Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
The purpose of 'Booth Babes' is to attract customers, presumably men to the booth. Whether this is an effective strategy is a separate discussion.
It's human nature, and attempts to circumvent it are trivially overcome.
Exhibitors that are currently using this approach can hire the same models and dress them in 'Business-appropriate' attire. The end result is you will still have beautiful women (who may know nothing about the product) staffing a booth and bringing in men.
If anything, this will provide more plausible deniability for more image-conscious men who don't wish to be seen chatting up some lyra- and latex- clad contractor at a booth.
I suppose if that become too troublesome, they can always ban makeup or attractive staffers (of both sexes). Or require that contractors be able to talk knowledgeably about the product.
I'm not criticizing their approach, per se, but I suspect even after these changes there will be continued outrage about the disproportionally attractive women staffing some booths and being paid to be chatty or even flirty.
The researchers first recorded the electrical signals from the mice's brains while the mice were awake and exploring the test chamber, until the researchers identified patterns of activity associated with a certain location. Then, when the mice slept, the researchers watched for those neural patterns to be replayed, indicating that the mice were consolidating the memory of that location. At that moment, they zapped a reward center of the mice's brains. When the mice awoke and went back into the chamber, they hung around that reward-associated location, presumably expecting a dose of feel-good.
This is a necessary step in the evolution of this device and form factor, just as the original iPhone, even with its many limitations and flaws served as the basis for essentially the entire smartphone ecosystem that we take for granted a mere seven years later.
This is not a device for everyone. It has many flaws. It has an overly large form factor (relatively speaking compared to where it will go).
But for some (many) this will fill specific needs. Whether motorcyclists or bicyclists to have navigation on their wrist, someone looking for a fashion accessory that can connect with their phone, those wanting the health-specific features, this device will have a solid niche fulfilling those criteria.
The next Apple Watch will be thinner, have better battery life, etc., eventually, much of the functionality still relegated to the iPhone will make its way onto the watch.
But the next watch wouldn't happen if there wasn't a market for the early adopters and developers who will make use of what we have *today*.
I have a 39" Seiki 4K monitor (TV) that I mostly love. It's not the best color rendition, but it's hard to beat sheer screen real estate for dev work. My biggest complaint is that at that size, 4K is a similar resolution to existing 30" monitors @ 2560x1600.
I'd love a 5K / 6K display in this size and thought it was probably a few years out. 8K would be nice, but I doubt that will be practical in a 35"-40" size for quite a while longer. I don't need 300+ dpi, but a solid 220 or so would be great.
I think some of the other posters are probably correct in that a nontrivial portion of that 'subsidy' is accounting for R&D costs. I think every major manufacturer either has or is considering electric cars, so it makes sense to start building them to work out engineering issues. Perhaps it is helpful from an accounting standpoint to attribute this to the requirement to sell these in California. I think even if they weren't, there would be similar development expenses for the inevitable introduction of these cars in another country or state.
Currently in CA (the only state in which they're sold, until they start in Oregon later this year), there is a $2,500 rebate from the state in addition to a $7,500 tax credit from the Federal government.
I have the 500e. I love it, although I'm inclined to agree about it not being competitive in the 30K+ range. It has a lot to gain from the lease / state / federal subsidies currently in effect. I can't really think of anything that annoys me in this car after nine months. I'll probably get another one in 2 or 3 years. (Or a Tesla if there is one in the $30-40K range or if I decide I want a larger car.)
It may not have a huge range (I get ~ 100 miles on full charge), but it is absolutely a serious attempt at an electric car. It appears to be well-engineered, and not an afterthought of tacked-on parts. It is based on the same chassis as the gas-powered Fiat. Doubtless it could be even more efficient if they were to optimize it more for the drivetrain it has.
I think the engineers did a commendable job of creating a practical electric car within their budget / time / materials constraints. Pathetic it absolutely is not. In my opinion, until Tesla takes on this market segment, there is nothing that will touch it.
I do find it curious that Marchionne is publicly trying to dissuade people from purchasing it. A weird reverse-psychology attempt?
It's a fantastic car. I've had mine for about nine months and after having owned an number of rather expensive (and inexpensive) cars, this is probably my favorite.
I've never driven a gas-powered Fiat 500, but I imagine the build quality is similar. It's surprisingly comfortable and well built for a car in its price range. I'm pretty particular about the noise levels in my cars and the electric model is reported to have more sound dampening than the standard model; external noise is probably more obvious when there's no engine to mask it. Quiet, fantastic acceleration, and virtually no maintenance. There's a lot to like about this car.
I hope they continue selling them. I've leased mine since the technology changes quickly enough that I expect better range / faster charging, or both within 3-4 years (plus competition from Tesla in that market segment), but if there were no other option I would definitely purchase mine at the end of the lease.
This is my first electric car, but I can say unequivocally that I will never purchase another gas-powered car (unless it's an exotic / sports car). It really is that much of an improvement over internal combustion.*
*For me. Obviously electric cars are not for _everyone_(yet). If you need to haul bales of hay up a mountainside four times a week, buy a truck.
One thing missed in all of this is that we are close (relatively speaking) to being able to grow a number of organs. It's entirely likely that this entire debate will a be a footnote in a future wikipedia article.
By the time infrastructure to support organ sales, the associated legislation, and oversight could be put in place, we would probably be well on the way to therapeutic use of many these advances. In the meantime, it could detract from funding and research efforts if there were an inexpensive (in a strictly financial sense) alternative to synthetic organs, which will likely be expensive initially.
After a number of years in the desolate wasteland that is 1080P, we are finally at a convergence of the television and monitor markets with 4K televisions. Based on the ability of Seiki to sell a 4K 39" panel for less the $500, it's likely that 2014 will usher in a series of relatively-inexpensive monitors delivering this resolution. Similar 1080p panels are selling for $300, and since the manufacturing isn't significantly more difficult, it's likely that in 12-18 months that pricepoint will be reached for 4K monitors as well.
Worth noting - the Seiki does all of this while including a remote, tuners, and multiple connectors unnecessary for strictly computer-use monitor. It's likely the costs (and prices) could drop even more in that sort of an implementation given enough volume. (Since the TV market is much bigger it may still make sense to make a one-size-fits-all model)
I purchased the 4K 39" Seiki TV about two weeks ago for use as a monitor. The 30Hz refresh rate is lower than I would like, but for software dev, still images, and watching the tiny amount of 4K video content it is completely fine. 39" is a little bit larger than I would have normally considered, but it offers a nice amount of screen real estate (less than 2 30" monitors though) and slightly higher dot pitch than a standard 2560x1600 30" display.
tl;dr It's completely worthwhile to get a 4K display now at this price.