For the one benefit of your initial landing possibly being inline with the prevailing wind, you're adding dozens of safety issues, inefficiencies, and implementation issues.
As a thought experiment, this circular runway is interesting. But for any other purpose than the one you pointed out, it doesn't have much use. I can envision approaches that will take the plane around most of the circumference of the runway before making the long trek to the hanger as well.
This is great and all during the day and in clear weather, but constantly changing approach vectors means you can't have any approach lights unless you have a ring of lights around the whole ring that extends at least an additional 1000 ft. So your "3km" footprint for the whole airport is now about 5km.
All of your points are excellent. I'm going to assume that with multiple planes approaching, that we'll need multiple color approach lights. "502 Heavy, your approach color is fuschia."
Circular runways are a half-baked idea. And like all half baked ideas, it creates more problems than it solves.
I find it surprising that on this website in particular that so-called techies are complaining about getting the chance to hack their OS, to be able to have a hackable OS.
Time for a rereading of "The Cathedral and The Bazarr", children...
For myself at least, I want to know how to work the Operating system, not hack it. The difference between working with your computer, and working to get it to work.
I can't speak for the grandparent post, but for me, that's how it is for Linux. I like what it DOES for me, and I like that it isn't backed by any singular for-profit company that wants to display ads on my machine or mine my personal data for profit.
That's a big part of it. I also do enjoy digging around in the computer a bit.
My whole issue is not with Linux itself, but some of the zealots. In many respects, they are like the Microsoft shills, only blessed with more technical knowledge and less communication skills.
Friend fisted is putting on an example. I had a distro problem, snd first it's because I didn't do some simple thing, then he gets defensive about it. And I think he doesn't even know. Regardless, after the People writing the code fixed the distro, I suddenly became smart again.
If/when Linux becomes completely point-and-click or touch-screen / voice only input for settings and servicing, it'll finally reach desktop and tablet ubiquity. Android got a lot of things right that Linux has yet to figure out... Android is technically Linux w/ its kernel, but it's definitely not the same OS as Ubuntu... and it really shows from its market share in everyday user interface land.
Well, it's tablets and phones against computer type computers.
The terminal has its place, but it should be a last resort. Windows and Macs have GUIs for just about every setting under the sun.
Minor quibble - I probably spend half my time in MacOS in the Terminal. I have so many files and file operations to deal with, and the Unix file operations are a metric shitload better than trying to do it with a GUI.
I love an OS when it works like I want it to, but I hate that Linux takes little care in catering to average, modern computer users that are not IT workers. Things should just work, and when the don't work, they should be easy to fix w/ point and click.
So much depends on what you are doing. My better half has been on Linux Mint for 2 years now, does her own maintenance, and doesn't even know what Terminal is. For myself, I'm doing some pretty intensive things in both MacOS and Linux, so I don't mind, and even enjoy it. That being said, we should be able to do most functions in an OS without going into Terminal - it is not 1999 any more.
Unfortunately for you, configure will tell you what dependency is missing. On stdout or stderr. Usually the last line. Try reading it. If you need the actual program that was run to probe for the lib, including the exact compiler invocation that was used (protip: you rarely need that), that goes to config.log. Protip: search the file for obscure keywords like 'error' or 'fail'.
That said, I fail to see how your comment relates to mine except in that you brought up a good (though trivial) example of what i meant when i said that IMO the one "lovable" thing about unix is that sufficiently competent users can usually help themselves out of trouble. If it weren't for this, I wouldn't be using it because I could get a better consumer experience elsewhere.
Your reply is proving my point.
The reason that I had problems in both cases was not in my compiling the software, not in telling me of any missing dependencies, not in my not reading the readmen files. There was an issue with the distro that made what I was trying to do impossible. A software error, as it were
Neither of these programs would ever work untill the distro was corrected. Dead in the water.
But back to the first point. You did a fine job of emulating these guys responses. First you pull the condescending What I should have done to make it work card.
When it was not possible for it to work under that distro.
After the distro was repaired by the writers. I could use gparted just like it is supposed to work, and the software I needed compiled and worked just like it was supposed to work.
And as a side note, I trust you are unaware that using the term "protip" is downright condescending? If not, year it is. It's a smug way of saying "Pay attention stupid asshole". Perhaps you just didn't know.
Okay, next, you take offense at a part of my reply that was just making mention that some folks aren't blessesd with the social graces or communication skills. I wasn't even referring to you!
Oh... wait.... after reading your response, turns out that I was referring to at least your type. Now score the trifecta and tell me that it was my fault that the Ubuntu Mate people had an error in their distro. Ciao, me hearty chachalaca.
