British Bill Gates?
Only if you ludicrously overvalue the man - which seems appropriate.
A complete bullshitter who sold an empire of bullshit - insurance ads and reality TV beckon.
64 posts • joined 9 Nov 2011
Of course money is unnecessary in Star Treks universe as the entirety of it's society's economic activity and output is consumed by it's bloated military industrial complex and it's endless series of expansionist wars with people who are 'evil' and by complete coincidence also look a bit funny.
... but that's is a meta-economic discussion for another day :-)
Am I the only one who notices the flaw? It's all well and good to use progressively more difficult computational work to underpin bitcoin but that work uses not just real world time but energy.
We've just created an incentive to turn fossil fuels into nothing but hot air (literally). Is this an elaborate joke being played on us to teach us the futility of capitalism system? Why drive to work, develop ideas, make products in order to make money when you can get a machine to turn energy into money directly without all that complicated and confusing economic activity in the middle.
'Stop hitting yourself'
Unless they know actual Nobel prize winners or porn actresses then what they are following are public feeds of public people. If you want interesting updates from real people:
A) only befriend people in reality who you actually want to be friends with.
B) only befriend people on Facebook who you are friends with in reality.
Most people seem to instinctively grasp the former, but a lot of people (like you and your friends) seem to struggle with the later. I don't eat food I hate, I don't sit and watch TV I don't like, I don't read Barbara Cartland so why would I follow the feeds of 'uninteresting, boring, self-important people' on Facebook/twitter and then complain about the content of the channel which I have crafted for myself.
Off to do something I want to do, and as far as possible, avoid doing things I don't.
Automation is not purely about cost. Certain assembly steps are just too complex to be done quickly machines. Part of the engineering process is to minimize and simplify those manual assembly steps to keep the manufacturing costs down (and to make the quality easier to control).
I think the point is that Apple apparently forgot about DfM (Design for manufacturability) or somehow convinced themselves that is was no longer important. Either that or their contract with Foxconn is structured in such a way that the loses caused by the manufacturing complexity fell on Foxconn rather than Apple.
Fail... because it is. And just like antenna gate it is Apple's sainted designer's fault.
Don't the DTV standards already provide metadata for name, genre etc? Is it not time to hide channel numbers from the user? What is a channel number anyway except a poor man's UID?
Then it's up to whoever designs the UI for the box to present useful info to the user, make it organised, searchable, allow storing of favourites etc. Maybe all the required info is already there but TV and STB designers are just too damn lazy.
In the DTV era a TV 'channel' doesn't mean much in terms of the underlying transport so why not make it a clean break?
'Does that mean that there were situations where they would better suit the task at hand'
I am not punishing them for someone else's poor planning because that would suggest my UNIVERSITY had a plan. I am punishing them because I do not want to be associated with the army of self-satisfied, sandle-wearing, hipster drones which they have cultivated via their marketing (and in which my university print shop had apparently enlisted).
I remember my university print-shop used Apple Macs being 'arty' designer types (or at least suffering from the delusion of being 'arty' designer types). The only problem with this was that every other computer on the entire campus was a PC. Since the university print-shop insisted on only taking documents in a format that no other computer on campus was capable of generating, all students had to nip round the corner and pay in a private print-shop or in the public library.
I haven't used one since, just on principle.
I'm so glad you cleared that up... So global warming is not a conspiracy between the majority of the worlds politicians, scientists and media to take over the US, raise taxes and install a 'one world goverrnment'.
Just so we are abolutely clear on that...
'I beleive that it has been some time since the belief in AGW was the popular view'
For 90% of the world and 99% of the worlds scientist AGW is still the prevailing view. It's only if you've been raised in a trailer in Buttfuck Alabama on a diet of Fox News, Glenn Beck and tub-thumping evangelical creationist idiocy that you are likely to think otherwise. By using the phrase 'one world government' you have very neatly saved everybody here the trouble of working out whether you were or not.
'enjoying life without having to pay 100% in tax?'
WTF has any of this got to do with tax? Always suspected the people who came here to support this garbage were republicans. It would be nice to put a firewall around the US to keep the opinions of cousin Cleetus contained in whatever century they're living in.
There is a difference between small investors making wrong choices and losing a little money and the large financial institutions rigging the market so that the ONLY people who can make ANY money are their own large private clients. Morgan Stanley's own employees (the ones responsible for retail investments rather than private equity) have publicly stated this is unacceptable.
Perhaps the problem is that some bankers have realized there, now that the 1% have the majority of the money, rather than providing any service to the 99% there is more commission to be made by using them as cannon fodder, allowing the 1% to short sell and squeeze the sponge just a little bit harder.
Need a Citizen Smith icon
Indeed... most engineers I know will never turn down the chance of free food - work on the assumption that ever free meal could be your last.
Unfortunately most conference organisers are no longer stupid enough to offer a free bar (at least not when there are hardware engineers in the room).
The obvious problem is what handset manufacturers and operators will call 4G when it really arrives in the shops and how they will differentiate it from what, by that time, they will have been selling for a few years...
It will all end in tears. Perhaps it was a mistake to make the jump between 3G and 4G quite so large in the first place, but for sure the relaxation of the definition by ITU is just postponing the problem to later.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019