criley

Source? Every review I've seen says they still struggle to beat ARM on power/performance/price.

I've absolutely not heard that their mobile chips are "better" by any margin.

Because of this, every single quote appears different. For some reason, I think that standard content like read more should be standardized to help me find easy anchors while browsing quickly.

That way, when I look at a quote, the only deviating part of the design is the unique content itself, and I can be sure that if it's deviating, it's the content I'm looking for.

As it stands, it's difficult for me to parse the whole list as identical elements with differing content, and instead I'm seeing them all as different going down.

EDIT: I also do not like that you preserve tabbing from the users input. It's useful in theory but since your url content relies on a tab as well, it creates a very weird dynamic while looking down the page where a tab doesn't really mean anything, because it means something different everytime I see one.

EDIT2: I'm not a designer (but I fancy myself an amateur) and if I was in charge of the layout, I'd probably have done something like: http://i.imgur.com/o0s9UZl.png -- The subtext is noticably smaller, the url is shortened for consistency and length, and the two aspects of the subtext are floating left and right for solid, consistent anchors.

EDIT3: Coming back to it, I went a slightly different direction: http://i.imgur.com/jfFcB1N.png

I know you're not looking for design advice, I just had fun playing with someone else's work. Thanks :)

Just my opinion, however, take what I say as a user story and nothing more!

The design turned me off, and I think you can accomplish a much better looking and easily digestible product from text!

Many sites have played the "dozens of links inward" game for some time. Almost every business site will provide links for every business or stock mentioned, all heading inward into their site further.

Here's an example: the first article I clicked on on the first page I knew behaved similarly: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100644923

Looks pretty similar.

But, as he admitted, he's not interested in breaking records. He's interested in making his game the way he wants.

That's totally legit and I totally support someone making that claim.

It's up to each and everyone of us to assess that claim and decide if we trust him in that endeavour.

I strongly resist the idea that Kickstarted games MUST follow one model or they are wrong or bad. Not every creative mind works well with the chaos and bile that spews from the crowd.

And according to one experienced source (OP): The answer is a resounding "yes"!

I figured what you generated went directly to your storage system, you drew from your storage system OR the grid, or some third part intelligently drew from the grid or your system as necessary.

Is it functionally impossible to have solar panels that don't "run the meter backwards?" Because I can see how that would threaten the infrastructure that wasn't designed for it.

I mean, I see places like Apple generating all their electricity on location for their new planned office and using the grid as backup. Is Apple sending their excess power back to the utility? Totally different scale, I'm well aware, but just curious.

The only difference to them is that you draw less power than you used to. Sure, it would benefit them to learn your habits so they can manage steady power delivery at scale, but they don't get a say in your solar rollout. They don't get to prevent it. They don't get to be skeptical (or if they are, they can't act on it).

The person I'm replying to seemed to say that the engineers at utilities are skeptical of this technology and honestly I don't understand how they're relevant, since utilities aren't rolling out the technology, maintaining the technology, etc.

I'm not impressed yet, and I know that better web experiences can be delivered.

However, now that I see this webplayer and recognize a few similarities with the desktop player, I can see why many of the horrifically terrible changes to the native player happened recently.

They were getting rid of native rendering and replacing it with rendering a webpage. No wonder people were so pissed and no wonder so much functionality was dropped.

EDIT: Okay, I'm going to say this. Webapps: USE MY RIGHT CLICK. You are NOT A WEBPAGE, so don't use a webpage right click!

Right click a song in native app: Play, Queue, Add To->Lists, Radio, Copy 3 Kinds of Links, Share, Delete from Playlist.

Right click on a song in web app: Back, Forward, Reload (breaks playback lol...), Save, Print, View Page Source, Reload Frame...

I love my right click menus and not having them in a webapp is very frustrating. Oh wait, this is supposed to also work for touch so I will never get a real alt-menu again, will I?

It seems to me that the whole point is that consumers will begin the rollout themselves, generating and storing power on their own and the only visible effect to the utility would be a dramatic decrease in power use by that customer.

While having a grid where you could sell your unused energy is a great idea, I didn't see that as the focus of this article. I thought this article was simply about the distributed generation and storage.

In the context of distributed generation and storage on an individual level -- why do utility engineers matter? They don't get a say in the rollout, they don't manage it, and they certainly don't get to prevent it. All they can do is maintain their infrastructure in the face of a change they cannot stop.

Hospice is end of life care. Hospice is understanding that death is coming and approaching it painlessly, intentionally and hopefully as happily as possible. To get into hospice you must be certified by a doctor as being terminal, (generally) less than 6 months to live.

Hospice is about bringing a life to a close with as much dignity as the illness allows.

The people in that industry are amazing, magical individuals and I do not know how they have the strength and tenacity to face every day like they do (although their amusing brand of dark humor seems to help).

Seriously though -- why would you want your product associated with terminal end of life diagnosis and care?

It's a trade off, and real name policies don't only exclude negative posters.

(To expand: I tested someone's js project on reddit just yesterday, offering my platform, multiple browsers, a decent writeup, images/screenshots etc. But my reddit account is fully anonymous. If my real name was required, s/he never would have gotten that free help)

The Play Store REQUIRES a fully activated real-name Google+ Account to rate apps and leave feedback, so I've been wholly unable to communicate with the dozens and dozens of apps that request feedback.

Sorry friends. Blame Google!

You either give up on having an anonymous email because they WILL FORCE YOUR real name to be attached to your email, or you give up on Google integration features because you simply CANNOT use Google features without a real name anymore.