That makes me wonder, why exactly and for what do you "love" Linux, if you're unable to help yourself when problems arise?
You can't possibly "love Linux" for it's polished user experience or anything, because that just doesn't exist. So what is it?
Not trying to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
For many things, I like the control of the experience. I like that I'm not having to deal with Microsoft. I much prefer using Unix and Unix-like commands. I like that my wife, who stopped using her Windows 8 touch screen laptop after a month because it was so awful to use, now does her own maintenance on her Linux Mint install. Lots of things to like. And in general, I don't have much problem with programs, its when I do, the responses to my questions can be rude and condescending.
i've been an average linux user since mid 90's. constant command line use may have been necessary back then but not so for last decade. use computer to pay bills, email, ebook reading, internet surfing exclusively. joe sixpack may disdain the command line but i find it more efficient that graphical mode to use in administering my laptops in most situations.
Surely. I don't have an issue with the command line at all. My problem is when people - presumed experts - jump to completely wrong conclusions when someone has a problem, and proceed to demean the person. One instance was I was having a problem resizing a partition using gparted in Ubuntu Mate. despite many attempts, I couldn't get it to work correctly. When asking the question, and speculating that the distro might have a problem, the answer was that I was a stoopid noob (which I'm not) Then a few weeks later, an update that fixed the problem came out.
I think they take it very personally if you say something is wrong with their beloved OS.
"One group I have to deal with has twice now come out like crocodiles on a wildebeest to me when I reported a problem."
Do you have a link to these wildebeest posts in responce to your reporting a problem with a distro?
I know you'll call it a refusal to provide a cite, but I still have to work with that group, so I'd rather not.
The goal is to do work, not simply get the software to work.
For avid GNU/Linux heads, the goal is to do work by getting the software to work, unencumbered by enforced dependence on one or more companies that may decide to irrevocably change the software or deny service in the future. This helps protect the future of getting work done. Thus, they like the open source and the self-compiling, etc.
Meanwhile, The people who have the same hardware on their other system are producing already, while the Linuxgeek is trying to step through dependency hell and seemingly ejoying it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a Linux lover, just willing to point out a shortcoming instead of strutting around like its a right of passage.
Compiling is fine. But it should be a.configure, make, and sudo make install process, not sit there and wonder why the program won't start, or getting some cryptic message about truncated line. or whatever else. It isn't 1999 any more, and if the best an OS can do is the 1999 experience, it isn't much of an operating system. But I know better, its a great OS, just one where the get off my lawn crowd has too much sway.
And it really shouldn't be people ranting about what an incompetent asshole someone is, only to be proven completely wrong, then refusing to admit that they were wrong.
As much as I like Linux, a fair number of its zealots are jerks.
What do you mean no new ideas? What about beauty and the beast (now with newly GAY characters)?
There...fixed that for you....
There is many a chuckle to be had when peopel become enraged about some gay characters in a story about bestiality. P
Looks like we see what the homophobes are actually into.
Being a Linux-distro though, expect to need to tinker / fix something, especially after upgrades. No distro completely do away with the dependency/configuration-hell introduced by complexities of the package managers.
It's so bad I'm tempted to recommend not upgrading unless when you really need to.
My wife has been using Linux Mint for 3 years now, and never had an update break anything. Usually the updates fix issues.
Because then it wouldn't be leet enough for them and they wouldn't be able to pick up chicks with their hax0r terminal skillz.
This is one of the things that annoys me too.
Ain't that the truth! As much as I love Linux, when I have a problem, it becomes a real pain in the ass.
One group I have to deal with has twice now come out like crocodiles on a wildebeest to me when I reported a problem. In both cases, I've reported problems with updated distros and their software, and was called stupid, to go learn how to use Linux because it was obvious I never used it before, mismanaging my dependencies, and on and on. Then the distro producers put out a new distro. And it works. I was right, there was an issue with the distros - although the software should be more forgiving. Crickets chirping except for one guy who still said it was my fault.
The thing that is sadly hilarious is that this software comes out for Windows, OSX and Linux.
The first two, you click and install, and get to work. The Linux version is hours of screwing around. I enjoy compiling software, but mystery dependencies and inconsistent installs is a real pain in the ass.
And exactly like these folks want it to be. They like 1999, and don't want to leave it. The goal is to do work, not simply get the software to work.
Otherwise, Mint with Snynaptic to hit the software repositories is pretty good. If the software you need can be picked up through the repositories, you can bypass the ancient computing hell.
That's wonderful. I don't know that the technology ready people of Singapore makes this a slam dunk for success though.
