410 karma · joined October 5, 2017
I wouldnt wish Linux desktop on anyone whos not willing to learn at least some troubleshooting, with is 99.9999999% of people. I lament the community missed the prime shot in the early 2ks, but it's just not there for the "home user". As an appliance for gaming (stem deck) its fine, and probably for web-only work as reinstalling is not a big deal, as the only caveat to the above.
Dunno if that is how it works but I have never been able to square the capitulation in our government without that tie. This is also considering the influence of christian z's.
There are 3 suppliers in the world that together have ~90% of global DRAM manufacturing capacity. I did not say they definitively were a cartel, but the effect is the same: raising prices together, lack of competition (via market consolidation etc) means there is no viable way to make more capacity in any kind of reasonable time frame, and they all moved most capacity away from consumer products imo to shore up giant deals at locked-in high prices with large buyers.
Now, I find it odd that to this day, there are still only 3 suppliers and ram prices (and SSD prices) have not really followed a reasonable pricing curve save for a few maybe a year pre-thecurrentnonsense, where it was getting closer to what I would have expected [I have not plotted the data for this, I just buy a lot of end-user priced ram and ssds for consumer and businesses, and have noticed the trend of prices staying unusually high compared to other tech]
The current problem is mostly one of there being almost no way to make a new ssd/dram mfg for a bunch of reasons: top of the list is probably IP, then the cost+time. Being in this kind of position on a global scale is probably just immensely satisfying for stakeholders, but my feeling is it is now a global security and financial issue.
My take is: use the force of the state to get them to expand capacity and cap pricing (yes, states of sufficient size can enforce this). If they say "we will take our ball and go home" then invalidate their patents and get to work on domestic backups.
Capitalism will find any way to make more money. It doesnt matter if it harms all the entities that buy their products in the long run - short term gain and "someone will figure it out" will always win the day.
Regan will haunt us till our doom if we dont start enforcing even antitrust.
From consumer electronics to the data-center, the rising real mfg costs and lack of supply is putting huge pressure on pricing, and may just drive anyone who cant negotiate with these suppliers out of business.
Once the dominoes start, I fail to see how things recover in less than 3-5 years, not counting all the businesses wiped out in the meanwhile.
I dont mind using ARM for NAS, but (to be fair I have not looked in a while) the issue is they tend to not have many pcie lanes. Looks like the N2 can have up to 64 @pcie5 so if it's built well, I don't think the CPU will be too much of a bottleneck.
Hell I'll put it out there - some company should make a NAS-specific ARM chip line to make lines of way less expensive (well pre the current troubles) base NAS enclosures with lots of NVMe etc.
Labor was better protected Elections were funded by the gov and any money spent outside of that sent you to jail and confiscated everything from you and your company and your family They were taxed at the top marginal back at 90% They could not buy or own anything in media
My problem with capitalism is the rules were made at a certain time and place. Then the industrial revolution happened which bricked the old rules, and let wealth concentrate, which started eroding rules to favor those with the accumulated wealth.
Then the sale of single input products and services (first software, then the web - or make one sell infinite) bricked what was left of capitalism and let wealth accrue at 99% of light speed. And the laws/regulations never got changed to put a clamp on that, the tax rules and everything else went to favor those with more than they could spend, then the self-interested actors spent a pittance to do what the framers were trying to avoid: buying up all the government reps.
And here we are - all the monied people who mostly dont seem to grasp that they are just hastening their own implosion doing their 60 year old plan of robbing the bank, as it were.
To me, theres two issues:
1) this push is all driven by big businesses looking to just get free money for nothing, which is why I worry that the EU is so taken up with it.
2) taxes, is you want to line apples 30% up with those, are just part of business. No, you cant write off the 30%, but if you want to keep adding 250million new phones to your potential customer base every year.... wtf, pay up and be happy? To be fair, taxes arent the same - taxes take money out of an economic system usually based on economic activity to make currency actually worth something. But they kind of are the same in that they keep the infrastructure that lets you reach customers going.
I guess we can move to the windows model and place the burden on the customers, pay your $99/yr for updates or whatever, but then youd have ... like no one buy the phone.
Apples stance is - if you generate economic activity on the phone, you should have to pay to upkeep the roads that keep the phone working. I am sure Apple and MS would love to do this with desktop, but the ship sailed on that ages ago, and probably wouldnt have ever worked.
I mean, that's a huge draw in the consumer space for mac/ios. Remember the scale were at here. Something like 250,000,000 ios devices a YEAR.
This whole thing feels like a lobbying push, and to be frank, I am more worried about the monied interests who might have bought this kind of lawmaking and what their end game is.
Its not like anyone can just make an iphone, it's not like the PC market, it's not even like the macOS market.
If people (consumers) in general gave a rats ass about it they would pick an alternative. It's not even on their radar. Price is 95% of why androids sold at all, and they had all the time in the world to make something better.
