No - banks, factories, post-offices, transportation offices, agriculture all may have different requirements. If every other aspect of life is affected just because an idiot badly studied only schools - that is not called a different time zone but pure madness.
Add a timezone and then they get up an hour later, and thus get more sleep.
Bullshit. Just get the school to open later - as can be and is frequently done at state, district or school level.
Another blatant lie from the article
School summer vacations in India are between April and June
Absolutely false - or rather an illiterate's generalization. Multiple southern states have summer vacations for children from March-May. Kashmir region has a very short summer vacation - and a 45 day winter vacation.
The school day starts at more or less the same time everywhere
Private schools can choose their starting time - unless the time is prohibited by law, or local district regulation. School laws fall under state subject - which means the state is the primary legal entity responsible for creating such laws. None of the states measures 3000 kilometers. 800 km is rarely or maybe never a distance in any direction to any direction in a state - let alone latitudinally.
District collector can order schools to start at times deemed convenient for kids - no district measures more than a few hundred km in any direction. E.g. https://indianexpress.com/arti...
There are many multi-shift schools - which have 2 sessions per day. So within a school, there are kids in multiple "time zones" - e.g. 7am to noon, and 12:30 pm to 5:30 pm.
Ask 10 children in India their school timings, and you will likely get 12 unique answers.
This exchange has been underground, and digging for a while. Ever since you didn't understand after my 3 repetitions that falsifiability of statements is lacking on YOUR part rather than Tesla's.
I am sure you did your best given your mental limitations, but still made a broken point. Think twice before calling something "so much nonsense..." in the future - some people on the internet other than you are not retards.
I said "In other words, your statement is non-falsifiable like most make-believe fantasy bullshit."
You said : "Making up something is not the same as formulating a hypothesis" - while using the word hypothesis for the first time in this exhibition-thread of your mental retardation.
Since then, I have been using the word in the hope of getting through to your ill brain.
I simply said that maybe Tesla was on to something.
Which is non-falsifiable. Almost as useless, as harmful, as provable, as falsifiable and as idiotic as statements like "maybe there is a God".
Nothing hard about that. All problems have simple and wrong solutions - so is yours. What is difficult, voire impossible, is not be an idiot and still call your original hypothesis falsifiable:
... Tesla.... and may well have discovered something that
It won't prove that Tesla had discovered anything like what you hypothesized he did. It might make the doer of the work you suggest discover "something". But it would never tell us whether Tesla had "discovered something that...".
The natural world is full of wonders. There is more between the heavens and the earth than we can imagine in our wildest dream, and the unbelievable damage that religion and mysticism have done to the human race in distracting us away from those wonders into make-believe fantasy bullshit will one day be remembered as the highest crime against humanity.
Yes
Part of it is not wait for refutation to stop believing in something, but wait for evidence to start believing in something. Otherwise the make-believe fantasy bullshit would never be refuted and hence one would never stop believing in it.
and may well have discovered something that
If we don't know this something - the only logical position is that for all practical purposes it does not exist. Yes , it could exist- same as God could exist. But these statements only serve to take us away from real stuff that is not make-believe fantasy bullshit.
In other words, your statement is non-falsifiable like most make-believe fantasy bullshit.
1. It's not golden : the choice is based on shareholding : direct or indirect. Read the law : not that there still can't be loopholes, but they are not as glaring as you point out.
2. Read my post before replying : it is not about the right of a business to exist. It is also not about B&M vs online. It is about taking responsibility of being a retailer if you are a retailer.
1. Either be a seller : only sell your own stuff and take full responsibility / position that a seller takes including warranty, returns, tax position, liability etc. E.g. Amazon could sell only Kindle, Alexa, Prime movies , Fire devices (??)
2. Or "provide a technology platform" to sellers as they call it - and offer no supply chain support to sellers, never sell Amazon branded products, and not have to worry about liability, returns, warranty etc.
