Product launches are the vehicle for attaining promotions at Google, allegedly. Maintenance does not get similarly rewarded, nor does launching projects and having them live on to actually be successful.
When the launcher got promoted and moved on, they have to figure out whether to keep the thing around, and the answer is generally going to be no since few things can really compete with the infinite money glitch that is search ads.
The cost of storage in this case is more or less irrelevant - traffic is what matters here. You’re also not getting any mentionable bulk discount on the servers for that matter.
The key is that you can engineer things in completely different way when you have trivial amounts of traffic hitting your systems - you can do things that will not scale in any way, shape or form.
Their scale was also an insignificant fraction of what Netflix has, making the point even more irrelevant.
The best figure I could find on Jetflicks user count was 37k, where as Netflix has 269 million users.
At that point, you’re basically just listening to podcasts. Leaning into it might be a good choice, since there’s no visual element that gets lost when listening to podcasts, as compared to YouTube videos.
I don’t see any good reason why the merits of hydrogen for vehicle fuel would be any better than production and disposal of batteries. The other cases I agree that hydrogen will have a useful niche.
It’s hard to assess the validity of those claims as the article doesn’t bring any numbers and the paper itself is paywalled. As the fossil fuel industry is pushing hard towards wedging in hydrogen as a means of keeping themselves alive for a while longer, it’s vital to be able to assess the actual claims, lest they are just planted there by the fossil fuel industry.
There are some use-cases where hydrogen will be useful, but I don’t think storage is one of them. Nor do I think vehicles are a particularly good use-case either, as compared to just iterating on battery technology.
and is a good way to store excess energy from solar and wind.
Is it really that good of a storage method, though? The round-trip efficiency is quite bad when compared to other methods of storage.
One of the best things about living in a walkable place is that the concept of a weekly shop is basically dead - access to grocery shopping is available enough that I can go as many or as few times to shop as is warranted.
Granted, this usually adds up to once a week or less, but yeah. Big benefit.
This is an important concept to be imparted on those who do not understand the benefits of walkable places - a frequent question is how they can manage to complete their weekly shop without a car, since the car is in their mind needed to transport enough groceries to last the entire week. This is of course necessitated by the fact that their ideal location to shop for groceries is a significant distance away that can only be completed in a practical manner by car.
With where I live, this is unwarranted because I have access to convenient grocery shopping about 200 meters away by foot, and for ideal pricing I go 1 km away on a bike with storage on the rack. I do not want for variety either, I’ve got multiple speciality shops and 5 different grocery chains within a 1 km radius.
Attempted homicide with a vehicle should probably carry a prison sentence along with a permanent loss of the privilege of driving said vehicles.
What a garbage decision, absolute peak cowardice. Resign immediately.
Anything the Heartland Institute publishes should never be treated as anything but toilet paper.
I mean, not really. This is actually a non-trivial topic, and true random is a really bad label for what someone actually wants out of a shuffling algorithm.
See the following engineering blog post on the subject: https://engineering.atspotify.com/2014/02/how-to-shuffle-songs/
Data takeouts are non-optional under the GDPR, so I would be very surprised if that happens.
True random shuffle would be a terrible idea. No one wants the same track showing up multiple times in a row, which would not be uncommon in true random shuffle.
WFH means less carbon emissions, less time wasted in traffic, and less time literally putting your life at risk from vehicle collisions.
It speaks volumes that all of these problems are car-related. The whole push for WFH is a massive condemnation of how badly people actually feel about the effects of the car-oriented development that the U.S has been spending so much time championing.
Powered by all-american freedom fries
A business-coded variant you can use if you want is “I don’t have the bandwidth for that”. It’s been effective for me so far.
It was never a strong combat game imo. It’s a fantastic game despite the combat, not because of the combat.