For this use I'd need one with realtime video capability since it would be non-line of sight operation. Hence more cost. Since it is mostly just me wanting to check on things, not worth it.

If there is an actual problem, I have professionals look at it.

In general things involving roof inspection are well suited to be done by drone. While there still are times you'd need to put a person on the roof, a drone with a high rez camera can get you the information you need in most cases. Safer, and also faster.

If they weren't so expensive I'd love to have one for my own use for that purpose. I live in a second story condo and access to the roof is a problem (you need a really big ladder). I'd love to be able to fly a drone up to check for debris occluding vents, damage to my A/C, etc.

You are a perfect example of what I'm talking about. No perspective on modern games, just bitching. You act like CoD is all there is. Let's see, off the top of my head for modern games that are deep and involved: Kerbal Space Program, Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity, Frozen Cortex, Sins of A Solar Empire Rebellion, Endless Space, Grey Goo, Transistor, Starpoint Gemini 2, Divinity Original Sin, and Age of Wonders 3.

That's not a list of all of them, just what I can think of easily. These are all titles that have come out in the last year or two, have real meat to the gameplay, little to no cinematics and are a hell of a lot of fun.

If you can't find games that are good, that's you being a stick in the mud and being too lazy to read anything but IGN, not because there aren't tons of releases.

There are a -LOT- of single player games these days. A lot fo multi player ones too, but that one exists doesn't get rid of the other. Whatever genre you like, you can find some of both.

Since you mention shooters, Wolfenstein the New Order is a single player only shooter acclaimed by critics and fans alike.

For whatever reason, humans (some of them at least) have this need to view the past with rose coloured glasses and then whine about everything modern. Happens with gaming just as anything else.

An objective look at gaming shows we are in an amazing golden age of gaming right now. Tons of games are being made. With that means tons of crap, of course, but plenty of good ones. What's more, basically everyone's needs are being met. Gaming isn't targeted at just one or two demographics, there is a massive variety out there. So we can have both something like Call of Duty, which is designed to appeal to a mass market, and something like Kerbal Space Program which has a much more limited audience. One does not choke out the other and everyone can find something they like.

My problem with games these days lack of time to play all the games I want. I have a big wishlist of games on Steam, and a collection of games I bought but haven't yet installed. However life intrudes and I have only so much time to spend gaming. I wish I could waste more time playing games but I can't.

Very different from my childhood where I would have to play and replay the same games over and over since I had very few.

This is just a cop out to pay people less. "Oh sorry we don't negotiate on salary, it is a gender equality thing, you'll just have to take the pay we offered you even though it is below what you should make." It's a CEO being a CEO and looking to line their own pockets. However she's just figured out how to couch it in equality rhetoric so as to mask the fact that it is just designed to screw over workers to enrich her.

Because if you start exaggerating and making shit up, it makes people listen to you less. The whole "boy who cried wolf" thing. If you keep saying doom is coming and it never comes, well then people are going to quit listening to you even if you are right one time.

Also it leads people to question your legit, non-exaggerated points. I mean after all, if the problem you are talking about really is so bad, why the need to make shit up? Is it really so bad if you have to exaggerate what you say? If you exaggerated this thing, how do we know you aren't exaggerating more?

The best thing is to keep it truthful. No, people won't always be interested in listening or in doing what you ask, but that's life. If you want to have any credibility long term and have hope of being listened to, you need to be truthful. Let people truthfully know the problems they will face and show them when they are facing them. Ya, it'll probably have to get to be a bigger problem before people fix it, that is how humans tend to operate.

Is he was pretty accurate on the "fucktard" thing? :D

Seriously though, this is part of the reason she's undefeatable. If her supporters don't even know who she's running against, how can that person have any hope?

She's an incumbent, which gives her a big advantage. Add to that the number of rabid "I'll never vote republican EVAR" folks in California, she's got enough that she'll never get voted out.

Only bright spot is she's currently the oldest serving senator. At some point probably reasonably soon, she'll have to leave because of age.

But like I said, crazy geek. What would I recommend to people? Probably 20mbps for individuals, 100mbps for families or power users.

Each order of magnitude of network speed increase matters less than the one before it as more stuff is trivial, and there's less stuff that is still problematic. There are things out there for which gig is a noticeable improvement over 100mbit, but not many. As time goes on and things grow it'll matter a little more, but still not a huge amount.

Eventually we may find that something is "enough" for end users and further upgrades aren't needed, perhaps in the 10gibt range. That even when we are doing all kinds of things with it, it ends up being fast enough, and not having any real benefit to go higher.

Right now, 20mbits or so is "enough" for most users. If you get multiple users in a household, or like to download large games or something, more can be needed. However even for that, 100mbit ends up being "enough". Moving to something higher isn't real noticeable. Steaming works no better, webpages are already fast, all you get are a bit less time on large DLs but you didn't spend much time anyhow so no big deal.

It's fun for sure, and I'll probably go to gig when it comes to my area (I have 150mbps now) but only because I'm a geek who likes shiny toys. When I stepped up from 30mbps to 150mbps I noticed no difference at all except for Steam downloads, it is a luxury, not anything that really matters.

The actors had nothing to react to and nowhere to go. Basically the whole damn thing was shot on green screen, with a two camera setup. Lucas could just park his ass in his chair, look at the monitors, and do nothing. Makes it hard when you are not only having to imagine the entire set and everything you are supposed to be seeing and reacting to, but also are on a small stage and can't even more around much.

He had a lot of people he was answerable to. Sure he wrote the script for the first one (other screenwriters did the second and third) but it wasn't the Lucas show. The producers worked for the studio, not him, he had others who would question his decisions, make changes, etc. He was in charge only in so far as being the director, who does have a good deal of control, but still plenty of limits.

Not the case for the new three. It was an all-Lucas team. He was in charge, surrounded by yes men and did whatever the fuck he wanted. The result was really bad.

Overhead on the CPU and in terms of interconnect latency. Because USB is higher level, it incurs a decent amount of load on the CPU. No big deal for basic use, but you wouldn't want it for your main drive or the like. Also USB's latency isn't great, on the order of 100 microseconds or so. Fine for many uses, but high by SSD reckoning and not something you want time critical system components on. PCIe latency is so low you tend to measure it in cycles, not in time.

Also 20Gbit/sec doesn't cut it for some of the internal shit. Graphics and compute hang on 16x slots those are 16GByte/sec in the 3.0 spec (half that in 2.0) per direction (it is completely full duplex). That's 128gbits/sec. For all that it is still extremely performance limiting if you regularly have to use it to access system RAM.

Really interfaces usually are designed for purpose, and not everything is compatible. When you are trying to balance cost, speed, complexity of implementation, complexity of signaling, distance, etc, etc something has to give. There's reason to have PCIe for internal connections, USB for devices, and Ethernet for network, and not try to cram all that in to one bus that is not well suited to them.

These M.2 drivers are PCIe. It is a different slot form factor, but it is just PCIe.

USB would not be desirable for internal system use, too much overhead. It is well designed for the purpose it has but you wouldn't want it for everything.

There are reasons to want multiple transports, different ones are good at different things.