Never thought I'll defend Indian government action, but here goes something that might appear to be a defence (it is not) : Amazon is : 1. Refusing responsibility of being a seller when buyer demands the service any seller is required to provide 2. Undercutting the actual brick-and-mortar sellers - not only by its economy of scale but by subsidizing the supply-chain of the "sellers" on its platform. So the actual sellers who are providing the necessary services are shutting shop
All sellers are supposed to choose one of the 2 models : 1. Be a seller : then take all responsibility of being a seller 2. Enabling other sellers : then don't sell your own stuff, and don't subsidize your sellers in any way.
I am not even saying this regulation is the best, or above average, response to the situation. But protectionism it is not.
The word "socialism" definitely does not breed illiberal, totalitarian states : I just pronounced it many times and it had no effect.
Now we come to the meaning : in the US various features of various European countries are ridiculed as "socialism". This includes universal healthcare, state funded higher education, employee rights etc. Clearly many European countries are not illiberal, totalitarian states - hence even the meaning of the word "socialism" does not breed illiberal, totalitarian states.
Now, some meanings of the word socialism could breed illiberal, totalitarian states.
Sure, but malware on the phone is a secondary problem - anyone that has to resort to those tactics is a relatively minor threat to your freedom.
When the operating system (or at least in built software - practically the same thing for most people) is a malware, it is the primary problem;). Almost by the definition of primary.
Android itself wants to track you. Many phone manufacturers want to track you independently of Android. Facebook app nearly certainly tracks you - and cannot be stopped easily. I am not sure how to distinguish between minor and major here - all seem a threat. Especially since there is one major declared leak a month : so one company having my info roughly means anyone could get it next month.
Apple's iOS is better - but losing your privacy could still be very easy with those devices too.
So you are saying GPLv3 is bad, so its usage increased? GPLv2 is less bad, and so its usage decreased? And you are also saying that you have a clue about this subject , or about anything at all ?
Since GPLv3 release GPL began to lose its popularity
GPL does not exist in reality, as a license that can be used - only its specific versions exist.
There is no reason for GPLv2 should or would lose its popularity due to the mere existence of GPLv3. If you meant GPLv3 is not popular, you could have said it. But in that sense, "lose its popularity" does not make any sense because it would never had popularity to lose.
Or you are saying GPLv3 was first popular, and then became unpopular. That cannot be caused by the release of GPLv3 - because it could not have been popular before its own release.
The concept of GPL in itself, is abstract, and makes sense only when you are talking about things common to all, or the guiding principle behind all versions. It cannot gain or lose popularity independent of its specific versions.
Of course, most old projects which were initially GPL will continue to be GPL
There is no "of course" about it if you know what GPL means. Many projects became (or were always) GPLv2 or later releases of GPL. Which means they were automatically dual licensed with GPLv2 and GPLv3 upon release of GPLv3. Some moved to GPLv3.
The phone network has to know where the phone is, but it does not need to tell the phone where it thinks the phone is. Especially in such a manner that then the phone can inform many apps running on the phone about its own whereabouts.
Everyone other than the phone network , who tries to track you based on this information : either from GPS or the phone network / wifi SSID location database - can be fooled using such a hack.
Slashdot Mirror
No - banks, factories, post-offices, transportation offices, agriculture all may have different requirements. If every other aspect of life is affected just because an idiot badly studied only schools - that is not called a different time zone but pure madness.
children on the west coast of India and children on the east coast of India are starting school at the exact same time
1. False - even the summary of this article states that they are "more or less" the same, not exact same time.
2. Even more-or-less the same is wrong - as I explained in this comment : https://science.slashdot.org/c...
Add a timezone and then they get up an hour later, and thus get more sleep.
Bullshit. Just get the school to open later - as can be and is frequently done at state, district or school level.
Another blatant lie from the article
School summer vacations in India are between April and June
Absolutely false - or rather an illiterate's generalization. Multiple southern states have summer vacations for children from March-May. Kashmir region has a very short summer vacation - and a 45 day winter vacation.
