Re: the end game emerges...
It's wrong to think that this is about anything other than money. If Musk can bankrupt Twitter, he can walk away from the debts incurred to buy it. The rest is about just about keeping himself in the headlines.
12172 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Apr 2007
Personally, I'm hoping it will soon become just a historical footnote. But, much as I dislike the antics, I suspect Musk knows exactly what he's doing, If he can bankrupt the company, he will probably be able to walk away from his debts. Bankruptcy might become inevitable if revenue declines and key workers have left the company on their own.
Telegram was popular in places with strict censorship long before it was discovered by the freaks. I think they were attracted primarily by the size of the groups and channels, which other services couldn't offer at the time, along with the robustness. Personally, I see receive almost no spam on it, and our local computer group has a low tech bot that keeps spam almost down to zero.
I've yet to see an ad on Telegram, though I know they're now techically possible, but funding seems to be biased subscriptions from heavy users. I suspect I and many others would drop it as soon as ads appear.
A bigger risk for any of these services, is how much data they actually store on their servers and who can get access to it. Telegram has been the source of much ire from governments for refusing to divulge any of this, though it has always agreed to act against certain types of communication. Protecting free speech inevitably means providing some room for the freaks so that others can still be heard.
Personally, I'm not trying to replace it. The last couple of years have illustrated that the once much vaunted idea of the "network effect" has reached its limits and users are more than happy to use multiple apps and jump between them.
Much of the media has zeroed in on services like Twitter because they make reporting easier, and therefore, cheaper. Journalists are often in love with the idea of the voice of the people.
If you look at lots of reports from the Ukraine and Russia you're more likely to see "source Telegram" than anything else. For anything official it's a piece of piss to broadcast to multiple media simultaneously, which is how it should be. It's the news sites that need to life their game. And they will, if they want to keep up, just as they did when Twitter became a thing.
My understanding is that there have been no injuries associated with Waymo vehicle. This is due in no small amount to the practice of defensive driving: if in doubt, stop. As locational data is essential for the things to work properly, they must be driven in real places in real conditions (topography, lighting, unknown objects, unpredicted movements, etc.). This should be under supervision for as long as it takes.
The market going forward for vehicles will be dominated by a leasing or taxi model as this is a more efficient use of capital, especially when meatware is no longer required.
No, they bought in 2017 and have seen a considerable increase in their stake.
Does Google get everything right? Certainly not but the reorganisation into Google + other bets did provide some transparency. $ 20 billion loss over 5 years is a lot but compares favourably with, say, Uber. And the investments in things like Waymo aren't supposed to generate short term profitability. TCI might think there's no future in autonomous vehicles but, in that case, I suggest they don't fly in any modern aircraft. Autonomous cars are not easy but significant progress has been made in the last decade.
FWIW I don't work for Google or have any share and there's a lot of things the company does that I don't like. But, credit where credit's due for a Silicon Valley company.
The Chinese EV market is crucial for any of these companies (Tesla's "profitability" depends heavily on carbon credits). Unfortunately for both Tesla and Rivian, the market isn't that hot at the moment but, more importantly, the battery makers and car manufacturers have largely caught up in the engineering, battery tech (actually, they probably lead there already) and software.
Founder's syndrome can be contagious. The problem with Facebook isn't necessarily the ideas but the poor governance which has allowed Zuckerberg to push a possibly half-baked idea too far and too fast.
If you look at what the company has done the last 10 years, there is little to suggest that there is a genius at the helm. Growth has largely been provided by acquisitions such as WhatsApp and, especially, Instagram. The rapid growth in profits lent a veneer of inevitability to the success, which it turned out was incorrect once competition appeared that couldn't be bought (TikTok) and light regulatory headwinds appeared.
Trying new business ideas is important but, for once, Google provides a better example of how this can be done. First of all, Page and Brin quickly realised they needed help with all the corporate shit and got someone in to be CEO. Then, after some fairly high profile failures, they reorganised the company structure to insulate their cash cows (Google and YouTube) from their alternative investments, which they give a certain freedom to but also aren't afraid to pull if they fail to reach certain goals within a specified period of time. Cue lots of gnashing of teeth from affected users but, as a corporate strategy, it's considerably more effective.
The comparison with Apple isn't valid. Not only did Jobs have a track record of ideas and success, he also understood how to make money, not least through controlling the supply chain. It's unsurprising that he was succeeded by the guy who ran the supply chain. But Jobs, and Cook, also understood that their success was dependent upon giving people more of what they want (and convincing people that what Apple had is what they want). Acquisitions have been limited and quickly integrated and unsuccessful products are quietly withdrawn. The cashflow allows continued development and no new products cost anything like enough to threaten profits. But even the mighty Apple had to reform governance after shareholder pressure.
In pubs the aim of loud music, and salty snacks, is to get you to drink more.
In other environments, the idea is generally to improve the mood by providing a "bed" over either the warehouse like silence or irregular clatter of people and equipment. Personally, I do find that music that is just about audible does help me ignore external sounds such as traffic, because the brain tends to focus on it.
The biggest problem with any kind of headset is turning it up too loud because this will impair your own hearing over time; if it's so loud that it's annoying other people then it's already too loud.
I don't encounter "leakage" often as a problem but anyone involved in a conversation is going to be more annoying than their headset. But I do like the like idea of improved situational awareness. I already have a headset with external drivers for when cycling. Generally, I can hear both navigational instructions and what's going on around me, which is safer for me and those around me! The design looks good as well, except for that perennial of us four eyes: a loop over the ear, though the clip does show someone wearing glasses, so maybe they've solved this.