Trying to switch between my "public Google account" for functionality and my "private Google account" for privacy is almost impossible when you consider how broadly Google integrates the features. It's simply unteneable, completely. Google wants my privacy gone, and is denying me access to their services until I agree to give it up entirely.

Very, very frustrating for users who have more than one account.

The war hawks and the Keynesian economists got together over a decade ago[1] and realized you can finance an entire war on debt.

The Keynesians get a massive stimulus and the war hawks get their war. Conservatives (except for libertarians) won't speak up, and democrats (except for progressive liberals) won't speak out so long as the white house has a "(D)" in residence. And lets be honest, libertarians and prog. liberals are among the most ignored demographics in Washington.

So, all in all, sounds like something Washington can get unify around to prove they can work together. War, it's a win for partisan politics!

[1] In all honesty, the realization that you could blow up the budget and call it stimulus happened longer than a decade ago, I'm just being pithy and referring to the fact that Iraq/Afghanistan were kept off of the official books for years and years and obviously completely unfunded except by debt-financed deficit spending.

This isn't socialism. The laptop is the property of someone and isn't assigned out based on need.

Also, possession of stolen goods is not an excuse. Ignorance is not an excuse.

I think you're confusing evergreening, which is a real problem, with the number of NME's that are being generated. NME's are "new molecular entities", or totally new formulations.

>Many of the new supposedly breakthrough drugs do not provide significant improvements in mortality, but do cost huge amounts of money so that they can recoup their investment.

Low hanging fruit has been taken and newer methods of discovering safe and effective drugs are needed.

You might find this shocking, but pharma is a dying business. Companies are divorcing their drug development departments into separate businesses so they can fail gracefully. The blockbuster drugs that can recoup the investment of looking for a needle in a haystack aren't coming any more.

>If, as these statistics imply, you can show that the drugs and other changes in medical care that provide positive changes to quality of life and mortality are coming from government research significantly more so than other sources then why subsidize private research, why protect the private drug development system that results in outrageously priced drugs, why waste 2/3rds of research money to produce such a disproportionately small portion of the advancements in medical knowledge?

This is absolutely, 100% totally and COMPLETELY false.

The government IS NOT INVOLVED IN DRUG RESEARCH. Honestly, period. They can't afford it! It costs a billion dollars to whittle 10,000 drug candidates into 1 FDA approved drugs. NIH grants aren't even 1% of that cost.

The government is not responsible for very much actual drug development at all. They don't own or fund the labs. They fund the schools that do the work on the lower level theory, on the tools and concepts that will one day be commercially viable.

Private labs handle the vast majority of all new molecular entity discovery, pre-trial, trial, etc. They have the money, labs and teams capable of handling it -- NIH funded labs often don't!

Here's a list of NME's for 2013 so far: http://www.fda.gov/drugs/developmentapprovalprocess/druginno...

Remember, the FDA is the gatekeeper and these companies research thousands and thousands of candidates looking for something that they can statistically prove safety and efficacy of to the FDA, and the FDA gets to decide.

As you can see from that list, the FDA doesn't allow new molecules out very often.

Misleading stat that doesn't look at the full cost of bringing a NME to market.

You're looking at a yearly budget for a company while ignoring reality: drug development isn't yearly, it takes about 8-12 years total. To analyze something on an 8 year cycle using 1 years worth of data is at best ignorant and at worst, intentionally dishonest.

They'll spend almost $1,000,000,000 USD to whittle 10,000 drug candidates into what is hopefully a single FDA approved new molecular entity.

>That's how you get the US sucking donkey's balls in infant mortality rates. As if it was some third world country.

Did you hear that loud crack? It was you smashing your head against correlation/causation. You might want to have that fallacy checked out. Looks bad, man.

Yes, academic institutions do a lot of low level work that pharma companies build on top of, but you'd be surprised how often potential new molecular entities (truly new drugs) do not originate from government sponsored academic sources.

(However, the tools, understanding and/or methodologies that made that new NME possible did likely come from those labs!)

If URL's are actually intended for computers, than I'd say we've failed rather badly.

The whole point was to interface with people.

If people don't matter and it's for machines, why use URLs? Just type IP's. Skip DNS all together...

It's PAINFULLY EASY to mark that information private, and to go into the Platform settings and make sure your friends "cannot bring your information with them into apps and websites".

It's two screens and takes about thirty seconds for you to control your Facebook and how much data leaves it.

Seriously guys, don't blame Facebook for your incompetence with their privacy settings.

This is unfair, you responded to someone who was saying "If you want a higher quality stream, then curate more aggressively using the tools available to you"

And I feel like you ignored the meat of his post to make a cheap shot on the idea of "losing friends over memes". That wasn't his point, and I think you knew that. The tools he mentions allow you to control what appears in your feed without unfriending.

However, if this replacement doesn't support some kind of widgets, I imagine it won't stick for me. I love having widget access to inboxes and gmail widget access to labels/etc.

Also: Google Now search bar is a widget and I will not give that up for the world. Hear me Facebook? No Google Now, no go!

Not that I necessarily agree with my correction, but I found yours to be a bit... politically myopic.

This would be a good chance to take a step back and think about what's more important: using Heroku or controlling your up-time?

You... you don't understand even the very basics of Google's business model, do you?

Spoiler: 99% of their revenue is not derived from direct user transactions to them.

I feel this unfairly divides ADD between "people who think they have" and "people who have" but in my experience this is a horrible line to draw.

Many doctors will listen for a stock phrase and hand out a one page questionnaire and diagnose you with adult on-set ADD on the spot.

Bam, then you "have" it, doctor verified and everything.

And yet, that person who "has" it may be no different than the one who read what is basically the same questionnaire online.