Agreed. Always line up the ducks before you go shooting.
Yes and no... nowadays, with mandatory reporting in some cases, and every newly unemployed developer on the planet able to post to any number of disclosure lists, I'm not seeing too many management types left these days that would take such a stupid risk.
All that, and it wouldn't hurt to print off copies of those emails (and his responses!) and take those home for personal storage. That way, if poop-meets-fan and they suddenly perp-walk you out (before you have a chance to reach for your backups or suchlike) you still have usable documentation - this is in case any governmental authorities get involved, a lawsuit springs from it, etc..
Printing also gives you the advantage of having backups that you can walk out of the building with and not set off any alarms, since many tightly-regulated companies lock down the use of USB sticks, external hard disks, and etc. (my last employer -- a web-banking software house-- would literally fire you on the spot if you got caught using a geek stick or external drive on their desk/laptop equipment or servers - at least if you do it w/o prior written manager authorization and only on authorized devices.)
To top that off, the printed copies are protection against an 'oops - our retention is only set to two weeks and the backups were corrupted somehow; sorry, sucker!' move. F500 firms generally blow away anything in the inbox that's more than a couple of weeks old anyway, so if you forget to archive it off to a
Meanwhile, it wouldn't hurt to have a bit of a side conversation with someone in legal (for a start), then escalate it to formal conversations with them via email (again, print those suckers off) should nothing get resolved.
So yeah...delivery drones will potentially reduce the delivery time of those amazon packages to 30 minutes...for a cost of $5,000 per package
Are you assuming that each drone will self destruct after dropping of a new SSD drive in the rooftop mailroom chute at an office building? I expect they're planning to use the same drone more than once. Sort of like we use UPS trucks at least three or four times before destroying them.
INPUT | PROCESSING / memory | OUTPUT (feedback) |
shows the phone and tablet as having the same Processing/memory as the PC. The only difference is in INPUT and OUTPUT. Therefore, the way to remove PCs from the world is fairly straightforward: allow phones the same input and output options. This can be done with bluetooth keyboards and a video connector to access a larger screen. Being able to connect to a printer would also be a nice effect.
With data in the cloud, there is little reason for such a device to not exist. Why it doesn't yet, I have no idea. MY understanding is that was EXACTLY where Apple was going, until Jobs died. Then the cowards took over and they're doing a rear guard action ever since, viz, the cylindrical / inferior MacPro, etc. The iPad should be the new MacBookPro by now, but, that would take vision and guts, something not found at Apple sans Jobs, or in Japan (culturally) or at Microsoft (ever). Maybe Google will put something together.
What we're looking at is (as noted by others here) that PCs are a VERY mature market. You can only do word processing so fast. If an app complies in 5 minutes, you're not gaining that much labour time by doubling the speed to 2min 30sec. And if an action takes 10 seconds, and you can do it in 1 with some new crazy processor, you're not gaining that much. There ARE applications where speed matters (rendering video, for example) but those are edge cases, not the majority. Remember when benchmarking was done with an "Unsharp mask filter on a 40meg Photoshop file"? How long does that take anymore? A second? Two? We're in the land of Good Enough Computing. And if there is anything that should keep AI fundies like Kurzweil awake at night, it's that. It's not that we can't use more speed and power, we just don't need it for 99% of what we do, and so our money will go into things are are technologically "inferior" but infinitely practical and dirt cheap.
So, yeah - Apple, MS, Samsung, whoever - they could kill the PC tomorrow. Just let datapads multitask, power USB (for keyboard / mouse / graphics tablet / printer etc), and have a convenient HDMI port out. Most of those things already exist to a certain degree already - so now it's just a matter of time before the iOS / Chrome / Windows / Android catch up to the need.
Probably not, so it isn't going to improve delivery times in the winter
You're right. The whole idea should be completely scrapped.
Also, do you know an instance where such an accident happened and didin't make to local news.
OF course it would make local news if Little Johnny got killed because he wandered behind a backing-up UPS truck in the street. Tragic accident, negligent parents, etc. But if a 20-pound drone gets clobbered by a Canada Goose and falls onto Johnny's head, making him exactly as dead as the UPS truck would have, it would be front and center in countless national/international news outlets. You know this is true.
A drone falls from the sky and kills someone, imprison DroneCorp's CEO for manslaughter. I'd like that.
Really? Do you have any idea how idiotic that idea actually is? Should the CEO of GM go to jail when you run your Chevy over a pothole, blow out a tire, lose some steering control, and cause an accident? Do you really think that?
There's many, many more PCs in the world than there were last year, and there will continue to be many, many more PCs next year.
Just because it's rate of growth is slower than it used to be, does not mean there will be fewer PCs used - PCs are not actually getting less popular, they're just not getting more popular at as fast a rate as before.
The 'desktop' is as necessary, and as used as ever - there's just fewer folks needing a new copy right now. The role of PCs in doing most of the creation of content, serving of data, and as a customizable platform will not be reduced - there's just other specialized devices getting into their own growth phases in popularity, consuming the content created by an industry of PCs and PC servers.
It's like saying that micro organisms are in danger, because they've filled most of the world, they aren't doubling in number periodically anymore, and other creatures that eat them are increasing in number. But none of those 'competitors' actually fill the same niche, and they all depend on the lowly class of micro organisms to function in the end.
You're missing the point -- the vacuum itself has no temperature; that was the statement.
A temperature is just a measure of energy. In material this is the energy of the vibrations of the atoms and molecules. In a vacuum it is the vibration of the EM field. Put a 'cold' material in a 'hot' vacuum and it's atoms will start to vibrate with a particular energy associated with the EM energy in that vacuum. Put a 'hot' object into a 'cold' vacuum and it will radiate EM energy and heat up the vacuum.
The energy may be stored in slightly different ways but it's really not any more different than the fact that water stores in energy in H20 molecular vibrations and nitrogen storing it in N2 molecular vibrations. We don't have separate concepts of temperature for these two materials so neither should we have a different concept for vacuum what stores its energy in EM field vibrations: they all couple and will exchange their heat energy.
I've met plenty of engineers from cultures where questioning and innovation are highly discouraged and they couldn't innovate their way out of a paper bag.
True and I believe that is why this discrepancy in knowledge has not had any real, noticeable impact yet because at university you have to question if you are going to learn anything. However this is not a static picture - standards in the west are dropping and at some point all the innovation in the world is not going to help us because our kids won't have enough background to be able to ask interesting questions or, to use your analogy, they will find the inside of the paper bag so new and exciting because they have not seen one before that they won't know why anyone would want to innovate their way out of it.
No, but you HAVE had the expectation that someone can't point a device at your property and cause it to fry itself. Just like you had the expectation that someone wouldn't shoot your horse, pre-auto.
You're confusing the words "can't" and "wouldn't."
There was nothing stopping someone from shooting your horse, or from locking up your car's engine block by shooting it, today, right now. I'd rather replace some onboard electronics than an engine block, wouldn't you? But the distinction is academic. Because it's all about what people do, not which tool people use. EMP weapons and guns don't shoot horses and cars, people do. The expectations and limitations are cultural, not technological.