His face creeps me out so much. I usually try to attack the policies and not the person but it is just too much for me.
It’s like if Jason Bateman was cast in an oddball version of Batman where the Penguin was actually Isaac Asimov.
This feels like something a C-suite came up with to carve out extra profit and had some bean counters crunch the numbers on, fluffed them up a bit and then had the company roll with it on his idea.
I’m usually disappointed by consumer apathy, but from everyone I talk to who has a car with a screen, if they have CarPlay/Android Auto they couldn’t do without it, and if they don’t have it it’s the biggest thing they wish they had.
I’d agree with your first statement if they were getting the boot in the place of a company with honesty, value, integrity, quality and security.
GM is none of those things, and it’s highly unlikely they’ll ever be any of those things.
This is bad news.
I think this is obvious to anyone that has viewed the damage that the extreme weather has brought in recent years
The issue was, is and will continue to be whose pocketbook it’s hurting.
Almost exclusively the damages will be suffered by poor and middle class, and paid out by public coffers while the profits made by NOT making these changes will be private and for the rich.
We’re not going to see any change until this starts hurting the rich.
Do we know why? For Americans, I can see the nihilism of the grunge era affecting the latter part of that group, and possibly having a lasting effect towards political compass.
But I can’t think of a reason of the top of my head for European millennials driving so deep into that side of politics.
They’re counting on people being complacent and just whitelisting.
The problem is, they’re probably right to try the tactic too. People need those dopamine hits.
That economic loss isn’t affecting the people it needs to affect for there to be real change. That’s the problem.
I had a recruiter after me hard one time. They had a company they were trying to grow and had already plucked away a couple of guys from my team.
He offered what he thought was an aggressive offer based on what the other guys said they were making.
I asked about WFH, he said the company preferred people in the office to collaborate. This was my third time asking this, the first two times I told him this was a non-starter, and this offer was to try to go above and beyond that to sway me with dollar signs.
I laid out the costs that were involved: commuting, car, gas, childcare, lunch, etc. and how his aggressive offer still had me coming up behind, and that’s before I even take into account time and comfort lost.
He’s called back again twice, and it’s the same freaking question, “any movement on work from home?”
We all know the answer.
Definitely. Android has tiers, from flagship down.
You can get an Android that surpasses any iPhone in specs and price no problem.
So you get carte blanche to be insufferable because you consider yourself to be a holier than thou messenger with self-assigned credentials?
Complaining about downvotes is a sure fire way to get more downvotes.
But I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the information you’re presenting, so much as the way you’re presenting it.
There’s tons of emotion around news and facts these days and people just want it cut straight without the fat. Don’t tell us how to feel, or why we should feel that way, tell us what the facts are and we’re grown ups, we’ll put our big people clothes on and make up how we feel about it on our own.
Any emotion you put into it is likely to undo any good points you may have made. There’s a time for that, this isn’t it.
It’s basically just their Outlook web app. It offers no extra function, and breaks a LOT of old functionality.
There’s a registry key to turn off the button.
There’s so much we don’t know about the brain, I can’t see implants being anywhere close to a success until the brain is significantly better understood
They were already making their own ARM processors in their phones/tablets/watches and even implemented in some of their pro line of laptops as a security processor. The evolution to make their own computer processors seemed inevitable, especially considering Intel’s products were failing to meet battery and thermal wants from Apple.
It felt exciting for people who pay attention to tech, but it was no more exciting than their prior switch from PowerPC procs to Intel, or from third party ARM in iPhones to their own procs.
It’s still very on brand for Tim Cook as well it allows the company to control even more of the design and manufacturing, which stabilizes their supply flow.
The company also had prior experience with the aforementioned PPC to x86 move and their Rosetta translation layer, which they implemented this time around with Rosetta 2 to great success as well, making most things run near native during the devs switch for their binaries.
I think this could have been smelled in the water for a long while. Tim Cook was trusted to steer the rudder but his specialty is supply chain management, and I don’t think anyone can say he’s done a bad job.
But. On the R&D side I don’t think people could say he’s done a great job.
The ideas have dried up. When you go “safe” at CEO you make money, but you limit your ceiling, which, once again, with Apple is already breaking the mold.
Consumer electronics is saturated. There is little to no breakthrough there anymore.
Evolution is outside that, but outside that might not be in Tim Cook or Apple’s executive suite’s realm anymore.
Slides from 20 years ago.
This is news, yes, especially considering that Apple made a deal with the devil considering its new self-reported bloom as privacy focused.
But news headlines are acting like Apple just said this today, and that is complete headline bait.
And anyone left will be living a live probably not worth living.
That’s not how this works at all.
There are plenty of ways to deal with this, and issue a death penalty to the corporation while not punishing the workers:
Forced turnover of executives and board members (with jail time and high % fines), corporate watchdog for x amount of years
Dissolve the mega-corp into smaller corporations, and/or force all subsidiaries into a planned disengagement from parent company
Bail-out in the form of state ownership by government buying majority stake
In any of the above, or even in a complete mega-corp dissolution the demand doesn’t disappear. If you want to have the argument that these “oh so wonderful stewards of business” are the reason people have jobs in the first place, you can’t ignore that demand is the reason those very same executives have jobs too.
If they tear it down, someone will build something else to replace it.
Listen here, you little shit
Microsoft’s phone link app works with iphones messaging app now.