They're used to running the devices basically forever and having them hold up.
Hold up what? Your ability to do work with the device after the OS has been updated a couple of times and performance degraded to avoid drawing too much current from an under-specified battery?
I wonder if having two screens (which would show two different apps) wouldn't be better.
It would arguably be a better solution technically, but I suspect that most people want to use one app at a bigger size than two apps at once. And then you've either got content spread over two screens with stuff in the middle, or the app has to be designed around the screen layout. And that either won't be done or will be done poorly in the majority of cases.
For me a foldable phone was the Motorola razor, the one with physical buttons. And in my opinion it was a great phone.
Yep. If it supported modern standards I'd still be using mine, and then hotspotting for a device with more screen when I needed that. Carrying two devices is nonoptimal, but so is holding a brick up to my ear, and fixing that with a headset would ALSO require carrying two devices.
Until you're starving. FTFY.
Modern leather isn't suitable for food, it's got too much plastic on it.
All ACs are the same LLM as far as I'm concerned.
In the ruling on Wednesday, the court acknowledged that Anthropic "will likely suffer some degree of irreparable harm absent a stay," but that the company's interests "seem primarily financial in nature."
Yeah, the company's interests are financial. That's what companies are for. The military's interests are also financial. People may think they're enlisting to serve their country, but they're really serving oligarchs. We have to blow up the middle east so we can rebuild it in our image — at great expense... and benefit to corporations like Halliburton who get awarded the no-bid contracts (sometimes literally, sometimes figuratively - I'm picking on Halliburton here not just because they deserve it in general, but because they were declared to be the only corporations capable of doing the job the last time around, short-circuiting the legally mandated bidding process.)
The Courts need to recognize that Internet has become a necessary utility and that the music companies need to deal with the individual directly through the Courts, not in a lazy clandestine way.
The record labels were originally suing individual users back in the Napster days and it was causing a bit bad PR for them.
I also can't help but think that going after ISPs is something of a cash grab, since I really don't know anyone who even bothers trying to pirate music anymore. It's no longer worth the effort with how cheap music streaming services are.
What really scared them was other countries not tolerating that bullshit and in most other countries if you lose a lawsuit like this the other party can come after you for damages. They don't care about negative PR, but a case where they are forced to pay out for having their spurious claims disproved scares the living shit out of them because it sets a precedent.
I read Richard Marcinko's leadership book (Marcinko was the SEAL who founded DEVGRU, the SEAL's most elite unit, aka Team Six). From it, I concluded this: Applying Navy SEAL principles to lead people works best when the people are physically and mentally built like Navy SEALs. Most people are not, not even elite company CEO's and their staff.
It becomes a game of square peg / round hole.
Special Operator type training is far too advanced for a corporate retreat, what they really need is basic. Learning how to march as a unit, work as a unit, understand and follow orders, et al. Shit that a soldier is expected to have down pat long before they ever get advanced training. Training that might actually be useful in helping people work together or improving discipline... However the ego of your average corporate dick will never allow that, they think they're special so they want the special training.
But in reality they aren't getting anything special, just paying to be shouted at by someone who claims they were a SEAL, SAS, et al. but in all likelihood never were.
Totally different business but exactly the same problem. Nordstrom generally has the latest trend clothes in fashion and pretty good quality; it's known for it. But when it had leftover inventory it knew there were people a step down from their target demographic that would love Nordstrom's quality products even if they're a season or two out of fashion for cheaper, so they opened Nordstrom's Rack to sell off the excess inventory.
Nordstrom's Rack got so popular they couldn't keep it stocked, and eventually started developing their own dedicated Nordstrom Rack brands, which sort of defeated the purpose of Nordstrom's Rack as it's entire value was Nordstrom's quality, late season, at a discount, but now it's discount quality with the Nordstrom's name on it.
Law of unintended consequences I guess.
Not really an unknown consequence.
