MRSallee

100%.

"I don't share these values, the person must be mentally ill. Wine is not at all the same thing, because let me explain my values which are obviously universal."

If you think that is contradictory to the original poster, you might think they said something I'm pretty sure they didn't.

I'm not sure why you presented this as contradictory to the post you replied to.

> High prices (demand) attracting speculation (supply) should drive down rents (prices) ... [but they're not]

Should? Then why aren't they?

> new buildings are regulated through zoning and permits.

My guess is that iOS 11 is much more to blame for slowdown that users are experiencing, myself included. Unfortunately, that is unlikely to be resolved -- even if I replace my battery for $30, my iPhone 6 will still be worse than it was in August.

Thanks for elaborating.

> You claim that one device in particular you happened to own has a certain characteristic failure, yet offer no discussion of the n on the issue, distribution, nor anything else really except “well I felt this way”

What I wrote: "For option [c], it’s important to view this hardware crash as a problem unique to these phones. ... Admittedly, I don’t know that it’s unique to this hardware."

I've essentially invited anyone with better knowledge to knock down my posit, while giving my reasoning with the facts that I know.

> Then you claim that thermal throttling is somehow unique to Apple yet every device these days does such thermal management

What I wrote: "unlike any rechargeable device I’ve ever owned — the iPhone 6 and 6+ suffered hardware resets (crashes) when their batteries drop below a certain output"

For starters, this isn't about thermals, as far as I understand the issue Apple was trying to solve. And what I described as unique to the iPhone 6/6s is that the hardware crashes as the battery health degrades. I've owned a lot of rechargeable devices over the years. When their batteries degrade, the battery doesn't last as long. I don't recall that any of them began to experience crashes.

> And when you look at the trade shipping any product, and what defects are considered acceptable... you write as if you have zero experience or visibility into any of these issues.

There's a lot we don't know about this iPhone 6 + battery + slowdown, like at what battery health does Apple begin to slow down phones, how long before users reach that battery health (within warranty?), how can users identify if they're affected by this, and how many devices are actually affected. It is entirely possible that the problem is overstated, and not widespread. It's possible that nearly every device is affected within warranty. Probably somewhere in between.

But none of that is my point. My point is that -- on the assumption that this is a hardware/software design problem unique to these devices, and I invite you to kill this assumption -- resolving the crashing problem by slowing down devices is hostile in that it penalizes consumers for a problem Apple created.

Whether or not Apple alerted users is still missing the point.

That's an easy bet...

What's the relevance?

Also have an iPhone 6. I didn't plan to replace it this year until iOS 11 made it frustrating to use. My primary issue was constant Bluetooth disconnections.

Now I have an Android phone. (Not especially happy about it.)

Yes, you can make an image that compresses to a smaller raster image vs. SVG, and complexity is a good way to do that. Especially possible if your image/logo isn’t just solid colors, but contains gradients or textures.

I would guess, though, that if you make a logo that is larger as an SVG than a compressed raster, you’ve probably made a bad logo. Logos should be simple.

And BBC is funded by British government.

And PBS is funded by US government.

My email preferences have everything disabled, double triple and quadruple checked to make sure, and I still occasionally get an email about one of my FB friends uploading a photo or some shit that is certainly (a) described by the settings as email I should not receive, and (b) not even what a notification should be. “A person with whom you’ve never interacted aside from accepting a friend request said something not about you on their own timeline.” ???

I don't understand why the scammer bothered to ship to an alternate address -- if Amazon is just confirming that the package was delivered and signed for, wouldn't that also occur if delivered to the buyer's address? The buyer would sign for the package before opening it and realizing the camera lens wasn't inside. (The weight difference could be made up with rocks.)

Disclosure: I know almost literally nothing about trading stocks. (The following will likely prove it.)

Seems to me that automation should be a massive benefit to everyone in stock trading, except for the folks whose jobs are directly displaced by it.

The relatively small number of people in this profession command massive salaries, largely because of their position as a bottleneck for financial dealings. They are gate keepers, highly educated gate keepers, and their relative scarcity means that the management of money is really, really expensive.

If algorithms can do the job, well, it's much easier to duplicate an algorithm. Shouldn't automation increase competition, the expertise and leverage of a relatively small and powerful employment sector duplicated and spread out, to the point that the cost of trading stocks becomes essentially zero?

So while my 401k may be run by a human hedge fund manager who's competing against automation, and is likely to lose this "battle against the high frequency traders," shouldn't I hope that my hedge fund manager is replaced by automation, rather than finds a way to beat it (or make it illegal)?