nimos

App store with a Netflix login in front? Same way they distribute their current app.

Do they ever actually hire people directly to make any of their content? I assumed it was all contracted out to production companies, I know it is for some shows. They could do the same thing for games just acting like a distributor.

I think it's more likely to keep people subscribed then generate new subscriptions. No one person is going to like all the content they make. Personally I'd really enjoy having some fun well made mobile games I knew wouldn't try to sucker me at every turn with IAP. I think people with kids would really appreciate this. Their competitive advantage is they don't have to worry about IAP or marketing.

I don't think this really falls into the category of "throwing spaghetti at the wall." It's creating entertainment content for a fixed monthly cost. Different entertainment, sure, but it's no self driving car.

Surprised Netflix hasn't branched out into more content types or more dynamic content. You now have this two way communication channel seems kind of boring to not try and use it even just for mostly video content.

Some of their shows run 7+ million an episode. If you look at the development costs of simple mobile games and cut out all the stuff related to IAP it seems like they could create a lot of value for customers for pretty cheap by making some simple popular games without the IAP BS.

The % of the network they would control would be too high maybe? Fundamentally the value of their product is based on the price of bitcoin. A single miner that gets close to 50% might be seen a a huge risk and drive down the price.

Why could they pass anything up until 3 weeks ago? I though filibustering meant the senate always needed 60 votes if the opposing party wants to block the legislation.

Sure but there is no cost basis for the non-linear increase. If anything it should be slightly less expensive for them. If you look at GCP/OVH/AWS their pricing are all roughly linear.

The price inconsistencies are all the way up the entire product mix. 80 vs 160 instance is 4vCPU-6vCPU and 6TB-7TB transfer.

Why does 5 vs 10 dollar boxes get you double everything but CPU. There are all sorts of pricing inconsistencies.

Comparing the 5 dollar to the most expensive using all 5 dollar instances you get:

960 GB more storage

160 more "vCPUs"

180 TB more network bandwidth

Memory is the only thing that actually scales logically. Very annoying IMO. I like DO otherwise. I think it fits in nicely between GCP/AWS/Azure and other lower cost providers having object store and block storage and a good UI/responsiveness.

Per second billing coming is the more interesting thing IMO. Seems like most non-gcp/aws are per hour minimums.

Oil and solar don't really compete that much. Oil - even at $40 a barrel - is substantively more expensive than pretty much everything else for generating electricity and is rarely used for anything beyond small scale generation.

Oil is valuable because of gasoline/diesel which about 3/4 of the barrel goes to. It's all about the ease of transportation that ICE/gasoline/diesel offer that no other fuel can really compete on.

The more relevant factor is the price of batteries which might make solar and other electricity sources viable competitors to oil.

I don't know why but it kind of rubs me the wrong way PR agencies for Kickstarter/crowd-funding even exist. I'd rather back something that had someone passionate with a shitty cell phone video over the generic sterile PR videos that everything seems to have now.

https://twitter.com/Woodshedagency The hashtags on their twitter description almost seem like satire.

Super excited to see what 2018-2019 looks like. If we have 3-4 high yield ~7nm nodes and the dram/nand markets start clearing again I think we'll see some pretty crazy prices for hardware especially with AMD/ARM pressuring Intel.

Hopefully Openstack will be a bit more mature then too. With lower hardware costs and an open source software stack cloud computing might get pretty competitive.

> I think the real answer here is to just do less work. Don't try to change a program to let it keep using lots of memory. Instead, make it so it needs hardly any memory in the first place.

I mean sure, if you can. Fundamentally games need to maintain a fairly large a mount of state you can't wave that away. For a lot of games that means rapidly changing state too for example bullet hells constantly instantiating and destroying each bullets can get crazy expensive.

Object pooling is pretty simple for games because the logic is already there. Whatever game logic was causing the game object to be destroyed moves it back into the pool instead.

Body armor comes in a wide variety of sizes and weights many of which are not heavy and obvious. You don't need a full getup with plates to stop handguns.

It creates an arms race for criminals. If everyone is out there is wearing body armor you have to move up to larger higher power weapons.

Sort of like missile defense systems in the context of nuclear arms.

I wonder what happens if you replace the call with 1-2 noops?

"New competitive pressure force established brands to come up with new ways to trick people into paying 200 dollars for things that cost 10 dollars to make."

Ah ok thanks, not super familiar with react. Had seen a video about fibers/async and saw something about 16 implementing them. Put 2 and 2 together and got 5.

Fibers? I thought they were implemented and that was what React 16 was all about.

Well that pays for my Christmas shopping. Made a couple thousand now off ~$10 I spent out of novelty. Hurts a bit seeing what I used to have

I really don't see it personally. It seems pretty clear people are buying and holding en mass at this point and it just seems like pure FOMO. There is no underlying asset and I don't think its that useful for replacing cash. Not going to complain though. I'll go on, take my money and run.

