Can't humanity benefit from technology without it being some conflict between "China" (aka some official enemy) and "The West" (aka white supremacy)?
Capitalism, nationalism, and related systems completely subvert actual progress for the sake of violent control and profiting off planetary destruction.
That seems to be the difference between China and the west in a nutshell. China keeps promoting shared future for humanity and cooperation, while the west keeps trying to create a new cold war where blocs compete against one another.
Hey Mr not so much Freudian slip, please keep this stuff over at Reddit, the containment zone for hatred and vile. Thanks for the service and have a good day. If this is repeated, a hammer will come your way.
How is the west white supremecy? You sound like a racist when you say that and it hurts your credibility, especially in a larger conversation about some of the other points you mention.
Go walk into a tech building in the west in the USA and you’d find that white people are a fraction of the workers present, and even then it’s European transplants also in the office. It is unironically very diverse. Teams I worked on were not strictly white people or majority white. And taking it even further - why be racist in the first place?
Imperialist European powers invented “whiteness” almost 500 years ago as a justification for and a tool of imperialist domination, and the Global North is still doing it.
We really ought to teach CRT in schools like the conservatives claim we do.
ehh... I think you're missing the part where Microsoft is actively exploiting its customer base throughout its entire product catalogue - the likelihood that this is an actual win is no.
They’re tasked with infinitely growing their stock price. That is a suicide job. Working big tech in the USA sucks right now because there’s no concept of just maintaining and maintaining something well, unless you’re Valve and steam
You could always start suing the US government for allowing shareholder primacy in the first place. Stakeholder primacy is the way to go and everyone knows that. Everyone besides corporate knuckleheads.
This is my first time hearing stakeholder primacy as a term. Can you elaborate on what the grounds you’d sue the stakeholders on? Ie what is the legal premise that you’re proposing you can hold them accountable for?
I never said you sue the stakeholders. They could sue the government for allowing this shit in the first place.
Stakeholder primacy is just the opposition of shareholder primacy essentially. Stakeholders are the employees, the community/society around the company like the town or city it is in. As in they have obligation to care for that.
This explains it well. Shareholder primacy isnt that old even. Stakeholder primacy used to be the norm and according to this article should also be the future goal.
So yes, this works very well and has so in the past. The current model of infinite growth is unsustainable both physically and environmentally.
Nothing. It's a pretty fantasy. Best I think we can hope for is a few monopolies busted up so some little guys can break into the market. That'll buy us about 20 years until those little guys have become the new Googles and Microsofts and Apples, and then we start over. We need to entirely rewrite how we do antitrust assessments to account for both vertical and horizontal monopolistic behaviors (a vertical monopoly is a company that controls the entire supply chain where a horizontal one controls the market and customer base. Historically, the US has been more concerned with horizontal monopolies.) It'd be great if we could come up with a better measure of consumer choice that we currently use. If you have the choice between 2 ISPs but they both charge the same amount for the same service, you don't really have a choice there...at least not a meaningful one.
Because they didn't come out saying they won't enable ads. They just quietly renamed the toggle to say something else, and that is shady AF. Why are you trying to spin it positively?
Give it a few more months and ads will be back. They dropped us in boiling water and expected us to just accept it. Microsoft will just slowly boil us next time.
It’s not about the current state of their OS, it is about the corporate attitude to users.
Microsoft are treating users not as valued customers purchasing a product, but as a resource to be manipulated and sold off to the cheapest bidder.
They may have backflipped on actual ads in the Start Menu, purely due to user backlash, but they still have game/app/bullshit recommendations and reinstalled garbage, unless you are a windows sysadmin and know jo to use a Profile Editor.
They don't deserve praise for not doing something bad. They deserve praise when they do something good that they weren't forced to do.
They didn't do this from goodwill, but because it was predicted to hurt the bottom line. They'll do it again as soon as it's forgotten about. This isn't the last you've heard from this.
