It has to be cheaper than human drivers and compete with other self driving offerings. That said this is definitely a difficult market to break into (at least for now). At the same time, an open source model isn't completely out of the question. Datasets of specific cities can be built pretty easily these days (even if expensive). If that ever happens, self driving will have no added cost.
I don't think it's gymnastics. The last part about being "genuine" is a stretch, but the fundamental point they're making is reasonable or at least worth discussing. It's relevant to the discussions of gambling and the lottery, for example. I don't appreciate Apple and their lock-in (especially the "we're protecting you" marketing) but the case for "the lesser evil" of advertising is worth discussing. I actually want Apple to start pushing ads, not because of the reason given by GP but because it will almost definitely kill Apple. I think they know that and will go only as far as they know they can without giving up their brand which is ultimately their most valuable asset.
because 'knowledge' on its own will not work to wield power over others just by itself. there are other ingredients in ensuring that knowledge can be used as power; these usually look like 'technology'.
I should also say that it's only due to the internet (and its novel aggregation-theory dynamics) that these old attitudes I am ranting against become truly noxious.
In the case of IndexedDB, I haven't looked into it, but Mozilla has the following to say about it:
>Note: IndexedDB API is powerful, but may seem too complicated for simple cases. If you'd prefer a simple API, try libraries in See also section that make IndexedDB more programmer-friendly.[0]
I suppose this project could make development easier by allowing developers to share server-side code? And it has the benefit of already having a large userbase.
Oh wow, I never knew WebSQL was deprecated. And yeah IndexedDB is pretty complicated, I've tried working with the API a few times but always abandoned it for simpler solutions.
>They wondered if such devices would seal off the wonders of technology into a black box: “effortless, opaque, and therefore unquestioned by consumers.”
rings true to me. I think this was and still is a valid concern. At the very least it's a real trade-off. I almost get the feeling that the author in the OP looks down on the knowledge needed to understand machines/technology since it can be replaced by a button. That misses the point entirely though. Taking technology for granted makes you a mindless consumer in my opinion. That's why we're so instinctively disgusted by the population in The Machine Stops. They don't exist in any real sense; they're just the exit nodes of the machine's functions.
Yup. Devs like to think that sales people don't contribute real value and are basically just marketing, and that's true to a degree, but it's also true that sometimes the entire product doesn't contribute real value either. A senior dev building Uber/delivery clone #1745 run by VC funny money is "contributing" the same as a sales person, no matter how many frameworks and algorithms he uses. (Unless, of course, that algorithm is itself contributing to some efficiency in the deliveries.)
>Calendar system: Auto-calendar set at 28 days for February [0]
[0] https://support.casio.com/en/manual/009/qw593.pdf