Well, it doesn’t necessarily need to be bought, it just needs to not be part of alphabet anymore. I think the ideal outcome is actually that chrome become an independent non-profit that maintains an important piece of software using funding from a consortium of different sources that want it to continue to exist.
This kind of thing is actually very very common and far from a new concept.
Honestly, what’s super interesting to me is how clustered the US and Germany are. I’ve always noticed that Germans show up more often than other non-native-English speaking groups in English speaking online spaces, but to see them be nearly on par with the UK in clustering with the US is wild, especially because there is so little clustering between them and the UK.
See that’s the thing, you don’t need a touch screen for those things, or even a screen. Everyone has a phone for sat nav, (you shouldn’t be looking at your phone while driving but you also shouldn’t be looking at a screen on the console while driving). And for maintenance stuff a light up an LED is enough.
I think in general there’s just been a proliferation of unnecessary features and with it has gone the affordable new car.
It often feels like the software is an afterthought and not given the time and resources it needs to work properly. Like, they slap the screen in to seem tech forward or to stream line dash design, and then dump the problems this creates on to software devs.
Yah, but musk has been doing some serious brand damage lately, so can they really keep selling on that?
A touch screen is more expensive than an injection molded plastic knob, even if the actual interfacing of the controls is easier.
I take the point that it’s simpler to integrate with how many buttons, dials and controls newer cars have, but I think the proliferation of those bits is part of the same issue. A lot of stuff is being added not because people find use in these things but because companies feel they need to add them to appear like they’re tech forward.
the problem is that they’re also one of the more expensive options. And they have a pretty bad reputation for quality now. So a 7,500 price increase is probably going to push people to look for higher quality at the 40 thousand price range, or for one of the cheaper options in the 30 thousand range. Assuming they don’t just go for a Prius instead.
The touch pad control shit just sends me “yah, let’s get rid of these cheap, easily manufactured and implemented dials and knobs that can be easily operated without looking and replace them with an expensive touch screen that you need to look away from the road to use, that’s truly the way of the future; Unnecessarily expensive, more difficult to use, and reliant on software that will probably get bricked in 3 years when the executives lay off the team maintaining it so they can give them selves a pay raise.”
Frankly, I think we should take this kind of stuff as a moment to consider where we could rebuild public infrastructure to prevent people having to own cars in the first place.
It’s monarchism but they replaced the Devine right of kings/Mandate of Heaven with the “Mandate of the Market”
I mean, it’s an old idea and philosophy in the US, that of the old manor lords of Maryland, Virginia and Delaware. They held their liberties in great regard, but only their liberties.
See because they’re special and the smartest bestest people who should definitely be trusted to make decision with no oversight. How could they possibly be where they are now if they were not the most suited to make decisions? I mean I’m sure if they make bad decisions I’m sure the market will punish them and take away their power, and if it never does well then clearly they’ve never made a mistake! Oh and if they do something wrong and the market doesn’t punish them, well clearly it’s because regulations distorted the holy will of the market! There for we should get rid of more regulations, because that will definitely improve the situation.
Still not sure why I would want a worse smart phone.
Yah, I’m really not enthused with the idea of having to pay monthly rent for my computers ability to function.
I wonder if intel just values their existing experience with 86 more than any potential efficiency gains since the efficiency matters a lot less when the whole system is just a glorified screen and antenna.
I wonder if intel is betting on increased centralized cloud computing as the way forward for personal computers. So the efficiency benefits of ARM are irrelevant in their minds since they think the real power will come from big data centers.
Windows also seems more concerned with going all in on cloud computing, the whole “you will own nothing and like it” paradigm. So making a faster and more efficient mobile platform isn’t probably a high priority for them.
All transactions are listed on the chain. All transactions can be linked to a wallet to prove the liquidity of the wallet.
Therefore all previous transactions made by a wallet are public record.
Not, anonymous.
The way the value of a wallet is calculated is by the sum of previous transactions. For a transaction to be verified, previous transactions must be summed to show a positive balance larger than the payment. That means all previous transactions made by that wallet are publicly available and linkable.
If they were not, then there would be no way to verify that your wallet had enough value to make a transaction.
If all transactions are linkable to a wallet, than one real world link can be used to link all previous transactions.
Ergo, not anonymous.
All it takes is one transaction on a wallet to be concretely connected to you and then every pervious transaction is clearly linked back to you. And that link does not have to be digital, it can be as simple as you being found in person with an item purchase through the system.
The strength of the encryption and cleverness of the protocols with in the system are irrelevant if there is a public list of transactions.
So, all transactions are listed on a ledger? That is publicly accessible?
Then it is not anonymous. Flat out.
In other words, of the self selecting group excited enough about the technology to try one of these, 46% wouldn’t buy another. I can’t help but wonder when these companies will realize that there is no market for clippy 2.0.