I think that depends a lot on the printer and whether the manufacturers package the drivers for high resolution nicely. As long as the printer does PCL or PS then you should be okay. But an awful lot of cheaper printers rely on things like GDI. Ghostscript and CUPS do a fine job in monochrome but are generally shit in colour, and they're a real resource hog. You can blame the manufacturers to a certain degree, but virtualising the GDI shit would get better results.
I've currently got a Samsung MFP (HP inside) connected to my Mac that I'd like to put on a network with a spare RPi. Now, there is a Linux project for this kind of thing. Unfortunately, it's fairly x86_64 specific with support for ARMv7 missing the last time I looked and installation was the usual kind of mess on Linux. Fortunately, however, there is also a BSD package that's supposed to do the same thing and I'm going to give this a try when I have few spare hours. Even more fortunately, I only want to do this to reduce clutter.
Nonsense: Berlin's market was in turmoil long before the cap on rents, not least due to the privatisation of very large areas of social housing by the council looking to make some quick money, again. Then came the AirBnB "revolution", which has priced a lot of people out of the centre of the city.
Your comment about your friend suggests that the rent was already too low when she bought the flat: caveat emptor, especially on buy to let properties. Either that, or you're talking shit.
Germany is short of flats in many large cities and planning regulations are, indeed, part of the problem. But a far bigger problem has been the loss of social housing and rising prices due to lax monetary policy.
Short term rental, ie. hotels, B&B have a lot more rules to follow than standard landlords, which one of the reaons why they're more expensive. AirBnB was offering slightly less than hotel pricing for private accommodation. Not only did this piss off hoteliers, though you can argue in some places that they were just adding capacity, more importantly they were displacing normal tenants because they're able to earn 10 x more than standard rents.
That's fairly common: landlords save 15-20% commission by renting directly and are happy to do so once they known the customers. Most countries also allow people to rent out their accommodation for a few days a year. The problems started with AirBnB allowing flats in some places to be rented almost all the time with a severe impact on rents and living conditions in places like Barcelona and Berlin.
To be fair, the article does spend a lot of time talking about the problems of MFA when it really means a combination of certain implementations and social engineering. Uber, not known for any kind of best practices, is also not necessarily a good example.
Tar pits, where delays between attempts grow, are a good way of dealing with any kind of bombing and are standard on many systems.
Yeah, simple, stupid ideas are always great…
Unions in America are a mess, and the teachers' unions are possibly the worst, but that doesn't mean that the system isn't a mess as well. PISA scores in America are abysmal and literacy is below G7 average. Somehow, I don't think teaching creationism is going to help.
While I appreciate the sentiment, I also don't doubt that there are plenty of companies happy to advertise on whichever medium they can reach their audience with. Fox News, the Daily Mail, etc. demonstrate that there's quite a market out there. I just wish the media would pay less attention to Twitter. They claim it's a way to gauge public opinion, but it was largely captured by a bunch of wankers years ago.
Trump is a showman. One in a long line of showmen who've made it to high office in the US. Let's face it, in many countries a lot of people are more than willing to buy snake oil but only in a few countries does voting for it have a chance of winning the election.
The debt was growing under Trump (tax cuts and poor industrial policy). Biden's post-pandemic spending plan was excessive and has contributed directly both to the national debt and inflation. But at least some things are getting built that have been waiting for years.
America is a great country but decades of underinvestment, particularly in education, coupled with investment policy that favours capital (Silicon Valley and the rest) have led to skill shortages in industry and a lack of willingness to invest in it.
As for "ordinary" Americans, there are millions of them and they're all different.
If you're going to go back to Reagan, then you really should listen to B Movie by Gil Scott Heron who nailed it: politically, Reagan wasn't anything, he was just the front man for the military industrial complex. Nixon was the one who really moved the political agenda and fed the politics of envy. Under Reagan there was, erm, largely an intellectual hiatus. It wasn't until Gingrich started tapping into Chrisitian fundamentalism and Negroponte discovered a new enemy that things got moving again.
Trump kind of got lucky that his undiluted bile came across as "authentic" in a large field of establishment also-rans and the subtext to MAGA is that "hate is good". It's a bit of a disservice to say he got lucky, because, despite his obvious limitations, he sticks very much to the script and follows the directions that make him so effective for a certain part of the population, at this time.
Don't forget that losses can be offset against tax liabilities. This is one of the reasons for "going private". If this wasn't the case probably only a fraction of the deals would happen and, while that might not be such a bad thing, that's the world we live in.
So, Elon, just close it take the hit and start something similar with what's left after the bankruptcy.
Omnishambles deliberately breaks the rules for coining new words and is as a result almost tautologically shambolic. permacrisis is linguistically okay (Latin and Greek mixes do abound) but fails semantically: it's oxymoronic to be permanently in a crisis.
Given that AVIF is based the lossy AV1 codec, it shouldn't be expected to be the best lossles image format out there. But I suspect that well over 98% of people's imaging requirements involve lossy compression, I don't think most people will notice let alone care, especially with hardware acceleration, even if that means more 8k cat video frames.
Meanwhile, the world waits to see what his reign will do to a site that – for better or worse – remains the de facto real-time vox-pop of global events and opinions.
I don't think the world is waiting. And the only people who claim that Twitter is representatitive of "global" anything are those who think quoting it counts as research. All the social media channels were always predestined to become echo chambers, the more effective they are at that, the more successful they are.
It's taken a while but Telegram has now largely started to replace Twitter in many places.
And why doesn’t the whole buisness model collapse?
It generally does but only once the way through the courts has been exhausted.
"Disruption" has been the mantra of Silicon Valley VCs for the last twenty years and is generally based upon pursuing unregulated markets as long as possible but making sure you cash out just in time.