The school day starts at more or less the same time everywhere
Private schools can choose their starting time - unless the time is prohibited by law, or local district regulation. School laws fall under state subject - which means the state is the primary legal entity responsible for creating such laws. None of the states measures 3000 kilometers. 800 km is rarely or maybe never a distance in any direction to any direction in a state - let alone latitudinally.
District collector can order schools to start at times deemed convenient for kids - no district measures more than a few hundred km in any direction.
E.g. https://indianexpress.com/arti...
There are many multi-shift schools - which have 2 sessions per day. So within a school, there are kids in multiple "time zones" - e.g. 7am to noon, and 12:30 pm to 5:30 pm.
Ask 10 children in India their school timings, and you will likely get 12 unique answers.
This exchange has been underground, and digging for a while. Ever since you didn't understand after my 3 repetitions that falsifiability of statements is lacking on YOUR part rather than Tesla's.
But I am sure you have your burdens to carry.
I am sure you did your best given your mental limitations, but still made a broken point. Think twice before calling something "so much nonsense ..." in the future - some people on the internet other than you are not retards.
If you can think, of course.
I said "In other words, your statement is non-falsifiable like most make-believe fantasy bullshit."
You said : "Making up something is not the same as formulating a hypothesis" - while using the word hypothesis for the first time in this exhibition-thread of your mental retardation.
Since then, I have been using the word in the hope of getting through to your ill brain.
I simply said that maybe Tesla was on to something.
Which is non-falsifiable. Almost as useless, as harmful, as provable, as falsifiable and as idiotic as statements like "maybe there is a God".
Wow, mental retardation doesn't come much worse than yours! I said YOUR hypothesis , which I quoted twice, is non-falsifiable, not Tesla's.
BTW nor will it tell us whether Tesla had NOT "discovered something that ...".
What's so hard about that?
Nothing hard about that. All problems have simple and wrong solutions - so is yours. What is difficult, voire impossible, is not be an idiot and still call your original hypothesis falsifiable :
It won't prove that Tesla had discovered anything like what you hypothesized he did. It might make the doer of the work you suggest discover "something". But it would never tell us whether Tesla had "discovered something that ...".
Your hypothesis is non-falsifiable. Just like most God theories.
And no-one said it has "equal probability".
The natural world is full of wonders. There is more between the heavens and the earth than we can imagine in our wildest dream, and the unbelievable damage that religion and mysticism have done to the human race in distracting us away from those wonders into make-believe fantasy bullshit will one day be remembered as the highest crime against humanity.
Yes
Part of it is not wait for refutation to stop believing in something, but wait for evidence to start believing in something. Otherwise the make-believe fantasy bullshit would never be refuted and hence one would never stop believing in it.
and may well have discovered something that
If we don't know this something - the only logical position is that for all practical purposes it does not exist. Yes , it could exist- same as God could exist. But these statements only serve to take us away from real stuff that is not make-believe fantasy bullshit.
In other words, your statement is non-falsifiable like most make-believe fantasy bullshit.
Rationing does not solve the problem, it just postpones it. Reducing human population (and thus our environmental footprint) solves the problem
You are rationing population. Or you are rationing survival rights, or rights to leave behind progeny.
What do you know about the situation in India which make you expect to see the problem ?
A few hours ago you deemed yourself qualified to comment on a regulation , of which you did not have the faintest idea.
1. It's not golden : the choice is based on shareholding : direct or indirect. Read the law : not that there still can't be loopholes, but they are not as glaring as you point out.
2. Read my post before replying : it is not about the right of a business to exist. It is also not about B&M vs online. It is about taking responsibility of being a retailer if you are a retailer.
They have 2 options :
1. Either be a seller : only sell your own stuff and take full responsibility / position that a seller takes including warranty, returns, tax position, liability etc. E.g. Amazon could sell only Kindle, Alexa, Prime movies , Fire devices (??)
