At the end of the day though, Atlassian won't even sign NDAs with it's clients.
Make of that what you will.
559 karma · joined December 6, 2019
Make of that what you will.
I used to do design/permitting for fiber networks and going around DOD areas/Fiber was always fun. You wind up having to submit your routes, and get vague feedback as to what you need to move, but never how far away/etc. Usually your best bet is to just go to the other side of the road if possible.
For whatever it's worth, it feels like GloFo has had various process issues for a -long- time. While there were issues with the Bulldozer design itself from a deep pipeline perspective etc, the other factor in it's lukewarm lifetime (especially the first couple gens) was issues with GloFo's processes even back then. I know some of that was that they were trying to gear more towards bulk silicon vs CPUs but I think there were other issues too.
A college friend works for my state's gaming commission. During a 'drinking talk' about digital signatures, she told me an interesting part of her job; not just going through the slot machines and validating the payout settings, but also checking the EEProms MD5 Hash* to make sure that it was in a list of 'approved' code hashes.
* - This was 15 years ago, I -really- hope they use something better nowadays.
Not a perfect solution but sometimes perfect is the enemy of good.
As for why it wasn't remastered at 4k, let alone 1080p back then, my guess is that the cost of rendering CG above DVD resolutions was a major factor.
For example, Intel '10nm' is actually pretty close to TSMC '7nm' as far as Transistor density, and at '10nm' is clearly superior from a density standpoint [0],[1].
However Intel has had trouble with their own 7nm node while TSMC is now at '5nm'.
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_nm_process#10_nm_process_no... [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_nm_process#7_nm_process_node...
Could help lower the number of GH issues that are filed because people don't read said docs...
Most folks go with the 4 door option, so that's what dealers tend to stock, so you don't see them often.
My main vehicle right now is a WRX, so a 40/33MPG Compact truck is a great Ironic DD for me.
I also appreciate that they are -not- locking the Ecoboost behind the XLT trim. I do think it's silly that there's no aluminum wheel option package for the base model though. Same for AWD, but I think that's a little less important for a truck that is FWD.
If I had one fear on this, it would be the CVT on the 2.5L engine. The Powershift was a good example of how Ford sometimes ignores warnings of engineers about reliability in the name of hitting a price point. Hopefully they aren't repeating the same mistakes. I guess it depends on the overall design; if it's something like the Toyota HSD, should work great and possibly be better long term than the 8 speed used in the Ecoboost.
Unless it's a Creative labs product. You'll never RMA one of those. Ever.
There are two things that IMO Disney does far more than most other animation studios; First being sequel churn (the general pacing of MCU releases, the pacing on the last SW trilogy and sidecar movies,) But the bigger one being Toyetics. [0]
Neither of those things are particularly 'innovative', and the latter of the two is a semi-exploitative practice of child psychology.
A couple years ago I got into it with Comcast over an Identity fraud issue. When I threatened to take them to court for harrassment (I'd sent them more than what was needed to prove I never resided at the address in question) they tried to throw the 'binding arbitration' clause out there... When I told them I never was or would be a customer of theirs and thus wasn't held to their arbitration, they didn't quite know what to say next.
Will it pan out? IDK. But the use case and implementation (For those not aware, a Helium 'miner' is providing a low data rate wireless access point, and you get coins for providing coverage over an area) seem far more feasible from a conceptual standpoint.
I provided a very real world example of car enthusiasts doing something that a sane human being would not do. Can you help me understand what I should be looking for?
I'm not sure how much of that is streamlining production versus design (i.e. fitting all the batteries in place may more or less necessitate that specific body style)
There's a couple classes of 'Truck guys'. The Truck guys that just want power, yeah they'll probably go for this.
The Truck guys that like throwing turbodiesels in to get HP/Torque numbers like what we see in the lightning, I would say it depends on whether Ford makes it 'Moddable' or not.
This new Lightning (putting it that way because F150 Lightning once corresponded to a gas-guzzling Supercharged V8 trim) has 775ft/lb of Torque. For reference, the existing models are between 265 and 510 ft/lb.
Additionally, one of the benefits of an electric motor, is that torque is essentially instantly available, compared to an ICE where there's only a slim power bad where that max torque range is hit.
Unless Ford 'governs' acceleration in software, I can see some lead-foots getting themselves into trouble quickly. They probably -will-, but I'd expect them to offer some sort of switch for that, lest the Ford zealots grab their pitchforks. Let us not forget that a lot of 'Car guys' are arguably insane. When Ford considered switching the Mustang to a Front Wheel Drive Mazda design, they had to deal with death threats!
In the Toyota Mirai, for example, the tank is located under the passenger's seats, in a nice little 'braced' area. Likely chosen because it's the least likely location for the tank to get damaged in a collision. Also the challenge of either having to 'choose' between a 'swap' tank and a 'fill' tank, or a more complex tank that does both.
On one hand, this could cause other countries to pay more attention to the situation, since -they- will still be dependent on TSMC and may not have the US doing all the posturing.
But that's assuming we wound up truly 'de-coupled'. TSMC tends to be the leader in fab tech, and I am fairly certain any near term plans will involve providing incentive for TSMC to build more fabs in the US.