I can't wait to see this technology in motorcycles and micro mobility vehicles. It will be a mushroom in Mario Kart IRL. And imagine this tech on drag bikes/cars
Even just getting above the boiling temp of liquid nitrogen is a really big deal. Liquid helium is something we will eventually run out of and is largely dependent on fossil fuel extraction to be collected. Helium can't be recaptured after it escapes an open loop cooling system.
LN2 is so much cheaper to run and it's sustainable. We'll never run out of Nitrogen so long as there's power to cool it. LN2 is cheaper than craft beer.
I wonder if progress will be slow and steady until we finally get there or if it will be a huge jump past the finish line like there was in the 80s. Either way, I don't expect to see practical applications outside of the lab in my lifetime...but it's really fun to watch the science advanced, even if it is all over my head
You are right, however, it's worth noting most of these materials are highly complex and contain exotic elements. Basically these compounds are not suitable for any real life application in long range energy transfer
There was one team fairly recently that thought they had developed one that got a lot of press, but it turned out to not be true.
But that was only for that one specific case, it didn't prove that room temperature superconductors can't exist in general, there are still other teams working on developing them, and theoretically they could be possible, we just haven't quite worked out what materials will exhibit superconductivity at room temperature, under what circumstances, and how to make them.
And we have some materials that come pretty damn close, Lanthanum decahydride can exhibit superconductivity at temperatures just a few degrees colder than some home freezers can manage (although at very high pressures)
not sure about the space age...maybe titanium age? that's about the time we figured out how to machine titanium on large scales, and for highly specialized, extreme applications (talking about the SR-71 here, mostly). could also call it the alloy age, since a number of important alloys were discovered around that time
We're currently in the information age, which is due to silicon. In a few hundred years, this time may reasonably be called the silicon age. Society has only recently transferred to the silicon age from the previous iron age. If we don't cause a total collapse of our society, then we will be in the silicon age for a few hundred more years, and that will likely include space colonization.
The space age you're referring to is likely the 60s, when space exploration was beginning. A decade or two isn't long enough to be considered an age.
I was a skeptic; "I can't see all the pixels unless I'm as close to the screen as the screen is wide, why bother?"
Then I went over to my friend's place and watched some stuff on his 4K OLED. Holy shit. So I can't see all the pixels, but turns out that only perceiving 2.5-3x the data is still a big improvement.
I'm still not gonna pay for one until they get a lot cheaper.
More than half a million UniSuper fund members went a week with no access to their superannuation accounts after a “one-of-a-kind” Google Cloud “misconfiguration” led to the financial services provider’s private cloud account being deleted, Google and UniSuper have revealed.
Services began being restored for UniSuper customers on Thursday, more than a week after the system went offline.
Investment account balances would reflect last week’s figures and UniSuper said those would be updated as quickly as possible.
In an extraordinary joint statement from Chun and the global CEO for Google Cloud, Thomas Kurian, the pair apologised to members for the outage, and said it had been “extremely frustrating and disappointing”.
“These backups have minimised data loss, and significantly improved the ability of UniSuper and Google Cloud to complete the restoration,” the pair said.
“Restoring UniSuper’s Private Cloud instance has called for an incredible amount of focus, effort, and partnership between our teams to enable an extensive recovery of all the core systems.
The original article contains 412 words, the summary contains 162 words. Saved 61%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
And then what? What's going to replace it? As of right now there is no alternative that can do what windows can do. There are other operating systems that can do some of the stuff but not all of it.
That’s a nice generalization and all, but mostly just a lackluster cop-out that I’ve heard a million times. It’s not like windows is some high and mighty operating system which is the only thing capable of running some software because it’s so awesome. Linux is really good at a lot of things like gaming, security, data analytics, and continues to get better. Lots of money was put into developing windows and making it usable for most people. If more money was put towards the development of Linux for the purpose of <insert your generalized cop-out argument>, you’d have one less thing to bitch about.
Bro I can't even load up most games on Linux so saying we should do away with windows is saying we just shouldn't have video games anymore.
