(Personally, I think anyone who would go to work for Zuckerberg/Meta is someone I'm glad is not remaining at Apple. "Don't let the door hit you on the way out.")
If Zuckerberg rolled a truck full of money to my house to change jobs, I wouldn't say no. I would however take the attitude of Peter Gibbons from Office Space though: Cleaning fish at my desk, etc.
by the time they wanted to switch to EUV, they had already fired most of the old white men, based on diversity quotas and salary, which would be able to execute the switch, and they got stuck with the quartz mask absorbing too much of the light.
Citation needed. While I don't doubt Intel got rid of older workers, the main reason is that newer, younger workers are cheaper. The fact they were old white men is more an artifact of the system where Intel hired mostly white men to be engineers decades ago.
Trucks, including the light trucks sold to consumers, are a separate category in DAFE. You don't average trucks in with cars.
It literally says in the very first sentence of the government page on CAFE: "NHTSA's Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards regulate how far our vehicles must travel on a gallon of fuel. NHTSA sets CAFE standards for passenger cars and for light trucks (collectively, light-duty vehicles), and separately sets fuel consumption standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks and engines."
How did this blatant misinformation get marked as "Informative", I'll never know..
In another article, I saw a suggestion that scientists were trying the opposite: injecting vaccines with a tattoo gun. The whole point of that is that the immune system is very active just below the skin, while deep in the muscle tissue you are too far behind the defenses.
Not with a tattoo gun, but yes, microneedle delivery is a new experimental way to deliver vaccines. It's less like a tattoo gun and more like a nicotine patch or a bandaid, though.
> And you've done nothing to explain what the use case is.
Sorry, did I miss when I agreed to educate you? Since when is it important to ME that YOU agree with me? I don't care what you think. I'm telling you to get your head out of your ventilation shaft and consider that _other people have other needs_.
Okay. Thanks for all but admitting that exactly none of those needs are actually solved by the feature we're talking about.
You don't have a need. You just don't want your routine to be disrupted by a company taking away a feature that works for you. And it's entirely okay to feel that way. But it's not really a good reason to have designed such an overly complex and, at least in the real world, frequently under-performing protocol in the first place.
Your other comments show you don't understand the limitations of the things that work for you, in other use cases.
Keep telling yourself that I'm the one who doesn't understand the tech if it helps you sleep at night.
My TV doesn't have Internet. The remote is not going to let me watch Netflix.
Then neither will casting, because casting by definition requires the TV to have Internet. It's a handoff process whereby the TV itself retrieves the content from the Netflix servers, and all your phone does is handle the authentication and key delivery plus playback controls.
You can do screen mirroring with a non-Internet-capable or disconnected TV, but not you can't use the ridiculously designed feature that I'm talking about.
So everything I'm saying is useless is useless for you, too.
My latest pet peeve is when Siri violates basic privacy standards by compelling data collection that isn't necessary.
A couple of days ago, I asked it for a list of restaurants near a particular town where I would be in a couple of hours. Siri immediately told me I had to enable location services for that query. What? Why? My query didn't ask for a list of restaurants near me. I asked for a list of restaurants near a different town, and more to the point, I gave both the name of the town and the state.
I attempted probably half a dozen different variations of that query, including things like avoiding the word "near", and Siri failed in the same way every single time, so this isn't just a one-off glitch specific to how I worded the query. It's a general problem with the way Siri handles queries that involve location.
This violates the first rule of location services, which is do not ask for the user's location unless you actually need the user's location. If the user is asking for restaurants in Panama City, Florida, Siri does NOT need to know that the user is currently in Charleston, South Carolina. It's none of Siri's d**n business. And more to the point, if Siri actually tried to do literally anything with that location data, it would be pretty much guaranteed to reduce the quality of the results rather than increase it, so having the data is just an invitation for any AI that might be involved to do something utterly stupid.
So it's not for you. You don't understand or need the use case.