And this is hardly cutting edge anyhow. People are building their own person carrying drones in their backyards. The problem isn't technology.
One of the first thoughts that came to mind is that given the terrible inefficiency of drones, what happens when there is a big backup. A lot of people heading to one place. Hover time will suck up battery power, so unless we accept crashes as part of the price of this technology, these things are going to have to land someplace that isn't the place where the people want to go.
As well, imagine the ground conditions underneath 50 of these things in hover mode. The same thing can happen if they mandate droneport platforms on every building.
I don't see the technology of building the drones as a big deal at all, other than being willing to put up with the heavy power demands of the things. There can be a scale on the drone that calculates the weight of the passengers and their packages, and disables the flight if there is too much weight for the length of the trip. That must be taken into account. As well, drone breakdowns are inherently different than a ground based vehicle. That Taxi pulls over to the side of the road, and you have some pissed off passengers. The drone augers into the road, and the passengers might not fare quite so well.
The biggest problem is that this is a really bad solution to a city human transport problem.
Don't you think that living in a country that has the most expensive "treatment industry", and before Obama basically no "health care" as in the sense of "making it possible for everyone to actually consult a medical" is rather ridiculous?
What is so complicated in simply looking how other countries doe it, e.g. France, Denmark or god forbid China? And copy the good parts?
How one can be against healthcare and claim to live in a first world country is beyond me.
Don't worry, we're going to slip into second world status in a few years.
Here's the big problem the Rpublicants have though. Once the Kenyan Terror baby got Romneycare passed and enacted, removing it became very, very hard.
After having 8 years to come up with a better plan, the Republicans not only didn't come up with a better plan, they came up with a plan that was so awful, so jacked-ass evil, that couldn't support it. Those old jokes made years ago about the Republican plan being "Die Quickly Please" wasn't far off the mark.
And the more intelligent among them knew it. And that is why Ted Cruz tried his desperation filibuster to actually stop the Government a few years back. Because once you start something like Romneycare, its really hard to turn back. All you can do is tweak it.
One of the completely messed up parts of the situation is that prior to Romneycare, we were headed toward a mutant version of universal healthcare.
Poor people and the uninsurable were using Emergency Rooms as healthcare. The last year of my father's life, I was graced to spend a lot of time in emergency rooms. I noticed a lot of people who were obiously not wealthy in the emergeny room, and none of them looked like they were having an actual emergency. I asked the doctor attending my father about this, and he told me they were poor people who couldn't afford treatment. I asked how they paid, and he said they didn't.
Not much later, I listened to a report on Emergency room healthcare. So here's how it worked. uninsured people use Emergency rooms as basic healthcare, without a lot of choice. This is the most expensive type of medicine, and the American version tops the list.
But they don't pay, because they simply don't have the money.
But the Hospital needs paid for the service. So the entire cost is distributed to everyone else's bills. Which gets billed to insurance companies, who then raise their rates. The rates rise, and more people drop off the insured rolls because they can't afford it, and businesses drop insurance because the copay is too high. My wife's employer was paying around 20 K a year for insurance in 2010, but he couldn't do anything about it because of pre-existing conditions. It was either pay that much or be uninsured.
So what we wer having was a good old fashioned positive feedback loop. As more people became uninsured, they used the emergency rooms, which caused rates to continue to go up, which caused more people to become uninsured, and on and on.
And why does one group remain so steadfast against a normal healthcare system? Because the insurance industry has enough money to pay them a lot of money to be against it.
From experience, I find that what you are likely doing is not tracking your purchases at all which is a perfectly valid approach. All of my purchases were the right decision at the time.
Have no idea why you would determine the veracity of my claim from your personal experience. My wife and I track every penny.
The credit card living started after going through purchases years ago when I first had a corporate card and had to reconcile for my whole group. It was pretty surprising how often that card was hacked. It also kept people in line. So I just transferred the concept to looking at every purchase to my own cards. I have one for basic living expenses, one for materials purchases, and a gasoline discount credit card. So each month, I go over the statements and if the spending gets out of line I know what to ease up on. In the end, I know exactly how much I spent for fuel, I know exactly how much I spent for food, I know exactly how much I spend on vacation, and entertainment. Then I get some money back at the end of the year.
I do understand that most people don't keep any track at all. That's why when they get into financial trouble, they are often shocked to see how they spend money when they start trying to keep track of expenditures.
My methods might seem odd, but you might be surprised at just how well they work.
I have a statement every month that tells me what and where I've spent my money. I can also use those purchases to show where I was at at the time if need be.
Mmm-hmm. Well, if you can't keep track of your spending, I suppose that'd be a reason to want to have others do it for you. I don't have that problem, personally, so it's difficult for me to emphasize with your use case.
