I had the option at work to do either two monitors or one ultrawide. I took the ultrawide, and have never regretted it. You have to use window organization software to use it effectively. I use Spectacle for Mac, it does the job.
To your point, I noticed that chocolate milk cartons have decreased from 1L to 750ML, yet they kept the same price. Further, the 750ML option was not offered before, and the 1L option is not offered now, which adds to the deception.
I find it most frustrating when you go to a shop and there's two things roughly equivalent you want to buy, one of them is $2 for 200 mL and the other is $1.80 for 180 g.
There's every other kind of trickery in the shops to prevent you from being able to assess the relative value of two products, to render those price comparisons redundant (like the fact that the two products are listed, one $/100 g and the other listed $/kg).
I've just moved to Germany, and here it's almost impossible to buy the thing you want — they always seem to subpackage it into segments so that you have to use more than you want and therefore come back. I thought the marketplace was hostile in Australia sheesh.
(But, 750 megalitres is significantly more than 750 litres.)
If they lose this case, do you think it would it leave Facebook a liability for no longer being able to fulfill that contract? I.e. you can’t share my data, now where are my personalized ads that you promised?
IANAL, but I think that clause would become null and void.
User: "hey Facebook where's the personalised ads you promised me?"
Facebook: "that clause was found to be illegal, and we have notified you that it is unenforceable by either party."
Right, and Facebook is arguing that it’s because they have to fulfill a contract. However, GDPR may block them from collecting the data they need to serve personalized ads. This would mean they wouldn’t be able to fulfill the contract.
To phrase my question in another way, would that contract still need to be fulfilled, if they are blocked by GDPR from collecting the data they would need to fulfill it?
1) Cryptocurrency ops are so vastly different from running a social website that I can't even think of any overlap.
2) I hate Facebook as a company, but as a builder/scaler of web apps for many years, I'm continually blown away by the speed and reliability of their website. Their operations are mind-blowing.
The only comparable apps (in terms of scale) are Gmail and YouTube, and Gmail is simpler in certain key areas (e.g. mail delivery isn't millisecond-sensitive for a user).
Cryptocurrency ops are so vastly different from running a social website that I can't even think of any overlap
I know nothing about how cryptocurrency works, but wouldn't social media outage sources like multiple server failures, hurricane, tornado, sliced fiber line, etc... affect the kind of cryptocurrency that Facebook is embarking on?
Or is there something in the "distributed" nature of cryptocurrency that makes it more resilient? Is Facebook using that model, too?
And Google Search. That's actually treated even more specially (compared to GMail and YT) inside Google and it has amazing reliability.
It would be interesting to know more details. I bet results are sometimes incomplete, but somehow Google manages to keep the system correct enough nobody notices a sudden quality drop.
I also understood Search has some special QoS at all levels: from the network to the scheduling of jobs...
I don’t have extensive knowledge of how crypto works, but for 1), most, if not all large-scale applications like FB operate with distributed systems somewhere in the chain (ex. image and video processing), which is the core of how ledgers work, and how mining works.
Their website tech is impressive, I’ll give them that. I still wouldn’t trust them with my money.