And you've done nothing to explain what the use case is. As far as I can tell, the use case is "Someone who wants to use their phone to control the TV instead of the TV remote," which is a tremendous amount of technological overhead for such a negligible benefit.
It's way easier to point your camera at the screen and do an instant sign-in on the TV than it is to get your phone connected to the right Wi-Fi network and cast to the right TV, so the use case would have to be pretty compelling to make up for what a pain in the a** it is when it works, much less when it doesn't.
You're coming across as "old man yells at cloud", and about something you don't even use!
Major correction here: about something that I have tried to use on many, many occasions, but never used successfully. There's a difference.
I won't read or engage further as I for one only spend my time on worthwhile things and you seem stuck in the mud.
You won't read or engage further because you don't actually know any compelling reason to use it. If you did, you would have said what that reason was by now.
Translation: Microsoft has outsourced its QA to volunteers.
You mean MS has outsourced QA to AI. I would think volunteers would have found that issue quickly.
Depends on what "preview” means. If it means an alpha build meant to be internal, such a bug is fine. To me this build was meant to be shown and tested by customers and closer to a beta build. Nothing ruins testing like the inability to test anything.
One time my company was asked to test some software for a supplier. The software would not run after install on any of our computers. There were no errors displayed to give us hints about what could be wrong. Despite weeks of correspondence with their development team, we could never get the software to run. After the testing period was over, they sent us a questionnaire. Unfortunately we could not answer most of the questions as we could never get it to run. One final question was about the readiness of the software for production. We said the software was not ready for production.
The development team was not happy about that and emailed asking for reasons why we said that. I assume their supervisors read the questionnaire responses. We told them that any software that would not work after weeks of correspondence and no hint about what to fix was not production ready. They responded they had since fixed all installation issues in the latest version. We answered back that we could only test the version we were given and that version did not work.
> Casting and the entire mechanism of having the device being casted to have to have direct access to the media source is idiotic and only exists because they insist on a extra level of weaponizing devices against the owners and policing what you can do with your own devices
You could have just said "I don't understand why that is needed" and saved yourself the effort.
The use case is extremely powerful. You want to direct a device to do something, rather than try to stream a 2160p video out of your phone over wifi. That's really not so hard to understand, surely?
Not really, no. If I wanted to use the TV to do all of the networking and playback, I would have just used the TV's app to do it. The number of hotels I've seen where the TV supported Chromecast or AirPlay streaming but did not have a built-in Netflix app are literally zero.
From my perspective, casting is a complete disaster by its very nature. It relies on the display device having full Internet access, which isn't a given. Literally every time I've wanted to do casting, it has been because the TV set's Netflix app wasn't working because of a network problem, and it couldn't get access to the Internet, so I was trying to use the phone's network connection. By shifting the network connectivity back to the TV set, it makes the entire system completely worthless, because the exact situations where it could be useful are the exact situations where it isn't.
When people refer to Linux they normally refer to an operating system based on it, and the most common and well known operating system using Linux is one of a gazillion of Linux distros.
This article and the data behind it are talking about what is and is not based on the Linux kernel not what the general population defines as Linux. You want everyone to ignore that while making your argument.
No one has ever thought of Android as the "Linux", it's just bunkers. Why?
Strawman argument. Anyone who knows anything technical about Android knows it is based on the Linux kernel.
Because Google may replace the kernel component with something else and they almost went through with that for Android but stopped at certain Nest devices.
Classic whataboutism. You might as well speculated that a meteor will wipe out civilization and no one can update Android anymore. That is equally as relevant as your scenario. Android uses the Linux kernel today. It is considered based on Linux today.
My "ignorance" is OK, while your logic and understanding of this world have never been there in the first place.
Yes it is a lot of ignorance. As someone who is on slashdot, I assumed you would know better.
"Nuclear war can ruin your whole compile." -- Karl Lehenbauer
