Warp was solid and good.
The "suicide" was the Windows 16-bit (not Windows NT) compatibility layer. They should have left it out. It never worked properly and IBM drained their resources trying to support it.
And, also, so much of the kernel was written in assembly language for the x86 architecture, so cross-compatibility was not even an afterthought with OS/2 which is a shame.
Trucking is low margin and complexity will increase costs. Some increases might be tolerated, while some other traffic may move to rail or air freight instead. In any case any increased costs are pretty much entirely borne by the end consumer so best avoid that as much as possible.
One of the other links had an analysis that an EV Semi could save ~$750k in fuel costs over the course of a million miles.
That alone would justify some complexity if companies are willing to pay more for faster delivery.
Then you have that one of the biggest expenses for a semi is the driver, so if you get rid of them, even for just depo to depo routes, well, another cost saver.
For self driving, they're already demoing it in Texas for semis, and there are driverless, as in no safety driver, taxis in SF and a few other cities. Now, they do have remote drivers available to take over, when necessary, but that's reportedly only a fraction of the time and getting better.
So if you're not going to be here for it to be "common", well, that might depend on what you consider "common"? Does 1% of trips count as "common"? 10%? 50%? Etc... Combined with how in good health you are. I'm retired, but I figure I'll live long enough to see it being "common".
For example, I'm willing to count Teslas as "common" at this point, because I generally see at least one when I go driving.
Maybe he could reincarnate in the MCU.
When I was at IBM I had an IBM RT PC with a ROMP processor on my desk running AIX connected to a Token-Ring network.
Since I was a lowly contractor, it was reassigned to an IBMer and I was given a Tektronix X-Terminal, also using Token-Ring, connected to a big server also running AIX.
IBM was in a weird state in the early 1990s. I enjoyed it a lot.
We programmed in Ada and the SQL-ish IBM DB2.
I don't understand the opposition to this.
If I am funding something, I'm a lot more likely to fund something that has a track record of making money, than some new thing that has no such track record.
Remember, the primary reason for funding a movie is TO MAKE MONEY, not somehow make the world a better place by providing it with some never heard before story.
Newsflash - it's ALWAYS been that way. You know those whole stylistic shifts in the painting world? Exactly that, but gatekept. Filmography? Ever wonder why so many films all seem to be the same for the next couple of years after a huge successful release?
How about comic books. Wait, the exact same thing, follow the successful one, but change juuust enough to not get sued.
Novels? Uhhh, sorry. Just look at the trash that came out after the trash for 50 shades.
NOTHING is sacrosanct, even less if you can get people to pay for it. Gotta get YOUR piece of the pie after all.
You may not want to live that way... but too bad, you have always lived that way. You just haven't looked around and saw it.
Calm yourself. It's random.
I matter how bad, lame, disreputable or other negative adjective that may apply, what is wrong, exactly, with giving fans what they want?
Why does Amazon want to make movies? To make money.
What's a great way to make money? By providing what people want.
Take your work seriously but never take yourself seriously; and do not take what happens either to yourself or your work seriously. -- Booth Tarkington
