I've seen some articles that suggest that Tesla is already producing batteries far cheaper per kWh than any other maker.
Which makes GM's claims about the Bolt very suspicious.
I'm not really concerned about previous NASA cuts as some roles will transition to private industry (like SpaceX).
For the most part, the private sector only cares about products and services that can make a profit within the next few quarters. That is not and never has been the purpose of government research. Government research is often done in areas where there is no immediate path to profitability, but the results of that research can be used to generate lots of money depending on what we learn from the experiments.
We used to have a good balance of public and private research in the U.S. but now public research is considered vile and to be avoided at all costs. People honestly believe that the private sector alone should be responsible for performing all research tasks despite its unwillingness to take on big projects that will greatly advance our understanding of the universe such as the large hadron collider. I'm not too worried since other countries seem content with the decline of U.S. research and are using a combination of the public and private sectors to pick up our slack, but as an American it was nice when we had the courage to invest in our future using both sectors to become the leader in scientific research. Maybe we'll eventually come to our senses, but based on the current cynicism against all things government, I'm not holding my breath for that to happen anytime soon.
The very fact he;s spoken in favor of NASA before is a GOOD THING.
Talk is cheap and even the summary pointed out that Ted Cruz has voted to cut NASA's budget in the past. Follow the actions of politicians instead of their words because they have a reputation for speaking out of both sides of their ass.
Don't forget to tip your servers.
That's horrible advice! I just kicked over my server rack and now my boss is furious.
Sony Pictures Entertainment will have no choice but to hold you responsible
Well, someone has to be responsible for Sony's massive fuckup and we all know it won't be Sony.
We've seen over the last year many open source, power in numbers projects have critical vulnerabilities waiting to be exposed. Those defects were sitting there for years, yet being open source didn't magically fix them.
I can't deny that - the "many eyes" argument hasn't quite held up over the years. However, the reason I prefer an open source solution is because they tend to acknowledge and fix the issue much faster than their closed source counterparts. Most of the serious security issues in open source software have a fix released within 24 hours. It takes many closed source organizations much longer than that to even admit that the problem exists. Worse yet, some vendors will deny the problem indefinitely or tell you to migrate to their new platform (which is obviously incredibly costly). With open source, you're free to fix the issue in-house or contract someone to do the work if the vendor is uncooperative.
Over the last year, I've learned that the key to internet security is that it doesn't exist.
That's the sad reality and it's completely independent of the licensing model of the software you use.
SAIDI: System Average Interruption Duration Index (average duration of interruption measured in hours)
SAIFI: System Average Interruption Frequency Index (average number of interruptions each customer experiences per year)
From what I gather, it's not *that* bad - most apps depending on systemd do so for the cgroups support.
That's the case now but soon desktop environments will start using logind and applications may start using journald. As systemd continues to offer more tightly-coupled modules, applications will likely start relying more on these modules until the point that systemd will likely be a requirement for almost all applications and desktop environments.