YesNoOk
avatar

QOTD (Read 2804397 times)

Started by Valodim, August 26, 2007, 08:25:30 pm
Share this topic:
Re: QOTD
#16561  September 21, 2018, 07:04:42 am
  • ******
  • (´ー`)ノ
i miss Random Insanity tbh
Re: QOTD
#16562  September 21, 2018, 11:44:13 pm
  • ******
  • [E]
    • Mexico
Quote
If you find this answer offensive, or perhaps not particularly happy about my tone,I'm glad my English is good enough to convey this impression across to you.
Re: QOTD
#16563  September 25, 2018, 03:56:07 pm
  • avatar
  • ******
  • all is love in fair and war
I bet the answer was
"Fukk yu "
Re: QOTD
#16564  September 25, 2018, 04:14:27 pm
  • ******
  • [E]
    • Mexico
it was a chinesse explaining china culture to americans.
Re: QOTD
#16565  September 25, 2018, 10:41:25 pm
  • ****


My eyes have been opened.
Re: QOTD
#16566  September 28, 2018, 06:26:05 pm
  • ******
  • [E]
    • Mexico
Quote
This is tricky to understand. But it is common practice in electronics.

First, let me tell you a story: there was a pizza joint we went to in college. If you ordered one of their named pizzas - say “garbage pizza” with everything - and then asked not to have, say, mushrooms, they charged you $1.50 extra not to have that item.

Wait what?? Didn't they save money by keeping the extra topping? Isn't that unfair?

Well, the cooks can make garbage pizzas without thinking. They know the drill. But if you ask for something special, this slows them down. Worse, if they mess up and make the pizza with mushrooms, you will send it back, and they will have to eat that cost. And so in the larger view, a special request cost them money.

This was my first lesson in the difference between the cost of parts, and the cost of labor, and sets the stage for understanding the complexity of Tesla's solution.

The cost of a product is mostly in paying engineers to design it, and then next in the costs of testing and assembly. The cost of parts can actually be a good deal less than these other costs that are spread over the development and production of a device.

So here's the dilemma in hardware production: how to produce a variety of devices (cars) that have different prices, so they are affordable for a variety of budgets?

This is where things seem to go crazy, but there is a logic to it. My husband worked for over a decade as an egineer in the cellphone industry, and he explained that this is how it works with cellphones too.

You want two devices, say, one that's cheaper, and one that's more expensive. But developing two different devices is twice as expensive.

So you develop only the high end device, go through the (very expensive) certification process (which, for cars, includes providing cars to crash test, plus the cost of doing the tests themselves - very expensive!) And you have only one production and assembly line for this more expensive device.

Then you release two cars: one that is sold above the target price, and one that is sold below.

In short, you charge a higher price on the high end phone, to subsidize the cost of the low end phone.

You limit the features through software, which doesn't require separate hardware design, testing, nor assembly lines.

In some ways, this seems crazy, but it has a certain logic to it. It makes development much much cheaper for both devices, because you get two devices for the cost of developing only one. So the high end device is cheaper, because it's sharing development costs with the low end device. In short, development costs are now half what they would be if you developed two devices. Same for testing.

So though it might seem unfair that the higher end device is even more expensive because it is subsidizing the lower cost device, on the other hand, the other device is funding half of it's development and testing costs - which make the high end device cheaper in the long run.

Why even bother having two differently priced devices? Because making a lower cost device expands the market. And making more devices helps economies of scale - this also lowers the price for both devices, which is good for the high end device as well as the low end one.

So this is what Tesla did: they made two cars that were really the same car.

So just giving the low end car full access to the battery for a lower cost defeats the purpose of amortizing development across two products. It's not at all fair to those who pay the higher price for full functionality. The lower cost device must have lower functionality - because the more expensive device can only be better by having full functionality.

This is a really hard concept for Americans who tend to think in terms of “what do I get??” And not about the broader concept of a shared system. So this kind of logic is very difficult to accept.

But in reality, it is still true: that if you don't sell two different devices by reducing functionality on one, it would increase the costs on the more expensive one - because if you don't expand the market to those who can't afford the more expensive ones, then you lose the benefit of economies of scale, and you can't split the development, testing and assembly costs between the two devices.

So Tesla was generous in releasing that functionality during times of crisis. And brave too, because it revealed this paradox of production, and brought down the wrath of those who don't yet fully understand the complication of making hardware devices.

And educating people on this complex issue is not easy to do in a sound bite. :)

Hope this makes things clear.
Re: QOTD
#16567  October 02, 2018, 07:57:52 pm
  • ******
  • [E]
    • Mexico
Quote
As a competitive chess player, I used to ignore simple games like Tic-Tac-Toe. That is, until an options trader taught me the amazing variant of Bidding Tic-Tac-Toe!

The game sounds simple enough:

Each player starts off with 100 chips.
Each turn (including the first), the players submit a silent bid for how many chips they are willing to spend for the right to make a move.
The bids are revealed and the player who made the highest bid pays that amount of chips to the other player and then makes his play.
Repeat every turn until the conclusion of the game.

