Disadvantage of said system for Google would be the fact that if you do that, people can skip ads much faster and they won’t be able to do any tracking of interaction at all. For advertiser’s point of view, that would be just worse version of TV commercial.
For many memory intensive operation, this is incorrect since by that logic, Apple’s chip should use far more memory due to having quarter as many registers for those purpose. (32x64 vs. 32x256)
Most processors have cache memories for reasons you stated.
If so, they should pay for Q/A and/or focus testing themselves. Not freeload off from forcing users.
I can already see that this won’t gather them any data that is actually useful for analysis.
Well, I’m okay with old concept of ads. But it was them that decided that ads must double dip with customer information and it was them that decided that ads viewed by people who are engaged to the ads doesn’t count as ads that was ‘seen’.
Continuous race to the bottom since then.
Even assuming that what he claim is true and can back with evidence, he would need to go further and show that loss of productivity caused by remote working is massive enough to: offset cost of borrowing commercial real estate (Or much larger real estate with corresponding maintenance bill in case on-site location is need for other reason), paying employee transportation, giving up remote talent, etc.
It is entirely his fault for not preparing for the time where people will actually bring out calculator when there was moon-sized sign post for several years.
It is likely due to: they want to update their software to add new features, but these device doesn’t have enough power to support that or it takes far too much human resource to implement, so most logical answer is they drop it. As for what kind of feature they add that would make it so difficult to implement…
In this brave new world of companies, more ways to serve ads and new method to mine telemetry data seems to count as a feature.
Personally, I think that is down to most scientists actually facing the reality. Previous expectation was that humanity will be able to adapt to some degree of changes with some sacrifice - then 2020~2021 demonstrated that assumption to be false.
If he wanted to argue that, he probably should have argued that in court. Especially considering that he always had the chance to do so. But that would be admitting guilt, isn’t it? He continued to fight the legal system after he was shown to be squarely in the wrong. Indeed, this is the case where legal system is actually working as intended - Judge shouldn’t actively protect either side, they judge, not represent.
And yes, ‘Being bankrupt’ is a valid argument. But only if it is true. Just like any other arguments, if evidence to the contrary is found, that is just another crime to be punished for lying in the court. Now you can see how he ended up with that much fine.
Well. If you put a large glass window on the reinforced steel safe to make sure you can observe inside the safe. You can’t exactly expect criminals to not just smash window instantly to take everything instead of struggling to open the safe harder way.
Making master key is also not the approach that works because unlike physical keys, digital keys can be copied millions of times exactly without any flaw over miliseconds without requiring any specialized tool on site.
You do have a fair point on problem of association. I don’t think diagnosed mental condition have significant prediction power either. Instead, I believe that occasional mental healthcare counselling on people who we find to be normal will be the one that improve this situation.
Well, to be fair, what they meant to say is “There is no way to prevent this while not changing gun law, state of mental healthcare, income inequality in economic classes, or criminal law and policing issues.” which is correct statement overall.
Considering Samsung during their cost cutting days designed Galaxy Xcover Pro 2 without drawback just fine, I think everyone will be able to do it without drawback just fine as well.
I would also wager that Valve was worried about Microsoft attempting to use “creative” methods to compete with Steam and chipping away at them, like hidden API. Its not like Valve knew that Microsoft’s attempt would continue to flop so hard for decades that they couldn’t even try that.