and I'll pay it. ESims are a carrier-dependent lockin and are a huge hassle.

It doesn't just negate free will -- it basically negates science. You can wave away basically any experimental inconsistency with the Superdeterminism magic wand...so what's the point of trying to science? I'm not suggesting that makes Superdeterminism wrong, however.

This is a great analogy which I've never heard before. It really works well.

Seriously: add a few more ports, make it a little thicker with a non-stupid keyboard...etc.

Want to pursue a STEM or other high-paying degree? No problem, but you have to pay a lot more for your degree.

It doesn't look like they took into account tipping for cab fares. A 15% addition to the Taxi fares would make Uber the clear winner in all cases, I think.

This is almost certainly a firmware bug with their read disturb compensation. At least they're owning up to it - but wow.

Is this a case where D-Wave was fraudulently trying to pass something off as quantum when they knew it wasn't, or did they really and truly not know. How could they not know?

I think this is an important article because he does a good job of showing how the govt bullies people around -- and illuminating precisely why governmental power NEEDS checks and balances, like a functioning (not rubber-stamp) court and warrant system.

Moto's 3G and radio patents had real teeth. Heck, some of them might be actual, real, inventions....as opposed to the drivel that Apple's been flogging.

The moment my Nest changes my settings without me asking for it is the moment I ditch the device and go to a different brand. Yes, there's the auto-learn feature, but I have it disabled and have manually set my programs: and that better be the way it stays.

Looks like a SCM merge error to me. That kind of stuff happens, unfortunately...

Peering fights are as old as the Internet itself. Just economics. Nothing to see here, move along. Vote with your wallets and pick ISPs that do a better job with their peering arrangements.

Turbines really don't do well with stops and starts, particularly when hot. If you could setup a system where the turbine ran continuously for a longish period and then shut down for a full cool down cycle: then yes, I think it might be a good match...but in general that load pattern doesn't match very well with automobile transportation. Perhaps batteries really are large enough now to make that work.

My experience with turbines has been that startup is always a risky operation and that every start has a small but real chance of causing catastrophic failure. Its hard for me to imagine they'll ever be robust enough for mass market use in something like an automobile....but who knows, technology is always getting better.

No, you really don't understand what this is useful for. They aren't "reinventing TCP" because they think they can do it better: they have a different problem domain and can do better than TCP for their specific problem.

TCP insists on strong ordering of data: it provides reliability AND ordering. Sometimes you don't want both of these, and giving up one or the other can get you big benefits.

For example, there are many classes of problems where you want reliability but are willing to lessen the ordering requirements (networked gaming is a common example) because you want the lowest possibility of latency. By not requiring a strict ordering you can avoid stalls and get data sooner: when a packet is lost in TCP the driver has to buffer the data until it gets retransmitted. For a concrete example, if packet #99 in a TCP stream is dropped, even though your machine has received packets 100-2000 it can't give them to your application until 99 has been retransmitted....since the TCP contract is for strict ordering. This leads to significant latency effects under packet loss, and is one of the reasons why people use UDP.