Popular brands know never, ever release your cheap products under your brand. Airlines are famous for this, when QANTAS wanted to release cheap, no frills flights under a LCC model, they didn't brand it as QANTAS CHEAP because that would cheapen the brand QANTAS, they created a new airline called JetStar and even though they are wholly owned subsidiaries. It's not unusual for a budget airline to operate under the parent airlines AOC (Air Operator Certificate... the bit of paper that says you're allowed to carry passengers), LEVEL (Spanish low cost carrier) operated under another AOC until it got it's own (Iberia's I think). The point is, they didn't want to associate the parent brands just in case they got successful.
But this isn't exactly off brand for Apple, they're charging $700 for a $300 laptop and $300 is being generous as we know it's really a $200 phone.
Anyone with a brain, having just invented a deliberately anonymous cryptocurrency that starts to take off, would NOT EVER touch the seed coins, especially once it became obvious that everyone was watching their movement.
The second that stuff moves, Bitcoin value tanks AND the ultimate destination of all those coins becomes international news. Hardly anonymous.
No, whoever they were, and for literally whatever reason they started the project, they would have created other additional accounts later on, capitalised on those, had no connection to the original accounts, and still be a billionaire now. But just one of hundreds / thousands of others that are all untraceable and not really being watched.
And when Bitcoin mixing services came out, they'd have been all over it - just to preserve anonymity if nothing else.
We know precisely one thing about Satoshi - and that's that they don't want to identify themselves. Maybe there is $138bn sitting in an account they could in theory get access to. But it would immediately reveal information about themselves that may well work against them - taxation authorities would be all over it, press, public, every penny would be traced to its final destinations, etc.
So even if they only had, say, a couple of million in another account... they'd use that. Not everyone wants to be a stupendous billionaire in the public eye. You have to be a bit of a sociopath to be a billionaire at all. And then think of things like security, press, public scrutiny, etc.
Maybe they've got enough to live a life of luxury, that they've properly declared, never have to work again and, ultimately... still stay absolutely anonymous.
The one thing we know is that they understand anonymity. Why on earth would we ever expect them to do the most stupid thing ever and reveal themselves, rather than just hide amongst a large crowd and enjoy the rest of their life?
Apple didn't want to use resistive touch which was very precise
I've owned a lot of resistive touch devices. Zero of them were "very precise". Most of them had a lot of depth so you'd struggle to pick pixels even when they were big enough to easily count. Palm Pilots and Visors, Zoomer/GRiDPad 2390, an HTC phone, blah blah blah. Phones had plastic screens because gorilla glass hadn't been invented yet. Jobs was irritated by his scratched plastic screen at exactly the right time and yes, made the right call. Yes, a plastic stylus on a resistive screen is more precise than your finger, but it's also either irritatingly tiny or you are just having to carry around more shit.
In fact, the most precise non-wacom screen device I've ever used was the capacitive glass screen on the GRiDPad 1910... also a device where a well-sighted (or near-sighted) person can count pixels, but there you can also actually touch them. But then that's got a tethered pen. I have GEOS on mine, with Graffiti. That is precise... But still not as precise as my lady's Fujitsu tablet with Wacom. That's what you'd use now if you needed precision, a radio pen. There was a company which sold an IBM 486SLC-based portable called Dauphin which had one that ran on batteries, how tragic... but it was precise. Unfortunately it was also as thick as a pretty good-sized hardback book.
This is why I stick with my Amiga emulator under OS/2.
Can't have your security broken if there is no security. I like the cut of your jib.
You never asked the person, you're making an assumption
Why don't you go read his response, Dildo Draggins?
For longtime users wanting to take the opportunity to upgrade to newer Kindle hardware, Amazon will offer a 20 percent discount on new Kindle devices
Sure, after you set fire to my old device, you want me to buy another device you will originally set fire to. It's book burning by proxy.
Thus mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true. -- Bertrand Russell