Of course I can keep track of my spending. I just hve a nice form that someone else puts together for me. And if by some chance you actually are keeping track of your spending to the exact penny, you are in extremely rarified air, because very few do. So first off, I'm pretty skeptical, but congrats if you do. The word is empathize btw, but might have been spell check.
BTW, I also get about 2K back every every year on a cashbck card. Since everyone is paying the same except at some of those cutrate cash gas stations, why not?
As for needing to show where you were... who do you need to show this to? The very fact that you think you need to show it to someone is worrisome, and speaks more to the problem than any solution.
Nonsense.So many Slashdotters are much buttsore about being tracked. I turn that around by having myself tracked at all times. I always have an alabi if needed. Now that being said, I don't do anything particularly illegal, maybe go 56 mph in a 55 zone, so I use their tools for my own purposes. If for some reason someone wanted to know where I was, I can tell them. I can prove it. You don't like it? Tough.
Why would you worry about your purchases being tracked?
Because the government thinks it's perfectly okay to directly violate the constitution that authorizes its existence, that's why.
Ah, I see. A Sovereign Citizen.
Because the government is trying to look at the people's persons, houses, papers and effects without warrants, that's why. Because the government will, if given a chance, interfere with personal and consensual choices it has absolutely no ethical reason to concern itself with, that's why. Because the government runs a system of unjust gulags, driven by a manifestly corrupt legal system, which one should avoid with great care, that's why.
A famous man once said thou art one paranoid mutha!
Sorry dear Soverign one, but your time has come and gone. It isn't 1840. There's just no way to get along in this world without being tracked. Closest you can come is to live in a compound in Idaho, with no Social security number, deal only in barter, and nothing else, but even then you'll be watched because people who do that sort of thing tend to be a tad unhinged.
I'm pretty surprised that you are brave enough to even get on Slashdot. Even AC's can be found out if there is a good enough reason. Someone who is violating your sovereignty is probably reading your post as we write it.
It's also hard to track cash purchases, whereas it is trivial to track electronic ones.
Ermagherd! Of course its easy to track them. That's one of the reasons I live on my credit card. I have a statement every month that tells me what and where I've spent my money. I can also use those purchases to show where I was at at the time if need be.
Why would you worry about your purchases being tracked?
Also it's pretty hard for hackers to steal the money I have in my sock drawer
You people and your stupid fiat currency! I barter, the only way to transfer goods. Got any cows? I'll trade you three sheeps and a goat for a good milch cow.
I don't know what the answers are and I don't know what is going to happen but it simply can't look like the world you are envisioning. It violates far to much of what little we do know about human nature and economics.
Note - this is not disagreeing with you, just conversation.
And it certainly cannot look like the one we have now. If we have a world with almost no one working, we won't have anyone to buy the stuff the robots produce. A crawl to the bottom as it were.
What is the use of a robotic assembly line that can produce widgets at half the cost of a human line, if there are only 5 percent of humanity that can purchase the widget?
I just had a ridiculous thought of a board meeting where the suits are sitting around and one says "There is a huge untapped market for our product out there - but how do we get money into people's hands so they can buy our stuff?" The so called job creators being forced to create jobs so that someone will buy their stuff.
Some other thoughts are that humanity might undergo a lengthy and slow contraction as people die off unreplaced. If we cannot break out of the concept of work or die, this is pretty close to what is going to happen. A Welfare state won't work if 90 percent of people are on it. Then again, neither will a capitalist or any other 'ist.
We might get rid of them quickly though. What might start out as racial reassignment ie, "send 'em back to where they came from!" might work for a few years, but eventually all the systems will overload.
Perhaps people will be removed from the population after reaching a certain age. Perhaps there will be forced sterilization, and only the working will be allowed to reproduce.
I suspect however, that we will solve this the old fashioned way. With warfare. We will probably gleefully torch the earth, and let the survivors if any, pick up the pieces. At that point, the robots will be pretty moot to survival. What good are smartphones to people who have been bombed back to the stone age? As a pretty smart guy once said, "I know not what weapons World War 3 will be fought with, but World War 4 will be fought with sticks and stones."
The glimmer of hope is that similar doomsday scenarios have been trotted out after every something something revolution, and by and large, life has been made better. Hopefully this will too.
Slashdot Mirror
For the one benefit of your initial landing possibly being inline with the prevailing wind, you're adding dozens of safety issues, inefficiencies, and implementation issues.
As a thought experiment, this circular runway is interesting. But for any other purpose than the one you pointed out, it doesn't have much use. I can envision approaches that will take the plane around most of the circumference of the runway before making the long trek to the hanger as well.
