Comment Re:sparse is good, but (Score 1) 216
Stephen Wolfram invented a New Kind of Science, that has unlocked the mysteries of the Universe. What have you done?
I know stuff about tanks.
Stephen Wolfram invented a New Kind of Science, that has unlocked the mysteries of the Universe. What have you done?
I know stuff about tanks.
When's the last time you watched a WNBA game?
When the Houston Comets were in the 2005 playoffs, I went to one of their games... SuperBanana, it might have great for some, but it didn't have the energy or quality of play that we enjoyed watching the Rockets. Neither I, my wife nor my friends ever had the desire to pay to watch another WNBA game. Sorry, just say'n.
One last bit of trivia: this isn't really news. I mean, I obviously find it cool, but seriously, 1960 was the discovery. Beta isn't bad enough, now they're altering the content too?
I, for one, cannot wait until the story headlined: "Justin Beiber's Totally RAD new computer!" hits the front page.
Maybe a new poll: "What color is your iPad?"
You make good points, but the ratio of the amount of hype to count of devices in people's hands is a bit skewed, no?
I'm sure the product will be great someday, but I'm getting sick of hearing about it.
Every time I hear yet another blurb about the Oculus Rift and The Wonders That May be Had, I start to think of the Moller air car or Duke Nukem.
Let me see if I can pull this out of my head correctly: I get what you're saying, and it brings to mind questions I've pondered over the years (which may or may not apply to Tesla's business model).
There exist many examples of what you've described, in many industries. When someone pops up with what looks like a better process or product, something that might yield great benefit, it often simultaneously disrupts an industry and the economics dependent upon it- people and systems change slowly and painfully. Often, existing industry will buy out the innovators and sit on their work for this reason.
How do innovative concepts that have not only enormous potential for profit, but enormous potential to benefit society as well, concepts such as electric vehicles with nation-wide battery-swap stations, thorium reacters, etc., get implemented on a useful scale?
How does society-changing, profitable innovation take hold while at the same time minimizing impact on those people and industries that are reluctant/slow to change?
I don't have answers for either of these questions, and if I did, I'm just positive that Captains of Industry look for answers from idiots posting on Slashdot.
As a semi-related side-rant, I guess what I find discouraging is that, taking the energy industry as an example, unimaginably wealthy corporations and shareholders seem to be content with a slow-motion slide into distopian decay, as long as they're the last ones to go. They could, albeit with significant, careful investment over time in the technologies mentioned above, maintain profits and control, but over a type of industry that has huge untapped potential as well as societal and environmental benefits far beyond what exists now.
...break the laws enacted to protect...
Excuse me-
Everybody else has played by those rules for years even though the rules themselves are fairly stupid.
Tesla is crying because they don't want to play by the same rules everybody else has to and trying to pretend they are innovative because of it.
Wow- So you're slamming Tesla with an argument of: "Innovate, but make sure you don't break the laws enacted to protect the status quo / artificially prop up an old business model.".... Isn't this one of the characteristics associated with innovation?
For the most part, the only actions members of congress work hard at taking are those that increase or maintain their own wealth and power (or, indirectly, that of the groups assisting them in this endeavour). Most any other public stance they take is usually theater to distract opposition to these outcomes- If they can keep us occupied, arguing about the theatric details while maintaining the illusion that we actually have a say in what happens, so much the better.
You may find an outlier here or there (usually for only a brief period of time during his or her political career), but not often.
At the state level, it seems as if voting for the common good is slightly more prevelant, with the emphasis on "slightly".
High-functioning sociopaths have control, both in government and in corporate America (The Venn diagram for these two groups probably overlaps 75%), and they possess the unprecedented technological means to keep it.
Agreed.
You know what gets me? The same managementspeak that has been used for years by organizations whenever there's controversy, evokes the same negative blow-back from the user base. Always.
What the hell is the benefit? I haven't read all the posts, but is there a single one that responded positively to the corporate-speak? My God, every new generation of suits keeps making the same fucking mistakes, decade after decade- So much so that if one or two of them actually interact with their userbase in some way with which people resonate, they're hailed as "visionaries".
About the site, it's not that difficult- a large portion of the userbase here perceives benefit from a number of useful features that seem to be missing or poorly implemented in the beta- Why fuck with the existing feature set? Why not add additional functionality, incrementally, to the existing feature set- and actually make something that's really better? If the beta -does- go all "Pop culture tech / TMZ / The userbase is the product" on our asses, as it really does appear to be doing, then I say Let the Dice execs have this site and the types that will end up here; we can and will move on and find something else.
Seeing as how long the beta has failed to include those features that people here have been screaming about, I would wager that Dice management has already run the revenue forecasts for different outcomes, and they've decided on "Pop culture tech". I think what we're seeing with Timothy's managementspeak is an attempt to stop-loss as much of the inevitalbe xodus as possible.... "Give'm hope that we'll listen, then some of them might stay around long enough to get used to the crappy UI and we won't lose them."
It's Microsoft's fault. They won't allow the makers to sell you a PC without a tablet OS.
I'm sure that's a significant factor. I wonder how the makers feel about that.
Look no further "Samsung is blaming Windows 8 for its poor performance in the PC market and the overall decline of the industry as a whole."
I open up Windows Store Apps only on the the Modern UI display and Win32/64 apps on the desktop displays.
Okay, I'll bite: What benefit could you experience on the Metro side (worth dedicating a monitor) that you can't with the desktop?
Not that you should give a damn about my opinion, but this post is as well thought out and on target as the first was knee-jerk.
What you have written above is the most realistic and insightful analysis that I have seen to date of our situation and options.
Yes, apparently you wiretap the internet and install the video cameras.
Who, specifically, are the two of you referring to when you say "you" and "we"? All Americans? Really?
Yes sir, no Americans "just talk big" on the internet as they rave into video cameras, and all Americans support "wiretapping the internet" as we giggle our asses off installing the video cameras... and all Irish are drunks, all Brits have bad teeth and all Muslims are terrorists.
You really put your names on this shit? Both of your posts are sense-free trolls. Give it a rest.
....However, there is a lot you can do to screw with your most loyal fanbase, the virgins who know the story better than you do. So, really. Just don't.
Allow me to fix that for you.
The moon is made of green cheese. -- John Heywood