I personally love the idea, but professionally hate it. IT shops chose apple for it being locked down, and burdening 3rd parties with extra support costs if the platform is wide open is a crappy thing to do.
(Todd said this would never happen)
Also, this is great news, and it will be interesting to see what kind of real-world changes in performance this has.
This action doesn't change the supply of money in the system, just where it ends up, so really it cant have an effect on inflation.
the schools already got paid, and now the money will go into more than likely base economy spends like food and housing instead of the the end of monies lifecycle at a bank or investment.
edit: of note, money is introduced into the system by in large through gov spending (roads, gov, military) - so as much as it would be nice to spend less on military - you can't really cut it off without spending it elsewhere, which I am all for, but you can't just have the government spend less.
edit-edit: this is also kind of the least they can do, and doesn't fix the problem in the future which is why I give it a half-hearted golf clap. It's almost like they want an a class of people to be over-debted....
http://www.notguiltynj.com/our-constitution-doesnt-give-us-r...
Want to know how you know the US will backslide? I Said it a decade ago - when R's are willing to pull the trigger on Roe, it will be because they are going for everything.
If you click on something that is AJAX-y, you need to provide feedback that yes, you clicked something and yes, the app is processing your request.
The first case I would just make your page load faster. The second case I think a spinner is perfect.
Money is a huge stressor in relationships. Misogyny is still a huge thing (to my utter surprise honestly). Abuse, etc. Options for financial stability to escape these things I would suspect to contribute as well.
I liken it to something Jonathan Demme (paraphrasing, maybe misattributing) said about Stop Making Sense - "concert films like to show the audience having fun, but our feeling is it limits/detracts from the experience" (stop making sense shows the audience very very little in its runtime)
So, to me, this carries over in the US coverage - they make all the decisions about how I should feel about every part, rather than letting the viewer come up with their own experience.
That means, as has been stated in this thread a bunch of times, that sending spam is essentially "free", especially since they like to use exploited email accounts to do the sending if possible.
I am all for a re-envisioning of email from the ground up, tbh.
It even updates the windows sandbox (which has needed an update for YEARS) which might be worth it by itself.
There is also the huge issue of student loans basically setting back a whole class of people more and more over the years. I have friends who have student debt and very nice paying jobs, but the debt still set back plans for home buying and family planning by 5-10+ years for a lot of them.
We are in a horrible time where people are espousing them either for profit or outside motive, not from any core belief structure. It is unbelievably frustrating to watch, from my perspective.
In other words, people are being paid to weaponize things like "free speech" on campuses, but they don't really believe in it, they are just tools. And let me be more succinct here - it's almost all coming from the "right wing"
Kids see through this bs, at least ones I have talked to about it. "Woke"ness, to what I can process, is the push back from decades of inaction on "lets not be assholes to certain classes of people", which is largely driven by companies wanting to sell to everyone, no matter how out of sync their, and I don’t know the term for this, prejudice externalities (that is, when ones prejudices effect someone rather than just being a thought) are with “regular” society.
This was of course facilitated by the internet. Without a way to communicate outside the gated walls of mass media in the past, this would probably not have happened.
Is there some over-reaction? Sure, but it’s a massive correction to how human history has worked forever.
People who use woke, triggered, without any disambiguation or nuance are to me just not handling the massive cultural change facilitated by things like the internet. Either they hate it, or can’t understand it, or do not like the results (imo)
I also take huge umbrage that the framing of this is just as horrible as the framing of paying taxes in the US.
People think, wrongly, that they make $100k, and have to pay 35% of that to the gov.
Wrong. You always only made $65k. There are studies that show wages have always tracked with taxes (up to a point).
Think of it this way - if your taxes went up to 75%, would you still work for 100k? No. Your take home would track in a few years (or sooner) to bring you back up to taking home 65k.
---
So I am nexflix, I charge 9.99 and pay whatever entity processes my payments like 1-2% if even. There is some other costs to this - infrastructure and employees, probably a bunch more.
Apple comes in and says "we build, and maintain a platform, that costs us x amount to maintain, and we sell 100's of millions of devices that utilize this platform, and provide fairly long-term support for those devices. We want you, if you want access to this platform, to pay y% of revenue derived from using this platform. We will call this the apple tax.
Is this fair? If you think taxes are theft, you probably think, "no". But you are wrong. Taxes are the % of your "output" used to keep the commons going. You know roads, bridges, laws, money, military, water, clean air, safe food, yadda yadda.
So the apple tax might be high, but it's mostly irrelevant. As a small dev, you would never have the reach you can have with the app store anywhere else. As a big dev, you look at where you can generate more revenue and think "fuck apple, let's start making legislation so I can use their platform but make more money without paying into it."
These "solutions" are just monied interests wanting more profit. This should only be handled in a way that suits the interest of consumers but they are not at the table.