Re: Postal
I think an advertising company - pasting a message onto a billboard - is a better one.
5205 publicly visible posts • joined 19 May 2008
That's not consent regarding sharing of data - that's something which was pretty well discussed, and has pretty wide ranging benefits and limited downside.
No-one really needs their organs once they are deceased.
There are various groups who would like their bodies to remain intact post mortem - and that's fine, that's why there is an opt out.
This is consent to sharing the most personal of data with completely unknown and unspecified companies for unknown and unspecified purposes.
Given the attempt to shift the NHS to the US model of "care" that data becomes *really* dangerous.
2016 - a referendum whose campaigning was shown to be illegal, and which I think we all know was entirely lies.
2017 - 42% vote share isn't a majority
2019 - I can imagine that most people saw no point in voting for an MEP at this point
2019 - 43% vote share is bigger than 42%, but is still a long way from a majority.
Even the 52% support in 2016 was pitiful, it represented something like 25% of the population, and on any change *so* significant a 50%+1 threshold is as dumb as a box of rocks.
"People voted out because they didn’t want rules set in Brussels"
Really - all of them.
They do know that we were the ones setting the rules in Brussels?
Final meandering question: Would it be possible to create an antisocial media that wasn't antisocial?
Yes - but you need to figure a way to pay for it, or to have it truly distributed (and that would need it to be a very reliable "just plug it in" appliance - and then you need to support that as well...
The visa/mastercard cartel is hardly a market...
Is 30% justified? I don't know, let's look at the competition - Alphabet charges... 30%
For subscription based services an ongoing 30% is patently absurd, for one off purchases it's not so clear.
Not sure what the Apple T&Cs say about sending people off to make an account on a website - not offering any way to pay for an account at all.
"Yep. But it's a very asymmetric cost, ie Netflix doesn't pay for the 'last mile' delivery."
No, because the consumer has already paid for that.
The post office don't get to bill me for letters delivered, all the cost is borne by the sender.
But I could set up a freepost address, and then the sender wouldn't pay, I would,
Why should SK charge both parties for the same bandwidth?
Well, when I was running a CDN we'd put the hardware in - they'd pay for power/cooling.
It makes a huge amount of sense from both parties, since you only deliver once to the cache, and don't pay central bandwidth fees for all the deliveries downstream, and the ISP obviously gets a huge benefit as well.
So both save on bandwidth costs - the ISP by more than enough to pay for the power.
The CDN also gets to provide a better service to it's customers in that region.
You can already choose your banking app..
The only thing you can't do is have some malware use the NFC payment facility.
It's a choice, but it's not exactly a limiting one for the consumer...
You have an iPhone, so you already trust Apple to some extent, and you want to use the NFC for card payments... scan the card, and ... well that's it really.
Maybe we should "open up the roads" and give people the choice of driving on the left or right...
Not all choice is good.
Not been out with an active fire crew, but there is certainly value in a dedicated, decentralised, localised comms setup with good penetration. I can imagine various situations where fire wouldn't help most radio penetration.
I suspect that AW was a leap forward in terms of dispatch control and information to crews en route, and very much in terms of cooperation with the other services at or near a scene. Once you are at an incident then you are probably right that for the vast majority of the time a single open channel is what's needed.
My assumption was that the high rate data and voice/low rate data could be separated completely.
So the fire officer in charge of the scene can get the building schematics on the high speed data link in the vehicle and plan/discuss/guide based on that, whilst the tetra radio on the vehicle provides a local repeater so that the handsets being used in the burning building basement can still talk to the network at large.
Not something that LTE can do (the relaying part in particular).
No good reason for the data and voice to be completely lockstepped.
The voice features have no replacement in LTE, the data is presumably more useful in vehicles than on every handset.
This phrase "legacy halfway-between-a-mobile-phone-and-a-walkie-talkie radio system Airwave" really doesn't do Tetra justice.
A slider that has one end labelled DST isn’t a complex interface, and it would only be needed on the few devices with a clock. My old thermostat (just about digital, but certainly not connected).
(Apologies I did say toggle button, wasn’t what I was thinking)
It’s only relevant on a device that does some time based switching, and displays a basic time based interface - old thermostats are the only example I could come up with (never had a cooker or microwave that knew what day it was).
Anything using a web interface has a better way to configure stuff (use the web UI - import a snippet of the TZ dB when the user configures you (only need the forward data for this TZ after all).
Why would anything embedded want anything other than UTC?
Being slightly serious though - what micro embedded devices need to report local time to a user without some other device doing the display and interaction?
I suppose there might be a few things like thermostats which have local interaction with a clock involved, but... Have a "DST" toggle button?
Then I'll exclude from scope any phones without a digital audio output...
a similarly random distinction to make.
The legislation option has been rumbling on for so long that the industry has basically solved the original issue by mere threat of legislation and then competitive pressure.
"But they're so special!!"
In only one sense.... they developed a connector that does everything a phone needs a decade ago, the rest of the industry caught up quite a few years later.
The idea of limiting waste is great, but the legislation is 15 or so years late. Apple are moving towards USBc, but there is no compelling reason to abandon all the chargers and accessories which exist and work perfectly well.
Well I had palm specific connectors as well, and the treo was a smarter phone than I had for a long while.
The iPad is not a phone, and doesn't have the same usage patterns, or established accessory market.
You're suggesting creating a mountain of e-waste as a solution to the problem of e-waste.
The move will eventually happen, but we aren't in the days when if your charger broke you would struggle to find a compatible one (unless you went nokia, in which case they were almost all the same).
What is it about USBc that provides a compelling reason to move from lightning?
Is it that you want to charge your phone at 100W? lightning handles at least 12W, which is plenty fast enough for anyone who ever needs to sleep.
Is it that you want to export a PCIe lane? Does the A15 chip family even have any PCIe lanes?
As you said, it's not as if there are loads of competing standards for chargers any more - there are basically two - so there isn't a requirement for legislation.
Huh - I said it as a *good* thing.
Apple phones (and other devices) have used two connectors since 2003.
They have recently moved to USBc for some of the psuedo computer tablets (the iPadPro range)
That's a good thing, despite meaning that "innovation" is relatively slow.
Not noticed USBc collecting dust, but my laptop is sat on a stand most of the time, not in a dusty pocket.
The main reason for lightning was that it was better than any other connector available at the time.
The reasons for keeping it could centre on not driving e-waste, why change a connector which does all you actually need for a phone (let's face it you don't back up over a cable any more).
The cynical will suggest that it's all about licensing, but there is a significant body of existing accessories which would be obsoleted with a phone upgrade for no particularly good reason.
Until there is actually a functional reason to change.... why change?
The iPad pro has changed, although I'm not really sure why - but I wonder if the A and M series chips will converge and we'll therefore be able to export PCIe lanes from our phones (docking adaptor with an eGPU anyone)