No, not really. No matter what you do with single images it will hardly matter in a world dominated by ≥ 25 fps video.
I have all the photos I've taken since about 2016 on my phone and even my music library takes up more space.
12166 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Apr 2007
I think it's possible to think that Sun trashed Java and a takeover by someone like Oracle was inevitable, once Java had become "essential" for some companies. I'm not thinking necessarily that McNealy didn't maximise returns for shareholders, it's arguable he did because companies kept buying Sun hardware to run Java, but stewardship was a real problem. Going either fully commercial or transferring the language to a foundation would have removed a lot of uncertainty for many.
Since Oracle's takeover it's at least clearer for companies what they're facing, especially since IBM bought RedHat and thus JBoss the biggest alternative runtime, which RedHat had already locked down. This has also made it easier for companies to consider alternatives, as they also did with databases: there's no doubt that Oracle's purchase of MySQL via the Sun acquisition was the best thing that ever happened to Postgres.
For me the big step up is the RPi 4 because the USB-2.0 bus is very slow for data transfer. I mainly use the RPi for Kodi and have consistently had playback problems that are almost entirely down to bandwidth: h264 performance itself was fine on the RPi1 but I've had problems with audio and synchronisation on every generation until the RPi4. I realise this is a trivial example but I can imagine similar problems in other projects with a lot of data transfer. For embedded stuff with little or no data or network activity, the older ones are fine.
How is this supposed to work? The only thing I can think like this has ever worked, is the restrictions on copiers and printers in the way deal with bank notes. Not that this stopped counterfeiting.
The models and the knowledge required to make them are out there, there's no sending the tide back out. But you could use existing legislation about people's right to their own image to enforce take down notices and fines. But only in countries that have such legislation: tough luck America.
I remember years ago that the process of taking notes (which require cognitive processing of what was said or shown) followed by reading and then expanding, led to best knowledge retention over time. Taking notes on paper is also far less distracting that using a machine and notebooks can be nice and small. I suspect that at some point, I might move to an e-reader that does notes, but these are apparently still a bit slow. In the meantime, I tend to be pretty good at remembering when something interesting happenend and can normally find it very quickly.
And taking a little extra time to develop handwriting that is legible, at least to oneself, is a skill worth having. My tip: avoid using biros, the pressure and friction are really uncomfortable. Pencils, rollerbarlls or fountain pens are much, much easier to write with.
I'd prefer to go back to the golden days of British Leyland… Triumph Acclaim, the awful Austin thingy and strikes! Cars you couldn't drive from people who wouldn't work and at all a price designed to bankrupt the country!
Hm, I quite like that as a slogan and might use in my election campaign. It makes about as much sense as the rest!
I think the issue is trying to land a craft accurately in low gravity. This is probably some kind of mutlilemma™ with accuracy, speed and stability just a few of the parameters. Speed might the real problem because this is from orbit on a body without an atmosphere. It landed well but with considerable momentum in a low inertia environment: things topple more easily in low gravity. Self-righting devices are all well and good, but from the country that gave us origami, I'd be looking for a more holistic concept around the centre of gravity. After all, why not try and make use of that extra kinetic energy?
Given the low gravity, I think we have consider comparative masses as much as raw power here.
Any attempts are likely to be given to engineers with spare time on their hands to work out how future rovers might include self-righting equipment. But, as long, as there's power, why not try some of them?
It'll probably apply to other countries that are aligned with EU legislation due to the "Brussels effect". Norwary and Switzerland spring to mind but the UK will probably as well: Apple wants to reduce the overhead of dealing with multiple legislations and most countries, including the UK, have a concept of regulatory equivalence. This might mean minor changes in the blurb so that national courts are happy to enforce, but the effect will be the same.
Of course, BoJo might have another "oven-ready" deal in his briefcase…
So, no sales growth because we're working on the "next great thing", or the thing we didn't plan for in an industry that is notoriously cyclical and you have to have multiple generations of models on the go all the time. Then there's the idea of licensing the bits that we do have (charger network, autopilot crap, etc.) as if the competition can't build better mousetraps once you show them how.
I can't wait for someone to call a credit note on this house of cards, which has a joker as king.
The European, and especially the German, car industry only has itself to blame. For decades it pleaded for incentives for larger, heavier vehicles with bigger profit margins. Like the US in the 1960s and 1970s.
Chinese electric cars will sell well because, at the moment, they are the better electric cars. But, just their like Japanese and Korean predecessors, they will need to set up European plants to succeed over time.
Not betting against their engineering skills or ingenuity, but I do think there is a systemic risk. Accidents were fairly common in the West until we developed the no-blame, safety-first culture. It's very, very had to see this happening in a country where the party effectively is both regulator and regulated.
Don't forget: Congress put the FAA under pressure to accept self-certification. After all, why should the taxpayer pay for engineers who know what they're doing to do the work when you can get the companies to do it "for free".
Isn't Conflict of Interest the new Dan Brown novel book?
The real change was the shift to all IP with 4G. 5G was dreamed up by marketeers (from the Sirious Cybernetics Corporation no less!) to try and drum up demand for new handsets with the rollout on networks designed to be done as and when it makes sense for operators, becaue it's really just infrastructure, a bit like improved asphalt for roads.
The next decade is due to flash past full of lots of hopefully problem-free upgrades to networks that we'll hardly notice but which, over time, will make a difference.
The Apollo programme was amazing but it benefitted from a limitless budget and the "no-blame" culture that was being established in the aviation industry. Lots of mistakes were made, some of catastrophic, but lessons were learned without turning people into pariahs. This, in turn, inspired many projects and engineers, including some in Silicon Valley.
Japan it seems has managed to do most of the remaining 10% of getting to the moon: landing exactly where you want to and in one piece. Now it just has to conquer the final bit: and the right way up.