This is great and all during the day and in clear weather, but constantly changing approach vectors means you can't have any approach lights unless you have a ring of lights around the whole ring that extends at least an additional 1000 ft. So your "3km" footprint for the whole airport is now about 5km.
All of your points are excellent. I'm going to assume that with multiple planes approaching, that we'll need multiple color approach lights. "502 Heavy, your approach color is fuschia."
Circular runways are a half-baked idea. And like all half baked ideas, it creates more problems than it solves.
I find it surprising that on this website in particular that so-called techies are complaining about getting the chance to hack their OS, to be able to have a hackable OS.
Time for a rereading of "The Cathedral and The Bazarr", children...
For myself at least, I want to know how to work the Operating system, not hack it. The difference between working with your computer, and working to get it to work.
Everyone needs to be sure to tighten one's safety belt before approaching the cliff.
All of us who identify as Dissociative Personality gender are offended.
I'm trying to keep track here. Do we have to remove Gorean from the Gender list now?
I can't speak for the grandparent post, but for me, that's how it is for Linux. I like what it DOES for me, and I like that it isn't backed by any singular for-profit company that wants to display ads on my machine or mine my personal data for profit.
That's a big part of it. I also do enjoy digging around in the computer a bit.
My whole issue is not with Linux itself, but some of the zealots. In many respects, they are like the Microsoft shills, only blessed with more technical knowledge and less communication skills.
Friend fisted is putting on an example. I had a distro problem, snd first it's because I didn't do some simple thing, then he gets defensive about it. And I think he doesn't even know. Regardless, after the People writing the code fixed the distro, I suddenly became smart again.
If/when Linux becomes completely point-and-click or touch-screen / voice only input for settings and servicing, it'll finally reach desktop and tablet ubiquity. Android got a lot of things right that Linux has yet to figure out... Android is technically Linux w/ its kernel, but it's definitely not the same OS as Ubuntu... and it really shows from its market share in everyday user interface land.
Well, it's tablets and phones against computer type computers.
The terminal has its place, but it should be a last resort. Windows and Macs have GUIs for just about every setting under the sun.
Minor quibble - I probably spend half my time in MacOS in the Terminal. I have so many files and file operations to deal with, and the Unix file operations are a metric shitload better than trying to do it with a GUI.
I love an OS when it works like I want it to, but I hate that Linux takes little care in catering to average, modern computer users that are not IT workers. Things should just work, and when the don't work, they should be easy to fix w/ point and click.
So much depends on what you are doing. My better half has been on Linux Mint for 2 years now, does her own maintenance, and doesn't even know what Terminal is. For myself, I'm doing some pretty intensive things in both MacOS and Linux, so I don't mind, and even enjoy it. That being said, we should be able to do most functions in an OS without going into Terminal - it is not 1999 any more.
Unfortunately for you, configure will tell you what dependency is missing. On stdout or stderr. Usually the last line. Try reading it. If you need the actual program that was run to probe for the lib, including the exact compiler invocation that was used (protip: you rarely need that), that goes to config.log. Protip: search the file for obscure keywords like 'error' or 'fail'.
That said, I fail to see how your comment relates to mine except in that you brought up a good (though trivial) example of what i meant when i said that IMO the one "lovable" thing about unix is that sufficiently competent users can usually help themselves out of trouble. If it weren't for this, I wouldn't be using it because I could get a better consumer experience elsewhere.
Your reply is proving my point.
The reason that I had problems in both cases was not in my compiling the software, not in telling me of any missing dependencies, not in my not reading the readmen files. There was an issue with the distro that made what I was trying to do impossible. A software error, as it were
Neither of these programs would ever work untill the distro was corrected. Dead in the water.
But back to the first point. You did a fine job of emulating these guys responses. First you pull the condescending What I should have done to make it work card.
When it was not possible for it to work under that distro.
After the distro was repaired by the writers. I could use gparted just like it is supposed to work, and the software I needed compiled and worked just like it was supposed to work. And as a side note, I trust you are unaware that using the term "protip" is downright condescending? If not, year it is. It's a smug way of saying "Pay attention stupid asshole". Perhaps you just didn't know.
Okay, next, you take offense at a part of my reply that was just making mention that some folks aren't blessesd with the social graces or communication skills. I wasn't even referring to you!
Oh... wait.... after reading your response, turns out that I was referring to at least your type. Now score the trifecta and tell me that it was my fault that the Ubuntu Mate people had an error in their distro. Ciao, me hearty chachalaca.
