Comment Re:All for it. (Score 1) 75
That's on the horse, of course.
That's on the horse, of course.
For Aldi, which uses Instacart, I assumed it was because there is no 'fee' for pickup, but they have to pay someone to shop for you. I consider the difference a convenience fee.
That said, by not shopping in store, I end up getting only what is on my list and end up paying FAR LESS than I would if I was wandering around.
Exactly. This press release is just a convoluted way to advertise how badass their product is.
These days, the market is more trusting of the statement that better tools and processes require fewer employees to serve the same customers if you call that AI. If you get more of your customers to succeed in using your website or app to do what they need without having a human do anything for them individually, you don't need as many employees doing it. But the market doesn't want to hear that you can cut jobs because your website doesn't suck as much any more, so you say AI and they think you've done something futuristic when you've actually done something practical, and you're vague enough about it that the SEC can't say that you claimed to be doing something you're not.
Americans can't even go on our own frothing racist diatribes anymore, we just pay someone else to do it.
Republicans equate being pro-market with being pro-big-business-agenda. The assumption is that anything that is good for big business is good for the market and therefore good for consumers.
So in the Republican framing, anti-trust, since is interferes with what big business wants to do, is *necessarily* anti-market and bad for consumers, which if you accept their axioms would have to be true, even though what big business wants to do is use its economic scale and political clout to consolidate, evade competition, and lock in consumers.
That isn't economics. It's religion. And when religious dogmas are challenge, you call the people challenging them the devil -- or in current political lingo, "terrorists". A "terrorist" in that sense doesn't have to commit any actual act of terrorism. He just has to be a heathen.
His Nazi bar will always be Xitter to me.
Both deliver mostly similar service, both endlessly churn content, raise prices and spam viewers with more ads endlessly.
There was a window when streaming was actually a better experience than piracy. But they've fixed that problem, and bittorrent is once again the least aggravating way to get your couch potato fix. It isn't about the money, it is about steadily making the service worse than it was when the subscriber agreed to pay for it.
Kindle, I mean Calibre, of course for managing and sideloading my own documents onto my Kindle.
Amazon have been changing lots behind the scenes lately. Last model or two paperwhites are harder to get DRM-free versions of files out of (no personal backup). The Colorsoft doesn't play as nice with products such as Kindle.
And they've been adding restrictions on how you can sideload books over the years too.
So no, it's not a consumer friendly move. It is only (and would only ever be) a move that helps Amazon.
NO! This is an outrage! [slams table]
Our religious war should be about reader's choice vs writer's choice!
Ok, but which of those things came with the new law? A lot of what you're describing (I suspect all of it) was already in place. What changed for non-banned users?
Oh, so they're doing it the same way I take "good" photographs: by taking a fuckton of mostly-shitty photographs and trawling through them for the rare few which actually look decent.
Vaporware. If this feature doesn't make it into the Open Source driver so that I can know where my computer is, then I'm not going to buy any Nvidia hardware!
It's fabulous! We haven't seen anything like it in the last half an hour! -- Macy's