refreshing change from "almost nobody was impacted", but given the importance of the impact on the people affected, it would have apparently been too callous even for a multinational conglomerate to say that. And it would probably have cost a lot in yet a bit more negative publicity.
Which is what this whole PR exercise is about - drowning the negative in positive, reponsible, taking-all-blame spin. That's because the whole fiasco was prohibitively expensive in both money and reputation, and Samsung is desperate to get some brownie points in Public Opinion.
Everything in here has been carefully crafted to make people believe that the investigation was thorough, the cause forgivable, the motive noble. Honor is preserved by taking the blame yet saying that Samsung equipment was absolutely not responsible. A brilliant exercise.
Well I'm against monopolies, so I hope Samsung will stay in the game for a while longer, but I don't buy the whitewash. A battery that is not of the specified size (how can they possible make something bigger than expected these days ?), that lacks insulation and has a slew of other manufacturing defects is not something that should have made its way on to the market, period. With the amount of defects listed, the fact that it did get to the market demonstrates an appalling lack of QA in every part of the manufacturing chain.
I'm guessing that this situation has been a long time in the making. Such absence of control didn't happen overnight, it is the result of complacency and the immense pressure of the market.
Maybe it is time to get off the wheel for a bit and take a breather ? Nobody will die if a new model takes a year and a half to get done instead of twelve months.
Seems that targeting the end user is a never-ending fountain of fun for black hats. Hardly surprising given that most end users haven't got a clue until it's too late (if even then).
What is surprising is the fact that this avenue of attack was almost abandoned for a period. I guess it wasn't so easy to implement in Facebook. Small mercies and all that.
Oh well, it's coming back now. Retro is the new in !
Okay, thanks for the official report. I think only Gartner will be surprised, if even they stoop that low.
I like SSDs. Since I banged a 500GB one in my laptop last month, I feel like the whole thing got a major upgrade. It's a different laptop. Startup is 25 seconds, from button ON to full desktop availability. Frak me but I like that.
So it seems clear to me that flash IS the future. Most people don't splurge for more than one hard disk on their PC, and Joe User's laptops are never upgraded, so if they can get them with an SSD it makes everyone happier.
15 years ago I was telling everyone they needed a second hard disk to put the swap file and make Windows faster. With SSDs, that is no longer a requirement.
Viva progress.
No, no, no.
You're assigning logic to his actions and words, when the only only logic that applies is that he'll say and do whatever it takes to keep him in the limelight as much as possible.
Nothing he says is actually important, nor does it reflect in any way what his next actions will be, nor should his words be in any way considered truthful. He is a lying cowardly scumbag and will use anything and anyone to make us think otherwise.
He can stay in the Embassy for the rest of his miserable life. At least there, he can't rape anyone.
And how would he do that ? Does Uber have some government funding we are not aware of ?
Because the President of the US does not have the power to tell private individuals in a capitalist economy to not put money into something.
But I acknowledge that it is typically American to expect the US President to wave a hand and do something about whatever it is that irks them at that specific point in time.
That may be the case, but saying "for anyone looking to earn money on anyone's own schedule" does not imply the same thing.
This is a failure of English to assign a proper word for this grammatical case. As for me, I don't think there is an error in the original sentence and I understood the meaning perfectly well.
There is no other way, since Humanity has lost the possibility of going up to fix the damn things ever since the Shuttle program was canned.
So top launching them until you find the solution - there's enough space trash up there already.
Only in billionaire-land can you push a major deal that costs 150% of the initial figure without getting fired.
In every other case, there are people analyzing, evaluating, reporting and checking that the deal goes through for the amount initially forecast, otherwise there is hell to pay to explain why there is difference and who is the dimwit that didn't have the experience to plan for it.
But hey, in this case the dimwit is the owner, so what can you say ?
Every single company or entity that has enough money to devote to such shenanigans is, by definition, getting too much money in the first place.
Be useful or get lost. When you're touting the redefinition of your logo as a major advancement, it is high time to get lost.
I thought we landed on that beach last millennium already.
We've taken vast swathes of territory since.
Personally, I would never have approved such "entertainment". This, however, is China. Let's try and stop imposing our views of what's moral to other countries/cultures. It's really starting to cost a lot in military invasions.
Right off the bat that sounds suspiciously like the evaluations of the cost of virii or hacking, or pirate downloads.
Did someone ask RIAA for their evaluation on the subject ?
That said, I can imagine that getting into this industry, when it forms, will cost a pretty penny, but come on, AI doesn't exist and it didn't cost a trillion dollars (or bring that much money in) to launch Siri or Cortana or even both at the same time.
Tired of the hyperbole. Time to retire to the mountains and dig that gorram bear pit.