2. Or "provide a technology platform" to sellers as they call it - and offer no supply chain support to sellers, never sell Amazon branded products, and not have to worry about liability, returns, warranty etc.
Doesn't make sense to me.
What do you know about the market situation that you expect it to make sense to you ? We can start from there.
Explained a bit in this comment , but other points might need explanation for your specific position : https://slashdot.org/comments....
Never thought I'll defend Indian government action, but here goes something that might appear to be a defence (it is not) :
Amazon is :
1. Refusing responsibility of being a seller when buyer demands the service any seller is required to provide
2. Undercutting the actual brick-and-mortar sellers - not only by its economy of scale but by subsidizing the supply-chain of the "sellers" on its platform. So the actual sellers who are providing the necessary services are shutting shop
All sellers are supposed to choose one of the 2 models :
1. Be a seller : then take all responsibility of being a seller
2. Enabling other sellers : then don't sell your own stuff, and don't subsidize your sellers in any way.
I am not even saying this regulation is the best, or above average, response to the situation. But protectionism it is not.
The word "socialism" definitely does not breed illiberal, totalitarian states : I just pronounced it many times and it had no effect.
Now we come to the meaning : in the US various features of various European countries are ridiculed as "socialism". This includes universal healthcare, state funded higher education, employee rights etc. Clearly many European countries are not illiberal, totalitarian states - hence even the meaning of the word "socialism" does not breed illiberal, totalitarian states.
Now, some meanings of the word socialism could breed illiberal, totalitarian states.
Sure, but malware on the phone is a secondary problem - anyone that has to resort to those tactics is a relatively minor threat to your freedom.
When the operating system (or at least in built software - practically the same thing for most people) is a malware, it is the primary problem ;). Almost by the definition of primary.
Android itself wants to track you. Many phone manufacturers want to track you independently of Android. Facebook app nearly certainly tracks you - and cannot be stopped easily. I am not sure how to distinguish between minor and major here - all seem a threat. Especially since there is one major declared leak a month : so one company having my info roughly means anyone could get it next month.
Apple's iOS is better - but losing your privacy could still be very easy with those devices too.
So you are saying GPLv3 is bad, so its usage increased? GPLv2 is less bad, and so its usage decreased? And you are also saying that you have a clue about this subject , or about anything at all ?
You truly have no clue about this subject. This article that you refer to says GPLv3 usage has increased, and GPLv2 has declined.
Since GPLv3 release GPL began to lose its popularity
GPL does not exist in reality, as a license that can be used - only its specific versions exist.
There is no reason for GPLv2 should or would lose its popularity due to the mere existence of GPLv3. If you meant GPLv3 is not popular, you could have said it. But in that sense, "lose its popularity" does not make any sense because it would never had popularity to lose.
Or you are saying GPLv3 was first popular, and then became unpopular. That cannot be caused by the release of GPLv3 - because it could not have been popular before its own release.
The concept of GPL in itself, is abstract, and makes sense only when you are talking about things common to all, or the guiding principle behind all versions. It cannot gain or lose popularity independent of its specific versions.
Of course, most old projects which were initially GPL will continue to be GPL
There is no "of course" about it if you know what GPL means. Many projects became (or were always) GPLv2 or later releases of
GPL. Which means they were automatically dual licensed with GPLv2 and GPLv3 upon release of GPLv3. Some moved to GPLv3.
The phone network has to know where the phone is, but it does not need to tell the phone where it thinks the phone is. Especially in such a manner that then the phone can inform many apps running on the phone about its own whereabouts.
Everyone other than the phone network , who tries to track you based on this information : either from GPS or the phone network / wifi SSID location database - can be fooled using such a hack.
The point is that Stallman made the license business unfriendly to the extent that most companies started to shun GPL
You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. GPLv2 is still available. Linux kernel still uses it.
All freedom is forced freedom. Freedom not to be killed ? Others are forced to not kill you under threat of punishment.