That makes me wonder, why exactly and for what do you "love" Linux, if you're unable to help yourself when problems arise?
You can't possibly "love Linux" for it's polished user experience or anything, because that just doesn't exist. So what is it?
Not trying to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
For many things, I like the control of the experience. I like that I'm not having to deal with Microsoft. I much prefer using Unix and Unix-like commands. I like that my wife, who stopped using her Windows 8 touch screen laptop after a month because it was so awful to use, now does her own maintenance on her Linux Mint install. Lots of things to like. And in general, I don't have much problem with programs, its when I do, the responses to my questions can be rude and condescending.
i've been an average linux user since mid 90's. constant command line use may have been necessary back then but not so for last decade. use computer to pay bills, email, ebook reading, internet surfing exclusively. joe sixpack may disdain the command line but i find it more efficient that graphical mode to use in administering my laptops in most situations.
Surely. I don't have an issue with the command line at all. My problem is when people - presumed experts - jump to completely wrong conclusions when someone has a problem, and proceed to demean the person. One instance was I was having a problem resizing a partition using gparted in Ubuntu Mate. despite many attempts, I couldn't get it to work correctly. When asking the question, and speculating that the distro might have a problem, the answer was that I was a stoopid noob (which I'm not) Then a few weeks later, an update that fixed the problem came out.
I think they take it very personally if you say something is wrong with their beloved OS.
"One group I have to deal with has twice now come out like crocodiles on a wildebeest to me when I reported a problem." Do you have a link to these wildebeest posts in responce to your reporting a problem with a distro?
I know you'll call it a refusal to provide a cite, but I still have to work with that group, so I'd rather not.
The goal is to do work, not simply get the software to work.
For avid GNU/Linux heads, the goal is to do work by getting the software to work, unencumbered by enforced dependence on one or more companies that may decide to irrevocably change the software or deny service in the future. This helps protect the future of getting work done. Thus, they like the open source and the self-compiling, etc.
Meanwhile, The people who have the same hardware on their other system are producing already, while the Linuxgeek is trying to step through dependency hell and seemingly ejoying it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a Linux lover, just willing to point out a shortcoming instead of strutting around like its a right of passage.
Compiling is fine. But it should be a .configure, make, and sudo make install process, not sit there and wonder why the program won't start, or getting some cryptic message about truncated line. or whatever else. It isn't 1999 any more, and if the best an OS can do is the 1999 experience, it isn't much of an operating system. But I know better, its a great OS, just one where the get off my lawn crowd has too much sway.
And it really shouldn't be people ranting about what an incompetent asshole someone is, only to be proven completely wrong, then refusing to admit that they were wrong.
As much as I like Linux, a fair number of its zealots are jerks.
I get a bit upset when they tinker with a classic tale to just be politically correct, or controversial, etc.
The old characters were just fine as they were.
Hot woman fucks a bull. Yeah - a real classic.
There...fixed that for you....
There is many a chuckle to be had when peopel become enraged about some gay characters in a story about bestiality. P Looks like we see what the homophobes are actually into.
Being a Linux-distro though, expect to need to tinker / fix something, especially after upgrades. No distro completely do away with the dependency/configuration-hell introduced by complexities of the package managers.
It's so bad I'm tempted to recommend not upgrading unless when you really need to.
My wife has been using Linux Mint for 3 years now, and never had an update break anything. Usually the updates fix issues.
Because then it wouldn't be leet enough for them and they wouldn't be able to pick up chicks with their hax0r terminal skillz.
This is one of the things that annoys me too.
Ain't that the truth! As much as I love Linux, when I have a problem, it becomes a real pain in the ass.
One group I have to deal with has twice now come out like crocodiles on a wildebeest to me when I reported a problem. In both cases, I've reported problems with updated distros and their software, and was called stupid, to go learn how to use Linux because it was obvious I never used it before, mismanaging my dependencies, and on and on. Then the distro producers put out a new distro. And it works. I was right, there was an issue with the distros - although the software should be more forgiving. Crickets chirping except for one guy who still said it was my fault.
The thing that is sadly hilarious is that this software comes out for Windows, OSX and Linux.
The first two, you click and install, and get to work. The Linux version is hours of screwing around. I enjoy compiling software, but mystery dependencies and inconsistent installs is a real pain in the ass.
And exactly like these folks want it to be. They like 1999, and don't want to leave it. The goal is to do work, not simply get the software to work.
Otherwise, Mint with Snynaptic to hit the software repositories is pretty good. If the software you need can be picked up through the repositories, you can bypass the ancient computing hell.
How is that a problem. Normal people do not want to do this.