Already what happens. GM and Tesla use pumped liquid glycol for heating/cooling and some other companies use refrigerants.

$1/kwh is a joke price. Peaking natural gas plants run at 20 cents/kwh on the high end. You can go buy a honda gas generator from home depot and run it for 1-2k hours and pay less than that per kwh.

That is how they work today. This is Tesla's current state of the art (larger) battery. As you might image in takes more than 1-2 to run a car.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ga4L1w66AbU/maxresdefault.jpg

The problem is disgustingly parallel.

Of course I did. Why wouldn't I? They are all battery PACKS. Maybe I didn't make that clear but I think that is a well known fact that Tesla batteries are made up of a collection of cells.

You have 100 of battery X and you go to 1000 of battery X you can charge 10X more watt hours but the same %.

The Tesla superchargers currently charge at around 2% a minute up until about 80% which is 40 minutes to hit 80%. Tesla is advertising 400 miles in 30 minutes which is 80% of the 500 mile capacity. What is so hard to believe about a 33% improvement over a couple year old tech that is a couple years from release?

Here are current industrial/transportation/residential electric prices in US [0]. They think Tesla will pay 40c a kwh??? What a joke. Sure if you look at constant demand facilities and extrapolate their pricing model with low average demand to megachargers you can come up with a ridiculous number. You can literally run diesel generators and generate electricity for a lower cost. This is so hysterically asinine I can't believe Bloomberg published this article. Not to mention a huge amount of charging can happen overnight when drivers are sleeping and electricity prices/demand are super low.

Pushing a lot of power through a wire is a solved problem. So what they need to push 10x through one connection instead of over 10. We are talking about a modest increase in % charge rates. That is what matters. All else equal you can charge a percent of your battery capacity not some arbitrary fixed number.

This is an embarrassingly poor article. I think the one the worst things about the current tech shortage is now we have all these arts/business majors doing technology writing larping like they know the difference between a watt and an amp.

[0]https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph...

Don't desktops make less sense than servers for ARM in terms of per core performance? Over my dead body would I use a 2.1-2.4ghz desktop chip but that seems to be what most cloud VPSs are around with ~3 for "high performance".

Really curious to see what happens in the next 24-36 months with 7nm nodes from non-intel fabs coming online. Combined with huge investment from China into nand/dram I think were in for some pretty exciting price/performance options in the next couple years.

I'm happy as long as there is an archive. The way front end dev is going these days it seems the best hope is a json api stays alive.

Taking the 2012 numbers you have at your link, the 85KW pack and 600kg, that is 6200 lb to get to 400kwh. The 2015 number on wikipedia is 540kg per 85kwh pack and the model 3 pack is supposed to be 30% more energy dense[0]. The 2015 number gives 5600lbs so I don't think at least 6000lbs is accurate, even the 2012 number is just slightly over.

All else equal you can charge batteries based on a % of their total capacity. Current superchargers can do about 2%/min for a model S in the 0-80% charge range but can't deliver the requisite power for a 400kwh pack. But I also haven't seen very many supercharger stations that would be particularly well suited for truck traffic either, so I'd imagine there will be a new charger/stations as well.

Sure batteries are no where near competing on absolute range of diesel but I don't think they have to. The question is can you get a days driving in without spending hours and hours charging while keeping the battery capital cost/weight reasonable.

You don't need a 1200kwh pack for that because you can take a couple short breaks plus a lunch with supercharging and over double your effective capacity.

We'll see what happens but I'd be very surprised if the announcement doesn't include a new super charger and stations unless they design it for short range point to point only.

[0]https://electrek.co/2016/11/14/tesla-model-3-battery-energy-...

Tesla doesn't publish it's costs but based on what they've said it is a reasonable estimate[0] Cells in bulk are below 150[1]

7 cents per kwh is a very common industrial rate.[2] Maybe it is a bit low but it's a lot more reasonable than one of the highest residential rates in the country ($.2/kwh).

Let's say 5000lb for batteries + cooling/wires. Semi's routinely have (200gallons *7) 1400lb in fuel or more and a ~500 hp ~3000lb diesel engine. I don't know what the electric equivalent would weigh exactly but Tesla's 362 hp motor is 70lb. Let's say a 500hp one weighs 500lb. 5000+500 - 1400 - 3000 = 1,100. Tractor weights are around 15-20k so ~5-7% weight increase with a pretty generous estimate for cooling/wires and engine weight assuming rest of the drive train is identical.

[0] https://electrek.co/2017/02/18/tesla-battery-cost-gigafactor...

[1]http://benchmarkminerals.com/lithium-ion-batteries-are-now-s...

[2]https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph...

1.9 was sort of an average from googling. This seems like the most detailed source which has a slightly higher number. https://insideevs.com/tesla-semi-truck-battery-is-how-big/

600 is just random googling of what is a long but not super long day for most truck drivers.