Bud

57 ms·

541.
Martin Pope, Whose Research Led to OLEDs, Dies at 103(nytimes.com)
2 points by Bud 5y ago|0 comments
542.
by Bud 5y ago
It's not clear to me why we should care whether nuclear is "subsidized", given that all of our dominant fossil-fuel infrastructure is also massively subsidized, in addition to it doing a great job of rapidly killing the entir
543.
by Bud 5y ago
So you were "on a conference call" and that makes you universally more able to assess current and near-future battery tech better than everyone else in the world combined, and also able to read their minds so as to discern whether
544.
by Bud 5y ago
The word "throw" is doing a lot of work in this sentence, since said throwing is both complex and expensive.
545.
by Bud 5y ago
Pretty bad for a system as crucial as this to be this bad in 2020. Honda ought to know better.
546.
by Bud 5y ago
People forget that iTunes was a mess while Steve was still alive. Now it's considerably improved.
547.
by Bud 5y ago
I treasure my copies of all of Alexander's books, but most especially A Pattern Language. It's beautifully printed and bound and it's a joy to come back to again and again. I'm not an architect or urban planner; it'
548.
by Bud 5y ago
"Most people" is something you're making up. I'll wager it's a minority. Most iPhone consumers either had a USB-C charger before, or a USB-A charger with Lightning cable from a previous iPhone, or they have a recent
549.
by Bud 5y ago
Granted. Of course. It also requires an additional purchase to use the other, superior way of charging that's built into new iPhones, which is MagSafe, of course. But my point was limited to dismantling the repeated claim in this threa
550.
by Bud 5y ago
In other words, you are admitting I'm entirely correct. No new chargers are required by this move.
551.
by Bud 5y ago
It's tiring to keep hearing this argument. No new chargers were required by this move. All the old chargers continue to work just fine.
552.
by Bud 5y ago
The move to USB-C chargers did not "necessitate an additional purchase". All the decade-old chargers and cables still work fine. None of your points make any sense, actually. It's not true that nobody other than Apple gained
553.
by Bud 5y ago
Yes. They did. All by themselves.
554.
Next generation Light Anti-tank Weapon(en.wikipedia.org)
2 points by Bud 5y ago|0 comments
555.
by Bud 5y ago
You could start by looking at average life expectancy, income inequality, education, literacy rate (the US is shockingly bad here), and health care access. As for "innovation" and "unicorns", the US has done well, but a
556.
by Bud 5y ago
No, it was not "waterproof". It had an IP67 water/dust rating, which is inferior to the IP68 rating achieved by current iPhones.
557.
by Bud 5y ago
"Water resistant" is a meaningless, vague term, of course. The question is how resistant. That phone was IP67 rated. Current iPhones are IP68 rated, which is markedly superior.
558.
by Bud 5y ago
You don't have to throw those phones away right now. Apple can easily replace batteries for you. The consumer doesn't need to be able to do this with a bigass Philips-head screwdriver in order to accomplish this goal.
559.
by Bud 5y ago
I agree. And there are lot of products that I don't WANT to have a crappy three-cent plastic door on, which will inevitably break, just so I can replace a battery that I will never, ever need to replace during the normal lifetime of
560.
by Bud 5y ago
Could we at least make this comparison in good faith? Apple is not a company that "makes disposable earphones". AirPods are a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of its business. The vast majority of its products can easily last a decade or
561.
by Bud 5y ago
Asking the rich to pay even a fraction of their fair share is not "punishing" the rich. Just so we're clear, punishing them would involve, say, jailing them or confiscating all but $50k or so of their net worth and then makin
562.
by Bud 5y ago
Actually, they are regressive. Calling them regressive, therefore, is just a statement of fact. If you want to project your biases against poor people onto others, fine, but let's be clear that that's what you are doing.
563.
by Bud 5y ago
I didn't say that particular model was perfect. I said Apple has been doing far better than competitors. Which is true. I set up and used hundreds of Macs and hundreds of PCs in 2018 as part of my job. I am pretty confident as to which
564.
by Bud 5y ago
No, they actually won't, at least not remotely as often. Have you ever heard of a system like this that systematically measures window tints and then tickets every single offender? No, of course you haven't.
565.
by Bud 5y ago
Only if you assume that once built, highways are thereafter free. Which they of course are not.
566.
by Bud 5y ago
Practical? Practical? That's laughable. It's not even good for groceries, for reasons anyone who has actually bought groceries can readily fathom. You want your groceries in a backseat or in a trunk, not in the cab of this stupid
567.
by Bud 5y ago
Can we at least be honest? Come on. Gas taxes are hilariously regressive. The people—ALL the people—who can afford this kind of dumbass vehicle and who are willing to commit the offense of buying and operating it will never, ever be affecte
568.
by Bud 5y ago
This guy's argument does not really seem to have any legitimate link to electric vehicles in particular, and as such, he should really back off of trying to blame EVs for this. It makes his overall point about repairability much weaker
569.
by Bud 5y ago
Cool, I didn't know the details of that.
570.
by Bud 5y ago
CNBC is just really shoddy in general with details like this, in addition to having a strong tendency towards negative reporting and negative headlines in general. https://bulloakcapital.com/blog/is-cnbc-biased/

More ›