Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Volvo but not Polestar? (Score 1) 113

Both parties are electing extremists. This is because our voting system is broken.

Some sort of ranked choice or approval, and STV for electing more than one representative per election, would work. Unfortunately the party in charge (of either side) does not want that because it means their extremists will lose. So this likely will never be fixed.

Comment Re:Trump is lost in the past (Score 1) 241

The advantage of small reactors is that (in theory) you could build a plant with 20 or so of them. This would make them less expensive because they would all share the support infrastructure. The reason this would be less expensive than a single big reactor is that they can be individually shut down for maintenance, so a SMR that only works 50% of the time is useful, while a big reactor has to work 99.9% of the time. Obviously as you stated they also have to make SMRs work at all and at a price that is less than 1/20 of a big reactor, which has not been proven yet.

The fantasy that towns would put a single SMR in their town square or a data center will put it in their basement are just that, fantasies. But clusters could be a deal changer for nuclear.

Comment Re:Title Correction: (Score 1) 161

The biggest problem with advertising as a funding mechanism is that it creates incentives to *make the content worse*. It's no longer "what can I present that will help the user". It's "what can I present that will attract advertisers and keep the user spending time where I can further target them". There's the tracking thing, too, of course, and the scam propagation, and whatever else. As well as just the raw annoyance.

There's no incentive for anybody improve "bad ads" as long as they believe bad ads still work. Even if they *had* an incentive, it's not obvious how either the people producing the ads *or* the people serving them would actually do it. The producers are presumably already placing the ads they think are most likely to meet *their* goals. And as for the servers, they have very little leverage, because, in the end, their business is "you pay me to show the user whatever you want the user to see".

Sure, subscriptions suck. So come up with an alternative, say a truly privacy-preserving micropayment system. That's doable nowadays in a way it would *not* have been in the late 1990s... but it won't happen as long as it's possible to keep leaning on advertising. Nobody wants to be the first mover on something like that or eat the development costs alone. Advertising needs to die so that something better has space to grow.

   

Comment Re:Microsoft being Microsoft. (Score 1) 190

Your support.microsoft.com link does indeed say "Rest assured that all your Office 2019 apps won't lose any data. ", and no longer says "Rest assured that all your Office 2019 apps will continue to function". If you cannot edit or save documents, that is not continuing to function. The support document is eliding the biggest change.

According to https://consumerrights.wiki/w/Microsoft_Office_2019_for_Mac, Microsoft sent email to users stating:

"Starting 13 July 2026, a security certificate update is required to keep Microsoft 365 and Office apps current. Since you have a device that cannot support this update, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, and OneNote will switch to view-only mode. "

That seems pretty definitive. And this "cannot support this update" bit is completely untrue.

Slashdot Top Deals

Any program which runs right is obsolete.

Working...