Linux isn't there yet and it's not even close. When it is then I'll switch but until then windows is just fine and isn't the boogie man you weird Linux fan boys make it out to be.
People like you are lucky things like windows exist because otherwise technology would be totally inaccessible to you, and you’d be banging two rocks together in a cave somewhere.
People like me? You mean the majority of people on the planet?
God forbid I just want to play a video game without having to learn the ins and outs of multiple operating systems while I spend half my time troubleshooting why things don't work.
Fuck me for wanting 1 part of my life to be easy I guess.
Why do I need to try? I have absolutely no reason to ditch windows. What exactly can Linux do that windows can't as far as gaming that requires me to switch?
I use my computer to browse the web and play video games and there is nothing about windows that makes that harder than it needs to be.
But yeah, keep being dicks to people on the internet while remaining anonymous because people don't want to make their life worse by using your preferred OS.
The Linux community makes me not want to use Linux out of spite.
“I’ve never tried to play games on Linux but I’ve determined that they don’t work and never will, so therefore Linux sucks and windows is the only answer”
I know... I explained to you why you can't give a reason... your head is deep and permanently planted in the sand
Literally everything you have said about Linux is quite far off the mark... showing you are either trolling or simply repeating stuff you may have misinterpreted and know nothing about...
Live happy with you windows ads... Linux does not need you bud
Do you play niche or weird games? Most games I play work as well if not better than windows compared to my gaming friends. The only problems I've had on Linux were because I decided to fuck around with the OS while doing some niche programming shit.
I interact with windows enough (since everyone comes to me for their tech problems) and I don't see a reason that Windows needs to still exist. Ads everywhere, cancerous data collection practices, crappy products that lag or glitch. Its a mess and I hate every time I have to use it any more. Nowhere near the same feature richness of linux, costs money, and they are constantly making poor anticonsumer decisions.
I do play a lot of niche games I guess you could call them. Some of my favorite games that I have hundreds or even thousands of hours in don't have but a few hundred players world wide.
The thing is I want the confidence to know that I can buy any game and it will just work. My mods just work. It's the ease of use I can get with windows I can't get with Linux.
I am no fan of Microsoft and I love supporting things like Linux but like most people I just want my shit to work when I get home. I have so little free time I don't want to spend it learning the ins and outs of Linux.
Understandable. For making sure games work I use protondb.com
I haven't had any problems modding games, even using external mod managers.
For most people, a browser and some apps is enough, which linux is perfectly ready for. For most gamers, linux can run basically any game like native, and most niche games with some finagling.
Not being able to run "most" games on Linux is a skill issue. If you wsnt to use windows fine, I won't stop you. But you are spewing a bunch of anecdotal nonsense.
You want to use a subpar paid for OS with telemetry, ads, and to support a greedy corporation for your convenience; Thats your prerogative.
At least educate yourself before you speak on topics you lack greater understanding of.
Yeah I don't think paying $3 for a windows key is breaking the bank for anyone.
And I tried educating myself by asking questions in this thread and not 1 person helped me. Everyone just attacked me, so if that's what the Linux community is like it's gonna be a hard pass for me.
Well, as operating systems go, they both accomplish pretty much the same thing: an interface for programs so that they get access to hardware resources. One thing that Linux does is that it supports many more architectures than what windows does.
In windows, the UI is a part of the operating system so customization is a lot harder than what it is in Linux.
These are the only things that I can think of that are directly tied to the operating systems, but I’m not the most knowledgeable on these things. I honestly wonder what makes windows better as an operating system, because I can’t find anything.
That’s not due to the operating system but rather the choice of those producing the program. The operating system simply provides an interface to the underlying hardware.
The OS provides services to the application, acting as a bridge between the application and the physical hardware. The entire point of an OS is to run applications, otherwise it would serve no purpose.
If the app can run in Windows on the same hardware that Linux can, but the app can't run in Linux, then the only difference is the OS.