Because the guy wants to use a computer, and he asked about Linux.
And this is hardly cutting edge anyhow. People are building their own person carrying drones in their backyards. The problem isn't technology.
One of the first thoughts that came to mind is that given the terrible inefficiency of drones, what happens when there is a big backup. A lot of people heading to one place. Hover time will suck up battery power, so unless we accept crashes as part of the price of this technology, these things are going to have to land someplace that isn't the place where the people want to go.
As well, imagine the ground conditions underneath 50 of these things in hover mode. The same thing can happen if they mandate droneport platforms on every building.
I don't see the technology of building the drones as a big deal at all, other than being willing to put up with the heavy power demands of the things. There can be a scale on the drone that calculates the weight of the passengers and their packages, and disables the flight if there is too much weight for the length of the trip. That must be taken into account. As well, drone breakdowns are inherently different than a ground based vehicle. That Taxi pulls over to the side of the road, and you have some pissed off passengers. The drone augers into the road, and the passengers might not fare quite so well.
The biggest problem is that this is a really bad solution to a city human transport problem.
> despite having one of the most expensive health care systems.
Not "one of" but "the" most expensive healthcare system by 100% increase from the next most expensive. Canada's.
Here's a nice citation: https://www.statista.com/chart...
Don't you think that living in a country that has the most expensive "treatment industry", and before Obama basically no "health care" as in the sense of "making it possible for everyone to actually consult a medical" is rather ridiculous? What is so complicated in simply looking how other countries doe it, e.g. France, Denmark or god forbid China? And copy the good parts? How one can be against healthcare and claim to live in a first world country is beyond me.
Don't worry, we're going to slip into second world status in a few years.
Here's the big problem the Rpublicants have though. Once the Kenyan Terror baby got Romneycare passed and enacted, removing it became very, very hard.
After having 8 years to come up with a better plan, the Republicans not only didn't come up with a better plan, they came up with a plan that was so awful, so jacked-ass evil, that couldn't support it. Those old jokes made years ago about the Republican plan being "Die Quickly Please" wasn't far off the mark.
And the more intelligent among them knew it. And that is why Ted Cruz tried his desperation filibuster to actually stop the Government a few years back. Because once you start something like Romneycare, its really hard to turn back. All you can do is tweak it.
One of the completely messed up parts of the situation is that prior to Romneycare, we were headed toward a mutant version of universal healthcare.
Poor people and the uninsurable were using Emergency Rooms as healthcare. The last year of my father's life, I was graced to spend a lot of time in emergency rooms. I noticed a lot of people who were obiously not wealthy in the emergeny room, and none of them looked like they were having an actual emergency. I asked the doctor attending my father about this, and he told me they were poor people who couldn't afford treatment. I asked how they paid, and he said they didn't.
Not much later, I listened to a report on Emergency room healthcare. So here's how it worked. uninsured people use Emergency rooms as basic healthcare, without a lot of choice. This is the most expensive type of medicine, and the American version tops the list.
But they don't pay, because they simply don't have the money.
But the Hospital needs paid for the service. So the entire cost is distributed to everyone else's bills. Which gets billed to insurance companies, who then raise their rates. The rates rise, and more people drop off the insured rolls because they can't afford it, and businesses drop insurance because the copay is too high. My wife's employer was paying around 20 K a year for insurance in 2010, but he couldn't do anything about it because of pre-existing conditions. It was either pay that much or be uninsured.
So what we wer having was a good old fashioned positive feedback loop. As more people became uninsured, they used the emergency rooms, which caused rates to continue to go up, which caused more people to become uninsured, and on and on.
And why does one group remain so steadfast against a normal healthcare system? Because the insurance industry has enough money to pay them a lot of money to be against it.
And now you know - the rest of the story.
From experience, I find that what you are likely doing is not tracking your purchases at all which is a perfectly valid approach. All of my purchases were the right decision at the time.
Have no idea why you would determine the veracity of my claim from your personal experience. My wife and I track every penny.
The credit card living started after going through purchases years ago when I first had a corporate card and had to reconcile for my whole group. It was pretty surprising how often that card was hacked. It also kept people in line. So I just transferred the concept to looking at every purchase to my own cards. I have one for basic living expenses, one for materials purchases, and a gasoline discount credit card. So each month, I go over the statements and if the spending gets out of line I know what to ease up on. In the end, I know exactly how much I spent for fuel, I know exactly how much I spent for food, I know exactly how much I spend on vacation, and entertainment. Then I get some money back at the end of the year.
I do understand that most people don't keep any track at all. That's why when they get into financial trouble, they are often shocked to see how they spend money when they start trying to keep track of expenditures. My methods might seem odd, but you might be surprised at just how well they work.
