radarthekat
About
- Username
- radarthekat
- Joined
- Visits
- 317
- Last Active
- Roles
- moderator
- Points
- 8,758
- Badges
- 3
- Posts
- 3,874
Reactions
-
Why Apple's supply chain is prepared for China's coronavirus
Further information:Comparisons:
- Every year an estimated 290,000 to 650,000 people die in the world due to complications from seasonal influenza (flu) viruses. This figure corresponds to 795 to 1,781 deaths per day due to the seasonal flu.
- SARS (November 2002 to July 2003): was a coronavirus that originated from Beijing, China, spread to 29 countries, and resulted in 8,096 people infected with 774 deaths (fatality rate of 9.6%). Considering that SARS ended up infecting 5,237 people in mainland China, Wuhan Coronavirus surpassed SARS on January 29, 2020, when Chinese officials confirmed 5,974 cases of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). One day later, on January 30, 2020 the novel coronavirus cases surpassed even the 8,096 cases worldwide which were the final SARS count in 2003.
- MERS (in 2012) killed 858 people out of the 2,494 infected (fatality rate of 34.4%).
-
Why Apple's supply chain is prepared for China's coronavirus
Here you go, plenty of information:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#age
I read a news report that stated that 15% of confirmed cases result in pneumonia. Well, that’s not surprising considering that “about 80% of those who died were over the age of 60 and 75% of them had pre-existing health conditions such as cardiovascular diseases and diabetes.”
Those numbers match up. Young healthy adults seem to be survived by the course of the virus, which looks to be onset of symptoms+two weeks. Looking at the ramp of the confirmed cases and the delayed ramp of the recoveries, I predicted last week that recoveries would hit 2000 by Saturday, Feb 2nd., when that prediction panned out, conforming to me that recoveries are trailing confirmed cases bu two weeks. And than allowed me to predict for today, Tuesday, Feb 11, recoveries totaling 4000. And that has now panned out. So now I’m predicting recoveries at 10,000 by Friday, Feb 14.
i see news headlines that speak of total confirmed cases and total deaths, but so far none that include recoveries. The media tends to be sensationalist, and not very nuanced in their analysis of the facts. But soon the recoveries will ramp to a number that grabs their attention and it’ll start getting reported on. Recoveries will ramp strongly going forward, with the number of active cases (confirmed minus deaths and recovered) evening out at some point, I think around 60-90k. That’s when the pressure on the medical system levels out, allowing the medical response to scale to catch up. Then we should start to see a leveling out in new confirmed cases while the recoveries continue to ramp for a couple weeks as the majority move through the course of the virus.By mid-March all of the above will have played out and the virus should be mostly contained.
-
Foxconn telling iPhone assembly staff to stay home because of coronavirus
Here's a link to a counter that's refreshed multiple times daily.
https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/85320e2ea5424dfaaa75ae62e5c06e61
I've watched the numbers and it looks like similar to the flu, the virus runs its course in about two weeks. So that means the recovery number is just starting to significantly ramp this week (it's gone from about 500 on Sunday to over 1700 today. As its slope points upward and matches the slope of the confirmed cases graph, we will see a leveling off in the number of active cases, I'm calculating around 60,000-90,000, with just as may people recovering daily as are contracting the virus. That should occur in about two weeks. After that, efforts to control the outbreak should begin to yield positive results, reducing the growth rate of new infections, now about about 16%/day and eventually seeing it die down as the weather turns warm,
-
FBI again asks Apple to unlock iPhones belonging to suspected shooter
FBI (to ACME Safe): This new safe you’re manufacturing is impenetrable.
ACME Safe: That’s for noticing. And thanks for being a long-time customer.
FBI: Yes, but, this new model, with the capability to totally destroy all documents inside, it’s giving us some trouble. We have a warrant to search a home and it’s got one of these new models in it. And we can’t get into it. If we tamper with it, cause any vibration to it or get the combination wrong after three tries, it’ll destroy its contents. We need you to open it for us.
ACME Safe CEO: I’m sorry, I can’t help you with that. The safe is doing exactly what we designed it to do.
FBI: You can’t help? Or you won’t help?
ACME Safe CEO: We can’t help. We have no more means of opening that safe than you do. We designed it that way. Why should we design a backdoor capability to open our customer’s safes? Who are we to retain that privilege? What if one of our employees went rogue? What if that backdoor means of opening any of the safes we sold got out into the general domain? It would be a disaster, spelling the end of our business?
FBI: Okay, we understand. We’ll just sue you to force you to incorporate a backdoor means to open these safes. As it stands, they’re too safe. Maybe we’ll even urge Congress to make it law.
ACME Safe CEO: Are you listening to yourself?
-
Jimmy Iovine reveals what's wrong with streaming music, talks Steve Jobs
You answered most of the issues you raised. I’ll try to put it more succinctly, using other professions as an example.dysamoria said:Am I the only one that read his quotes in a Joe Pesci voice?
Let me see if I understand this:
The streaming companies, in order to make more (any?) money, want to sidestep the problem of paying licensing to the record companies for all the content they own, right...?
