Comment Re:Huge problem (Score 2) 136
No amount of Nvidia etching IP onto wafers is worthy of a 4.6 TRILLION market cap - bigger than the 4.2 Trillion market cap of the ENTIRE name-brand pharmaceutical industry.
In a slightly perverted sense, I think these are sort of expert systems too, but their expertise is this: "What has been said, and how can I sound like the people who said it?"
And we wouldnÃ(TM)t have to deal with the enshitification of the iPhone and the Mac.
I won't say it about the Mac but it definitely applies to the iPhone: it came pre-enshittified and Jobs was definitely personally responsible it. The iPhone was a terrible regression in the history of PCs, where we somehow went from personal computer revolution of the 1970s back to the IBM-decides-what-you-run of the 1960s.
It would have been good for Jobs to have left the computer world a decade earlier than he did. He didn't need to die, but everyone would be much better off today if, in the early/mid '00s, Jobs had opened a tire shop or restaurant or gorilla costume rental business. Anything but handheld PCs. It's been nearly two decades (!!!) since Apple out-Nintendoed Nintendo and we still haven't recovered. If anything, things are getting worse.
OTOH the modernization of Mac OS to Mac OS X was done very well, and IMHO the word "Mac" would now be a semi-obscure 20th Century historical reference if Jobs hadn't brought in NeXT and made that happen.
Yeah, for what they're charging, they can afford to go the extra mile and have the wifi offer a default route to the internet!
The problem with the police station scene in The Terminator, was that the cops shot back. Now we realize, they wouldn't do that. "Well, no I can't stop you from seeing Ms Connor because you're not a human, so I guess go right in there and do what you need to, mister, uhrr, clanker skin job."
if you're going to manage ANY ecosystem
The premise is that the customer (the person who owns the computer) has said "No thank you, I would rather that I (and my agent, F-Droid) manage it myself. Your interference is unwanted." That's what the owners are doing when they decide to install F-Droid.
I wonder if convicting some Google employees and everyone above them in the management tree of CFAA, might help remind everyone who is allowed to break whose computers.
You really think dudes wouldn't use a computer called "Amiga," or name their favorite gun "Vera," or their favorite baseball bat "Lucille?" Captain, please don't refer to the Enterprise as "she," or Cayenne8 will think you're
"Computer science went from a future-proof career to an industry in upheaval in a shockingly small amount of time."
This is basically 2001 prior to 9/11 again. Even the Slashdot comments could be substituted. I must be getting old.
Sucks to be graduating right now.
That used to be one of the more popular ones, but everyone's boycotting it now, until reality shapes up.
p>Google should go fuck themselves.
I should be in control of my personal computer. Is that really so hard to understand? Who the fuck is so retarded that they think people shouldn't have any say in what their PCs run?
Google isn't really retarded. They're just evil.
There can be and it's a really great idea! I currently use the CookieAutoDelete extension, and while I hate its shitty UI, it does what I want: unless I have whitelisted the domain, any cookies it offers get deleted a little while after closing the tab. So if I want long-term cookies for someone (e.g. slashdot.org, to stay logged-in all the time), I got 'em. If I don't go out of my way to whitelist a site, whatever cookies it sent, go away in a few minutes.
Web browsers ought to be able to do that out-of-the-box by now, as well as all the things uBlock Origin does, too.
Our web browsers kind of suck. At least Firefox has usable extensions, but these basic things should be totally mainstream and built-in by now. We've had decades to get this right, but I think the big browser teams have conflicts of interest over money (e.g. Google funding Firefox). Websites shouldn't be asking for consent; our browser preferences/settings ought to be handling that, with "consent" managed through the enforcement of our chosen personal policies.
If you read the article carefully, they are talking about lenses THINNER than a hair. I see several of the posts here thinking the width/radius of the lenses is this small, a reasonable mistake given the way this was written. Having a radius that small would severely reduce their light gathering ability, requiring very bright light or very dim images or very long exposure times.
-
You have a message from the operator.