I'm gen-X and I don't do phone payments either. Not that I don't want to, it's just not part of my groove.

I have many implants to do many things. Paying for stuff is just one of them. But I also open doors, share my contact information, log into my computers, do 2FA...

It's hard to explain to those who don't wear implants, but once you get used to never needing keys, access cards or payment cards, it's hard to get back. I seriously couldn't live without them. Like popping into any store to do the groceries and simply waving my hand to pay instead of fumbling in my pocket, only to realize I left my wallet at home or something. It really does grow on you.

As for nudity, you jest, but my local swimming pool has NFC lockers and I can enroll one of my implants when I close my locker, so I don't have to wear a bracelet while I swim. It's little things like that...

I have no confidence in their estimate, either. I think they overestimated it by $20 billion.

Think about it. In the Bay Area, people travel just 10 miles per day on average. I think the state average is somewhere closer to 20 or 30. Even if you assume 30 miles, that's only ~7.5 kWh of charging per day. Spread over 12 hours of being plugged in, that comes to just 2.6 amperes per vehicle on average.

My air conditioner can end up running very nearly continuously during the day in the hottest part of the summer, drawing O(30) amps. And you're telling me that the local grid can handle that, but somehow can't handle a measly 2.6 amps of car charging power overnight (when air temperatures are cool and the air conditioner mostly isn't running)? Is this a joke?

I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that somewhere in Southern California, there might be some craptastic circuits that can't handle it, and maybe a few mobile home parks here and there, but... I suspect the number is a heck of a lot closer to zero than to 20 billion, much less 40.

It's not "the Western world" so much as the US. I'm pretty sure Spain or Germany have no problem with hentai.

Case in point: I have a payment implant in my hand. What that is essentially is a contactless Mastercard payment chip from a keychain wearable that's been extracted from the wearable and embedded in bio-compatible goop.

Well, if the payment processor or Mastercard ever learn that my wearable is in fact under your skin, Mastercard will strike it off their network. It's happened to others who didn't keep their mouth shut and got checked out by the payment processor: they were asked to produce a selfie of them holding the wearable, and of course they couldn't.

Why you ask? Because after all, what does Mastercard care where people put their wearables provided they're valid, right?

Because of the religious right in the US spewing off nonsense about the "mark of the beast". Mastercard wants nothing to do with implants to appease the religious nutters and avoid bad publicity. It's the ONLY F*ING REASON. And that forces implantees in all the other reasonable countries in the world that don't have ridiculous religious groups to play hide-and-seek with Mastercard.

This is outline-ish, maybe not what you call a real history.
https://rusmania.com/central/k....

"Why does this happen? Because the better an organization is at fulfilling its purpose, the more it attracts people who see the organization as an opportunity to advance themselves."

And if their superpower is advancing themselves, mere merit has no chance to compete.

https://bobshea.net/empire_of_...

yeah, I agree. For a company that first peaked by being a mail-order catalog based system, they could have taken Amazon's model, paid up on the stupid patent rights (even though most of the details about online shopping are bleeping obvious, but never mind, /. had that discussion 25 years ago...I was there.), and dominated that model all over again... ...but they knew if they did, they'd hurt their retail...so they died (multiple times).

This aspect has been true in other parts of tech history; a company won't embrace the future because it hurts their current. IBM crippling the PS2 because a properly configured 386 would have competed with their workstation line. The supposedly paperless office of the Xerox PARC system was lost to Xerox because the copierheads feared it would hurt their copier and ink sales (mind you, in spite of 50 years of the PARC lifestyle on our computers, we're still shelling out tons for HP ink every year, so much for paperless...).

Yeah - the McDonnell Douglas attitude. Such mergers, where the better company (who was the larger) gives way to the management of the smaller one happened with the SiriusXM merger. XM had the better tech, the wider variety of stations, the wider variety of playlists within those stations, the more loyal customers, and generally the higher individual stock value at the time (XM holders got 4.6 post-merger shares for each 1 XM).

Yet Sirius's management won out on every level except the tech, where they were the weakest of a bunch of weak stats. XM drove the tech, but Sirius drove the content...into the ground. Most of the XM stations with Sirius matches were shut down, along with many of the content-specialized stations that distinguished sat radio from the crap we already got over the air, and the Sirius stations with their much smaller clear-channel quality playlists dominated. The product saved money...and lost value.

I had a less historical, more geeky, version of the same. No matter how much I tried to emphasize 1977 *original* price, I could not get Google to give me a site that described the original retail prices of Star Wars figures at the time (I was looking for it as a matter of measuring inflation, to the price of Prisoner figures today on a kickstarter).

Everything just kept being page after page of either modern price guides, or actual figures for sale. Google just wouldn't give up on the commercial side of it and give me some page (somebody SOMEWHERE has to have written it) that had the original retail prices, and maybe even a discussion about the increase of the prices between rise in demand for popularity and the general inflation of the late 70s early 80s. Nothing at all.