They want their own content ownership, which they think will come from amongst all the unsigned independent artists, so they can have “original” content on their streaming services...?
In effect, the streaming companies want to become “recording” companies, and basically repeat the whole cycle of the recording industry having a say as to what artists make and how it’s marketed...?
Is that what Iovine is saying?
I don’t know where he gets off saying that it’s a great time to be a musician. It’s a great time to be a person that wants to make music (because the tools are plentiful and even free), but this is the opposite of a good time to expect to earn an income off of being a musician.
There’s just no money in it. Even live performers struggle to make an income, and they put out way more work just for the little they make (travel, lodging, marketing, practice, maintaining a live band, maintenance of equipment and vehicles, etc).
There are countless artists who make great stuff, but they have zero exposure to an audience that wants their work. This is despite the claim of full and direct access to the world.
Iovine sounds like yet another lucky entrepreneur who thinks the examples of success he’s been surrounded by are proof of how it can work for everyone and anyone (survivorship bias).
The music software and hardware business really lives off of the money coming from hobbyists, not paid musicians or studios. The stats collected by developers have indicated as such. The number of hobbyists far surpasses the number of people making a living off of making music (and the corporations make the bulk of the money possible, all on licensing of content).
There’s no access point for the average artist. No path to having an income because there’s more than enough content available and the average artist doesn’t have the marketing might of a corporation (which they waste on 100% owned manufactured content, instead of finding interesting artists out in the world).
Half of my own music library is music that was OFFERED for free online by the musicians that made it, and mostly because they saw no way to make money with it. They wanted someone to at least hear it, so they gave it away.
I struggle constantly with getting myself to work on my music simply because of the reality that it will never provide me with any financial income. There’s no audience. The music business (and our dying economy & culture) have seen to that. People don’t even really value music much at all.
Music is not a rare commodity. With all the commercially manufactured music constantly being pushed out on the radio, malls, restaurants, TV, and every other place with speakers, music is not a compelling item to seek out. Music has become homogenous, and the culture does not value uniqueness. They’re taught not to, by popular culture manipulators (ie marketing).
Blah blah blah, who cares. I’m just one of thousands of artists who will permanently be stuck without an audience for, or an income from their art, struggling to afford just barely subsisting in my life, let alone being able to afford BEING a musician.
It is NOT a good time to be an artist.
Last comment: Visual artists are in the same spot.In baseball or soccer, there’s not much room at the top. How many Major League Baseball players are actively playing each season. One thousand? Those guys get the big bucks, and there’s not much money left for the millions who also love and play the game.But while it’s clear that baseball as a profession offers enormous income at the top, it’s also recognized that there’s a huge air gap between the relatively few who get to play at those levels and everyone else. With millions upon millions passionate about the game, and those same millions willing to play for free due to their love of the game and their drive to compete, we don’t hear the same level of frustration about the majority not being able to make a living playing baseball.It’s almost as though musicians, who presumably are musicians because they have a similar level of passion about music as people do about baseball, don’t understand that if you’re doing something that a huge portion of the population would do for free, you can’t reasonably expect to be able to make a living off it.You should, in fact, not be surprised that there forms a market for that product that parallels the markets for other endeavors huge numbers of humans are passionate about and willing to engage in for no pay. Like sports. A small number of superstars showing off the game at its highest level, inspiring the rest to emulate. Does the world need a million top-paid baseball players to showcase the game? It apparently does not. And that’s the role of top athletes, when you think about it. To showcase their sport. You need more than one, because they need competition at their level, but you don’t need more than a few dozen. And so what has evolved? Yup, a market that supports a few dozen top Olympic skiers, a few dozen top body builders (we’re talking the ones who get the big bucks) a few dozen major league baseball teams, football teams, soccer teams, nascar teams, formula one teams, etc. It would be inefficient to have a world where there were tens of thousands of top baseball players. You just don’t need that many to showcase the sport and inspire kids around the world to dream and find an empty lot to get some exercise in.And so it is with music. There are relatively few, at any given time, active at the top of each genre, showcasing that genre and making the big bucks.All others better be sufficiently passionate to make their music for free or for less than required to make a living. Because the world has spoken, has arranged the market as it has and just doesn’t afford the vast majority a means to make a living as musicians. You may think otherwise, but I’ll offer you this simple mind experiment. Imagine if all the money takes in by the record labels, which artists have long complained they don’t get a fair share of, magically had gone into the artist’s pockets. So now all the money made in music goes to the artists who make it. After marketing g expenses, etc, honestly accounted for. How many artists would that support with a decent living? Pick a number. And what percent of those who dream about being a musician, spend money in instruments and equipment, travel to gigs, etc, would still be left without sufficient income to support themselves? The vast majority is the answer. More than half the kids I grew up with, significantly more than half, had the dream. Music is so fundamental to being human, the market will always be flooded at any level of income with aspiring musicians. And baseball players. The lights and the cheering crowds are seductive. But someone has to do all the other jobs that make the world function. Not many complain there’s no money to be made as an electronics engineer. Because the need for that greatly creeds the need for musicians at all levels, and so there’s both more money going into the engineering trades and it’s more evenly distributed. That’s just how the world gets structured.