There's more to take into account other than just resolution, like
color space coverage (100% sRGB is quite affordable nowadays, I wouldn't go less than this; on the other hand, >95% DCI-P3 or AdobeRGB still on the expensive side in comparison and not as widespread),
screen type,
brightness, and
refresh rate.
And resolution itself should be paired with monitor size for it to be meaningful. For example:
24 inch monitor at 1080p = 92 PPI
24 inch monitor at 2160p = 184 PPI
32 inch monitor at 2160p = 138 PPI
46 inch monitor at 2160p = 96 PPI
In Windows and Linux anything around 92 to 98 PPI gives you easily readable text at 100% scaling. This is a good baseline. There are PPI calculators online: https://dpi.lv/
The 24 inch screen at 2160p (which is 4K) has twice the pixel density of the 24 inch screen at 1080p. That means if you would set your display resolution scaling in the OS to 200% you'd get the same font size as <24 inch, 1080p, 100% scaling>. However, because the density is much higher, everything looks much clearer.
The benefits are larger when reading text, IMO. You still notice an improvement with movies, of course. Mobile phones and tablets, even the cheaper ones, usually have significantly higher pixel density than computer monitors which is one reason they look better.
Of the three examples above, the 24 inch monitor at 4K will look better than the other three monitors because it has higher PPI. (Assuming all else is equal like screen type, color coverage, brightness, etc.)
I feel like I would want a proportionally larger monitor to keep the same DPI
Let's say you want a new monitor. I suggest looking at the PPI and not just the resolution or monitor size in isolation. These two units should be paired.
For example, a 32 inch monitor at 4K has 138 PPI. The font will be tiny at 100% scaling but that's expected. In this case it so happens that 1.5 x 92 PPI = 138 PPI. So by going to the OS display settings and increasing scaling to 150% you get the same font size as <24 inch, 1080p, 100% scaling> but everything looks clearer.
The 46 inch monitor above is 4K but because the screen is so large this comes out at only 96 PPI. So in terms of quality it would be quite close to the 24 inch monitor at 1080p.
PPI is one of the most important characteristics but don't disregard the rest. Try at least full sRGB coverage. And for panel type IPS is a good choice if you can afford it. (I'm afraid of OLED because of burn-in issues and I can't afford to replace monitors like they're socks. And mini-led is very expensive.)
About the refresh rate, I don't game and for movies it's kind of useless. But I do notice a difference moving the mouse and scrolling pages on the browser. (My external monitors are 60 hz and my laptop is >100 hz.)
On a side note, Apple laptop screens tend to look nice because they have high PPI and good color coverage (among other things) whereas PC/Linux laptops for the most part have low spec screens. This doesn't have to be the case, of course. My work laptop (I'm using Linux) has >200 PPI with near 100% DCI-P3 and fonts look great on it.
Eeerp. Yep, I meant PPI not DPI. Thanks for the write-up about text scaling, though, I will note that when I end up upgrading. The PPI calc also looks interesting.
For what I understand, PPI is pixels per inch in a digital image, and DPI are dots per inch on a printed image. So we can use PPI or DPI for the same image depending on whether its on our computer screen (PPI) or printed on a sheet of paper (DPI).
I'm using a 32" 4k monitor without scaling, even if my eyesight is not the best. I have no trouble at all with it. It's the more common 27" 4k monitors that have tiny fonts and need scaling. But 32", 4k it's fine at 100%!
As for 1080p, it's enough for most things. You mentioned the dpi comparing it to a 24" 4k monitor, but why would you need 24" for a 1080p monitor? Anything above 20" is a waste for 1080p.
How much someone scales the display is of course subjective. I could use a 32 inch 4K monitor at 100% scale but it would be uncomfortable to read.
The Windows operating system used 96 DPI/PPI as a default (Mac was 72 DPI/PPI) and a 23 inch monitor at 1080p is exactly 96 PPI. So it's no accident I like PPI at the mid-90s.
The reason I used a 24 inch monitor, instead of a 23 inch monitor, as an example it's because I have a monitor that size.
Technology
Active
This magazine is not receiving updates (last activity 53 day(s) ago).