Fatalist_ma

Learning the whole course ahead of time sounds easier said than done. But I definitely recommend pre-learning the next chapter in the course instead of relying on the teacher's explanation. Personally, I could never understand a relatively complicated math concept just by listening to the teacher. I usually need to think about it, draw things, read several different explanations, etc, to really get it. But when I was already familiar with the topic, then I could benefit from another repetition and ask questions if there were some complicated aspects.

Someone could say that, but we know and we can prove that a car is not a plane. An example of a bad plane would be the Wright Flyer.

I remember Bing Chat doing that sometimes in the first days when it was rolled out. Could it be the "temperature" set too high (or interpreted incorrectly) in some instances?

Satelite "internet"? All I have read about is the ability to send emergency text messages. The author goes on a tirade about how you can't browse Bloomberg with a 256kbps internet. Straw man much?

> As per GlobalStar, they are capable of up to 256kbps (32Kbps). This is with optimal, unobstructed conditions and high power and gain antennas.

For text messages, even 256 bps is more than enough, hell, even 2 bps is usable for that.

> The source of this rumor is from Ming Chi Kuo

Ignores that the linked article from Bloomberg does not rely on Ming Chi Kuo and is much more concrete than just "the modem supports a frequency".

> Globalstar believes that over half their revenue will come from terrestrial spectrum licencing.

...

> The most likely path forward, and the one that Globalstar proclaims themselves, is licensing this spectrum for use on a terrestrial basis

...

> The recent meteoric rise in Globalstar’s stock price is almost entirely unwarranted.

??? If you're claiming that the new frequency in Iphones is for terrestrial use, then that validates Globalstar’s own strategy, so how is it unwarranted?

Well it's a finger-sized antenna. Admittedly all I know about antennas is that size matters. An Iphone is bigger than a finger, why is it inconceivable that it could have a comparable antenna on its surface? Also for an Iphone this would be just one rarely-used feature, it could get by with somewhat worse reception and lower bandwidth than a dedicated satellite phone.

Does not look like that was his only metric: "but I'm pretty sure there would have been more total users of the code, likely making the amount shared in the open still greater."

I'm not sure adding more concrete UI elements is the way to go, browsers are too complex as at is, which makes it extremely hard to develop them unless you have as much resources as Google. And what happens after 10 years when new UI trends become popular and we need new ui elements? We don't want to break the web, we can't just remove old stuff, so we'll need to keep adding and adding.

I think a much more important endeavour is to make the browser more extensible,(like what CSS Houdini is trying to do), so you can create any kind of crazy interfaces(without having to abandon css/html completely and drop down to canvas/webgl).

Before clicking I assumed the lamp had a small screen and they were using that screen...