...will be translated into "The suspect was resisting arrest and the officer had no choice".

Each. And. Every. Time.

This is just going to be automated whitewashing. Because why would Axon antagonize their customers by making an impartial AI bot that transcribes the truth eh? They clearly have a conflict of interest here.

The flip side is that when halfway through the development cycle, the dev decides to go a completely different direction and starts over with a radically different concept, now the people who bought in at the beginning don't have any ability to vote with their dollars and ask for a refund, which is problematic. So there are abusers on both sides.

More importantly, this change makes early access a whole lot less attractive and a whole lot riskier from the perspective of a potential buyer. As a result, I'd expect people to be a lot less likely to bite the bullet and give people money before something is complete or nearly complete. And I suspect that the people who do buy early access games won't be willing to spend as much money for that privilege because of the increased risk caused by this rule change. So creators are likely to get significantly less money by making something available in early access than they would have before this change to the rules — likely to the point where it doesn't even make sense to release something as early access until it is mostly finished, which completely defeats the purpose.

There's probably a middle ground somewhere, but my suspicion is that this will turn out to be a significant net negative for content creators, in spite of preventing a small number of freeloaders from taking advantage of it.

Also, if it becomes obvious that making things available for early access won't bring in a significant percentage of the final purchase price, I would expect most content creators to start making early access versions available through other vendors, either with a Patreon-like model or by making early versions free with the understanding that at some point, they'll charge for it, and only people who buy it will be able to upgrade past version 0.5 or whatever. And approximately none of those people will end up converting to paid ownership through Steam, so Steam will also end up making less money as a result.

So I'm having a hard time seeing how this is supposed to actually be a revenue-positive decision for anyone involved.

As the person who has been responsible for responding to law enforcement video requests and occasionally (three times) testifying as to that process and their authenticity, it's exceptionally rare (never personally seen it) for CCTV footage alone to convict someone. Most of the time it leads the police to a suspect, usually because someone they know recognized them (not for nothing that the police frequently publish these videos/images) and then the idiot convicts themselves by talking to the cops (pro-tip, never do this). Less frequently it leads to other witnesses and/or evidence that gets them convicted.

Most of the time it doesn't do a damn thing because the crime in question isn't worth the police resources to follow up on, even if you have something pretty damning, like a legible license plate.

If AI enhancement results in more arrests for crime, I'd wager it comes about largely through the police releasing the enhanced images to the media, with the suspect(s) then being outed by their friends/family. Cops go talk to the suspect, he's an idiot and thinks he can outsmart them, and ends up saying incriminating things. Same as today, it'll just be higher quality images on the local news.

And porn. I knew I saved all those early aughts videos for a reason. ;-)

This is some racist ass bullshit and the people modding it up should be ashamed of themselves.

If you want to condemn India for something, condemn them for copying the worst parts of American capitalism.

Tell me, how many Indians do you see here? I count zero. You might be able to claim one, if you discount the fact that Ms. Amuluru is a natural born US citizen, about as Indian as I am German, but whatever, even if you include her I doubt very much she was a decision maker when it came to the aggressive cost cutting -- err, I mean "optimization" -- that lead to this, this, or this.

I don't really think it's incumbent on me to prove to you that the perspectives of myself and others are valid.

That said, have you tried to find a non-astroturfed product review for literally anything these days? Have you not noticed how Google -- who used to have the philosophy of getting you off their page as quickly as possible -- has plastered search results with "panels", using data stolen, err, I mean "borrowed", from actual webpages, and frequently directing you to other Google products and services? The last bit is the straw that broke the anti-trust camel's back on both sides of the Atlantic.

That's just Search. If you've worked with G-Suite/Workspace, you're well aware of the anti-consumer changes they've made to that product over the years. If you've come to rely on any Google products as part of your personal or professional workflow, you've probably had the discomforting experience of having the rug pulled out from under you. Is it really a wonder how they managed to go from being hip, cool, and disruptive, to the focus of so much ire?

I weirdly prefer working with Microsoft, despite their countless flaws/problems, and that's saying a lot. If you had told me 10 years ago that I'd feel that way I would have laughed in your face and asked how high you were. Hell, I became an Apple user because of a multitude of negative experiences with Nexus phones, specifically, the complete lack of QA/QC Google maintained over that flagship product line. Dismiss this as an anecdote if you want, it's not, the Nexus 6P ended in a class action lawsuit, countless people had the same lousy experience I did. Android had me for nearly a decade. If you had told me at any point prior to October 2016 I'd end up an iPhone user, again, I'd have laughed in your face.

If the products still work for you, great, but don't discount the multitude of voices saying they're inferior to yesterday's products and deeply frustrating to use.

The funny thing is where they call this America's first true high-speed rail system, when it averages just 100 MPH, meanwhile parts of Acela express have been running 90 MPH for more than two decades, with peak speeds over 150 MPH. And over the course of this year, the equipment on that route is being replaced with new Avelia Liberty equipment that may actually make it average faster speeds than what Brightline is proposing.