> Even interviewing this person was an absurdity and revelatory of the kind of bias at npr.
So news organizations should not cover things which may seem sensational, especially those which are being actively talked about in the context of the current news cycle?
Right, these people are essentially arguing in favor of censorship. Basically, we should water down views and filter out extremists. Which is a great way to make insane people seem rational... which I think is a media phenomena we should all be familiar with by now.
You'll have a much harder time breaking into the market with things like a new OS because you have so much more ground to cover today than you would had you started back in the 90s. It's not enough to have a half-decent GUI and a web browser: you'll never get any corporate customers without a significant amount of security hardening, and you'll have to have an extremely compelling reason for them to switch even their servers over (which are run by IT people, who are much easier to train on new technologies than the rest of the workforce), much less their desktop fleets.
Consider how many businesses are built around Excel and either cannot re-create their workflows in LibreOffice Calc/Google Sheets or don't see the value proposition in doing so. You can argue till you're blue in the face that business critical processes shouldn't rely on Excel, and you'd be right, but good luck convincing the people who matter most that they need to change something that still works well enough (especially if they're not privy to the behind-the-scenes work required to integrate other systems with Excel). It's not like Excel is the only thing keeping them hooked on Office.
When it comes to other, less ambitious projects, like email software (not even hosting, just an email client; hosting is its own can of worms), you're competing against companies that either give it away for free or include it in a bundle of other applications businesses really want, like O365. I pay for Shortwave because I loved Inbox by Google that much, but it's a very niche product. I doubt the average person loved Inbox enough to trust a third party with their emails so they can get that experience back, much less pay said third party when the Gmail web interface is good enough for most tasks.
There's a reason we can describe companies like MS as being entrenched: there are no real competitors left. Enshittification works because people aren't inclined to switch without significant upsides. If your selling point is not being actively hostile to your users, why should I believe you will resist doing the same when you IPO or get bought out?
Full title: Intel Removed All CPU information pages before 2nd generation Intel® Core™ processors
I don't get why they did this, Ark is such a great resource. If there is any cost to keeping the data usable, surely it can't be that much worse for ultra-legacy products that it only makes sense to keep around "newer" (and I use that term very generously) products.
You know they've got at least 10x the server cost being wasted by old emails and stuff like that which could be more sensibly purged instead of customer reference documents.
Perhaps it's an anti-recycling effort against those who would otherwise keep running these old processors which once played a respectable key part in Intel's progress.
After digital files first became available for electronic components, there has never been any good excuse for them to go out-of-print after that.
It's incompetence because Intel should have learned from the Itanium days that their core value proposition is backwards compatibility. There is no logical reason to erase your history of success.
They probably laid off whoever championed for Ark when it came up at meetings, and then later shut it down and redirected it when it came up in a requests/month report.
That doesn't make sense unless they're going to release a "Core 2 Duo 8400" at some point. Maybe the i5 750 but I suspect they could have added a generational notice to the ark page and be done with it.
Who, when creating new OSes focuses on really old, consumer, nothing unusual hardware?
Second, for compilers you have projects like LLVM that's like a framework for building compilers where those companies like Intel, AMD, Samsung, etc contribute.
Physical thank you cards are pretty dead. I don't even keep track of mailing addresses for a number of my friends (and a couple siblings, come to think of it) - how would I send them a physical card?
Even older relatives - we sent a physical gift a bit ago, but the response/thanks was by text. It just doesn't make sense to send a letter, have it take a week, never know whether it got lost, etc.
I had to file by mail because I moved to a new state and got 2 W-2s for the same job, of which the W-2 for the former state left the federal fields (1-13) blank. This weird W-2 apparently makes me ineligible for e-file.
Edit: In hindsight, I could have just waited until the start of 2025 to update my address in the HR system and gotten a single, normal W-2, but then I would be both violating the remote work rules (by not adding my new work location) and (probably) committing tax fraud.
Being able to take pride in your work also helps a lot. In academia, my work may not be the most well compensated (it's perfectly reasonable for the area but I'm not going to be retiring early), but it is modern software that meaningfully helps others at my institution and doesn't actively make society worse.
Yes. This is very closely tied into the ability to admire the organization, at least for me. It's very hard for me to take pride in my work for an organization I think is bad.
For decades, the US could be counted upon to fund things with little immediate benefit but massive long-term positive externalities. I don't think its likely that the republican party will "go back to normal" post-Trump, so we can all kiss the long-term reputation building that American hegemony relied upon goodbye. Short of a great depression-esque political reset, I do not see things changing for the better.
Same goes for a lot of TV shows shot on film vs tape vs early digital cameras. Tape and early digital cameras have a much lower quality ceiling than stuff shot on film.
Any model we can create of human intelligence is also likely to be incomplete until we start making complete maps of peoples brains since we all develop differently and take different paths in life (and in that sense it's hard to generalize what human intelligence even is). I imagine at some point someone will come up with a definition of intelligence that inadvertently classifies people with dementia or CTE as mindless automatons.
It feels like a fool's errand to try and quantify intelligence in an exclusionary way. If we had a singular, widely accepted definition of intelligence, quantifying it would be standardized and uncontroversial, and yet we have spent millennia debating the subject. (We can't even agree on how to properly measure whether students actually learned something in school for the purposes of advancement to the next grade level, and that's a much smaller question than if something counts as intelligent.)
GPS trackers and immobilizers (aka "kill switches") have also made repo work a lot easier. If you buy from low/no-credit ("buy here pay here") lots, you probably have at least one (if not both) installed.
The original title was "One Author's Argument 'In Defense Of Looting'".
https://web.archive.org/web/20200827191914/https://www.npr.o...
> Even interviewing this person was an absurdity and revelatory of the kind of bias at npr.
So news organizations should not cover things which may seem sensational, especially those which are being actively talked about in the context of the current news cycle?
reply