If you bid “23” and I bid “15” then your bid wins and you have the right to make the first move.
See? You got to make the first move, but now you only have 77 chips to my 123. That means I have more power in bidding for the next turn, because if you were to ever get below a certain amount of chips (<25) then I could simply bid more than your entire stack 3 times in a row and win by force!

This game gets ridiculously complicated and has inspired computer scientists working on artificial intelligence as well as mathematicians in game theory. Give it a try with a friend some time- it’s enormous fun to play and so complicated that it is not clear at all what the optimal strategy is even after many games.
Re: QOTD
#16568  October 02, 2018, 10:41:16 pm
  • **
  • I am Real Mekanisteru Zero (Mr. Zero)
I am back since too much year out... and nothing change
Yep I like the Draw an other Things.
Re: QOTD
#16569  October 03, 2018, 11:07:21 am
  • ******
Great quote of the day. :P
Re: QOTD
#16570  October 11, 2018, 03:00:38 am
  • *****
  • Gaps? Where we're going, we don't need gaps...
    • USA
    • ricepigeon.neocities.org
https://BLACKLISTED WEBSITE.com/wiki/MUGEN:MUGEN_Database
Quote
Besides himself and his dupes, GarchompMatt can count on the help of a casual contributor known as RicePigeon, a pedophile nutjob who makes pointless edits to little girl characters every single day, what a sweet life.

Too bad a libel suit probably wouldn't be worth it in the long run... jfc
Re: QOTD
#16571  October 11, 2018, 06:56:19 am
  • ****
  • Grammar errors result from not proofreading posts.
    • Canada
I went and read through the whole page.  Holy smokes my sides
Re: QOTD
#16572  October 11, 2018, 07:10:14 am
  • ******
  • 90's Kawaii
  • :thinking:
    • Guatemala
Re: QOTD
#16573  October 11, 2018, 07:38:45 am
  • *****
  • The story begins with who's gonna win
    • USA
What a perfect snapshot of like 6-7 years ago

Both in terms of the stuff clearly vexing them and the fresh off the chan humor
Back from the bellows of hell
Back from the back of a jail in a cell
Back from the common decrees to the common degree
Back to the streets from the East
Back to the belly of beast
Back to the place of my peace
Back to me holding my piece
Anything working disturbing that peace
Will certainly meet the deceased, capiche?
Re: QOTD
#16574  October 12, 2018, 07:00:46 pm
  • ****
  • I bite the faces of people who don't wanna be cool
God, what is wrong with those MUGEN archive kids.

seriously what is wrong with those MUGEN archive kids.

Also us MUGEN elite were clearly right!  Thanks to open source communism allowing the use of sprite packs ripped at an axis and established system coding, the not-elite characters don't do interesting things anymore like sink into the floor during floorbounce, jitter while moving, or infinite people by walking forward and jabbing. Curse you encyclopedia dramatica and the change you brought! And to think I found that shit funny. In fact I bet the people who wrote that used to think it was funny too.

it's because they are already content with what they have done, mugen is not a paying job so as long as the charcter works for a creator that's enough; one's persons crouching while running is another person's change it to pots style.
Re: QOTD
#16575  October 12, 2018, 07:40:45 pm
  • **
  • CPU Purple Heart
    • USA
    • www.dailymotion.com/2a8130871d2742d2f4da3b069


Personally, I found this descriptor funny because it matches identically to how a friend of mine described the place and its regulars.
Re: QOTD
#16576  October 17, 2018, 09:54:08 pm
  • ******
  • [E]
    • Mexico
Quote
When I was 18. I was the only pizza driver wiling to go to the “Bad Side” of town. Mostly because I had to go there after work anyway to buy my drugs so…
Re: QOTD
#16577  October 18, 2018, 11:38:54 pm
  • ******
  • 90's Kawaii
  • :thinking:
    • Guatemala
Quote
Security at the expense of usability comes at the expense of security.
Re: QOTD
#16578  October 19, 2018, 03:36:31 am
  • *****
  • Gaps? Where we're going, we don't need gaps...
    • USA
    • ricepigeon.neocities.org
Brought to you by the Redundant Department of Redundancy.
Re: QOTD
#16579  October 19, 2018, 04:29:44 am
  • ******
  • 90's Kawaii
  • :thinking:
    • Guatemala
It's actually not, it's paradoxical.

The gist of it is that measures that focus on technical security at the expense of user usability lead to unexpected security flaws; e.g. when IT emits draconian guidelines for passwords the average office worker does something retarded like writing down his password on a sticky note on his desktop.
Last Edit: October 19, 2018, 05:35:29 am by Foobs
Re: QOTD
#16580  October 23, 2018, 10:02:36 pm
  • ******
  • [E]
    • Mexico
Quote
Because it’s like 100 years from now a politician saying that his ancestors were jews opressed by the nazis and in genetic exams you find out that he is only 1% jew; and you also find out his ancestors were nazis and killed a lot of jews.