Wouldn't work for me, have to be thigh side-pockets. But I also have a mount for longer journey 'cos I use the phone to navigate.
But jeans? On a bike? You can't be going far because that double-seam is designed to hurt. Gave up jeans years ago as impractical for everyday use. They're okay as work clothes when others are not available.
Haven't put a phone in a trouser pocket for decades: try cycling like that. Shirt or jacket pocket but needs to be able to operated with one hand. Otherwise, silly money for these toys! The Samsung A series or its keenly priced Chinese competitors do all I need from a phone apart from wireless charging.
See what's on the market in a couple of years…
I think that this particular bit of the law is fairly new: it was revised a few years ago to make all hacking attempts illegal unless you have permission. This includes pen testing. :-(
However, there have also been improvements on how companies are expected to protect data, especially "personally identifiable data" which the company has clearly breached. Provision has also been made for whistleblowers.
I'd expect this decision to passed up the courts until some experts are involved: the company can't get away with this kind of incompetence. Whether they can sue for reputational damage is another matter but I suspect they'll be advised to settle to avoid making their own reputation for incompetence if not negligence even more widely known.
While I think you're overdoing it a bit, you do have a point. There is a lot to admire in Teslas, there has been some great engineering work, but there have also been lots of corners cut. For many owners they're like enormous I-Phones so changing them every couple of years isn't an issue but the mass market might think otherwise. Unfortunately, the stock market doesn't think.
I suspect there's a problem with definitions: a proper fuel cell should provide the energy of combustion but at greater efficiency because the chemical process is essentially the same just slowed down. In the meantime, I'm all for ICEs running e-fuels over EVs everywhere with not a charger in sight: network and generation capacity will probably never be enough.
As I said, batteries are being used because they're "good enough" but the energy density is never ever going to be sufficient to compete with hydrocarbon or ammonia fuels. The problem with being good enough is that they're also sucking up much of the attention and capital.
Batteries are a dead-end technology but they're currently "good enough". The chemistry tells us that fuel cells will eventually replace them and, just as with planes, there will be auxiliary power systems for when you get outside the temperature envelope for whichever technology you're using.
Just don't tell this to the "tech companies that make cars" as they like to style themselves.
Buyers in Canada and the midwest only have themselves to blame: they should have known better.
Sinclair was a clever guy but a poor businessman and this was obvious in all the products: they were too obviously designed down to a price, as you might expect in what was "the Far East" (Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Korea) at the time but not possible in the UK any more. In the absence of sufficient investment capital, time-to-market and refinancing via cashflow were key and this meant that corners had to be cut at almost every opportunity. But at the same time, production could never be really scaled up for worldwide demand, because cashflow was being funnelled directly back into production.
The sweetspot was probably with the Spectrum, which ironed out most of the awfulness of the ZX80 and ZX81 predecessors and, for a while, became the dominant small computer, at least in the UK. And the competition wasn't really with Apple: both Commdore and Atari used the 68000 but produced machines and software that didn't look like it had been knocked up over the weekend, which the Sinclairs always did: great for hobbyists but a real killer for business. They were also keen in getting as much out of the 68000's ISA advantage over the crippled x86 ISA and, by doing so, like Apple, were able to address markets that the PCs at the time simply couldn't serve, such as video production. For business, by 1984 the PC was becoming established and the sunk invesment of the "platform" meant that alternatives to MS-Intel would always have it hard. Even now, 40 years on, the Wintel still dominates business computing.
Already by then the CISC/RISC distinction was less and less clear. Intel was moving everything that wasn't x86 legacy away from pure CISC but had to keep the core. The PowerPCs were by far the better chips, but Intel simply had better process engineers and money for fabs, and with Andy Grove ("only the paranoid survive"), the right boss to drive for success using all means necessary, legal or otherwise.
Vodafone has already outsourced a lot of stuff and is actively engaged in tower and network sharing in many countries. Sell off the data centres and what else is left?
Systemically, the risks posed to our economies by this kind of concentration are at least as high as those posed by using Chinese suppliers.
Where Cloudflare's reputation matters is as a CDN for businesses. This is why it publishes so many technical articles and prices itself consistently under the "market leaders".
Sorry, fucking up a termination during someone's probationary period doesn't poison an employer to me as much as some of the many restrictive practices companies go in for. Not that I'm looking for a job with them, I just don't find this tale particularly alarming.
I'm sure there are some important discussions at Davos but almost none of them will be about whatever the supposed topic is. This is just to ensure maximum media coverage.
As for future pandemics, well I think the roadmap is currently paved with the best intentions which will all be quietly shelved in a few years when the money runs out. As happened with the previous ones. Standard epidemic protocols are usally a good start and would have been good in 2020 if they'd been followed. And we have got some new tools: regular analysis of waste water can help identify outbreaks fasrter and more reliably than testing, and sample for sequencing and some vaccine approaches that were novel (mRNA, vector, protein, spray) are now proven to work at scale. But we'll have to wait for things to get really bad before any resources are committed.
If we don't do something about the abuse of antibiotics and the rise of resistant bugs, we're really could be back to the 1930s. This is avoidable and solvable but there's not much money in it for Big Pharma when compared with selling antibiotics to the agricultural industry.
For large scale attacks fuzzing is now the weapon of choice. Sure, if a quick static analysis reveals potential vectors, they can be considered nice to have, but the best thing is simply run attacks in a sandbox and keep the results quiet.
Medics are notoriously unqualified to assess the safety of software devices. You really need trained engineers for that who can get the necessary medical information from the clinicians. But we then run into the usual problem: regulators are underfunded and understaffed, so lightweight "self-regulation" usually gets the nod: medical devices, cars, planes, financial products, etc.