Mmm-hmm. Well, if you can't keep track of your spending, I suppose that'd be a reason to want to have others do it for you. I don't have that problem, personally, so it's difficult for me to emphasize with your use case.
Of course I can keep track of my spending. I just hve a nice form that someone else puts together for me. And if by some chance you actually are keeping track of your spending to the exact penny, you are in extremely rarified air, because very few do. So first off, I'm pretty skeptical, but congrats if you do. The word is empathize btw, but might have been spell check.
BTW, I also get about 2K back every every year on a cashbck card. Since everyone is paying the same except at some of those cutrate cash gas stations, why not?
As for needing to show where you were... who do you need to show this to? The very fact that you think you need to show it to someone is worrisome, and speaks more to the problem than any solution.
Nonsense.So many Slashdotters are much buttsore about being tracked. I turn that around by having myself tracked at all times. I always have an alabi if needed. Now that being said, I don't do anything particularly illegal, maybe go 56 mph in a 55 zone, so I use their tools for my own purposes. If for some reason someone wanted to know where I was, I can tell them. I can prove it. You don't like it? Tough.
Because the government thinks it's perfectly okay to directly violate the constitution that authorizes its existence, that's why.
Ah, I see. A Sovereign Citizen.
Because the government is trying to look at the people's persons, houses, papers and effects without warrants, that's why. Because the government will, if given a chance, interfere with personal and consensual choices it has absolutely no ethical reason to concern itself with, that's why. Because the government runs a system of unjust gulags, driven by a manifestly corrupt legal system, which one should avoid with great care, that's why.
A famous man once said thou art one paranoid mutha!
Sorry dear Soverign one, but your time has come and gone. It isn't 1840. There's just no way to get along in this world without being tracked. Closest you can come is to live in a compound in Idaho, with no Social security number, deal only in barter, and nothing else, but even then you'll be watched because people who do that sort of thing tend to be a tad unhinged.
I'm pretty surprised that you are brave enough to even get on Slashdot. Even AC's can be found out if there is a good enough reason. Someone who is violating your sovereignty is probably reading your post as we write it.
It's also hard to track cash purchases, whereas it is trivial to track electronic ones.
Ermagherd! Of course its easy to track them. That's one of the reasons I live on my credit card. I have a statement every month that tells me what and where I've spent my money. I can also use those purchases to show where I was at at the time if need be.
Why would you worry about your purchases being tracked?
Also it's pretty hard for hackers to steal the money I have in my sock drawer
You people and your stupid fiat currency! I barter, the only way to transfer goods. Got any cows? I'll trade you three sheeps and a goat for a good milch cow.
I don't know what the answers are and I don't know what is going to happen but it simply can't look like the world you are envisioning. It violates far to much of what little we do know about human nature and economics.
Note - this is not disagreeing with you, just conversation.
And it certainly cannot look like the one we have now. If we have a world with almost no one working, we won't have anyone to buy the stuff the robots produce. A crawl to the bottom as it were.
What is the use of a robotic assembly line that can produce widgets at half the cost of a human line, if there are only 5 percent of humanity that can purchase the widget?
I just had a ridiculous thought of a board meeting where the suits are sitting around and one says "There is a huge untapped market for our product out there - but how do we get money into people's hands so they can buy our stuff?" The so called job creators being forced to create jobs so that someone will buy their stuff.
Some other thoughts are that humanity might undergo a lengthy and slow contraction as people die off unreplaced. If we cannot break out of the concept of work or die, this is pretty close to what is going to happen. A Welfare state won't work if 90 percent of people are on it. Then again, neither will a capitalist or any other 'ist.
We might get rid of them quickly though. What might start out as racial reassignment ie, "send 'em back to where they came from!" might work for a few years, but eventually all the systems will overload.
Perhaps people will be removed from the population after reaching a certain age. Perhaps there will be forced sterilization, and only the working will be allowed to reproduce.
I suspect however, that we will solve this the old fashioned way. With warfare. We will probably gleefully torch the earth, and let the survivors if any, pick up the pieces. At that point, the robots will be pretty moot to survival. What good are smartphones to people who have been bombed back to the stone age? As a pretty smart guy once said, "I know not what weapons World War 3 will be fought with, but World War 4 will be fought with sticks and stones."
The glimmer of hope is that similar doomsday scenarios have been trotted out after every something something revolution, and by and large, life has been made better. Hopefully this will too.
Oh no they'll have to make better printers, how terrible for the consumer ...
Most consumers want rock bottom prices, which is how Lexmark got where they are today.