I mean, a 7" screen? Who wants to watch video on a screen that size?
You do realize that people will use it for many things other than video, right? If they were building a portable digital TV, they would probably call it something different, like a portable digital TV.
You would think they would totally go after that market. Removing the phone aspect of it makes it cheaper and doesn't require the monthly fee, sure, but look at what that can do to the business market. Make these things affordable enough so that even a small business can purchase a dozen of them and you're talking about a very sweet tool for a wide variety of uses.
How do you define tablet? I would almost say that my Evo is a tablet. I know it isn't, but that's simply a matter of screen size. Make one a little bigger and that's exactly what it is.
Well since the GF is out of town I figured I would log some overtime while she's gone. I do have school to pay for, not to mention the (hush hush) ring I'm saving up for.
And yea, I would love to take a train, unfortunately I live in the city and work in the country. At least I commute against the grain, as it takes only about 35 minutes to drive there while those going the opposite direction are taking at least an hour.
It's the price you pay for living in the city. On the bright side, I am a five minute walk from the grocery store, nightlife, the park, and pretty much anything else I would want to do.
Please tell me you put as much thought into your landscaping as you did your home itself. It would be a shame to see such a well-thought out house be undermined by planting deciduous trees on the north and evergreens on the south (or some other equally moronic scenario).
In these days when the economy is in rough shape, unemployment is high, and jobs aren't easy to come by, where are people getting all this time to do this stuff?
Personally, between work, school, and girlfriend, I am often at a crossroads where I must only choose two of the three. Girlfriend has been in Norway for over two weeks, and school doesn't start until the 30th, so I've just had work and I still only manage to pull about 50 hours a week. It seems to me there are lot of people who are lucky and have enough free time, or there are a lot of people slacking off in other areas of their life. Hell, it took me 30 minutes just to find a parking spot when I got home at midnight last night.
I also assume your paper map self updates to take into account new routes and new paths.
Seriously? A good USGS topo is going to be more relevant than your typical Google Maps based GPS. They are cheap (~$8 for one grid), water proof, tear proof, and give you a lot more detail than you will find on a little screen. They are also very easy to update yourself. I scribble all kinds of notes on my maps based on what I actually see when I get somewhere. Not to mention they might save your ass from getting shot from wandering onto private land, as they detail BLM, NFS, NPS, and private land.
I go into the backcountry quite often. And while one the reasons I bought a new phone (Evo) was for it's capabilities as a backcountry digital swiss army knife, I have found that I have never needed GPS or a compass to safely navigate A to B to A.
The best thing you can do is to study the map while on your way to the parking area. If you know where you are going, you won't have a need for GPS or a compass because you will already know which direction is which. Get on the trail, stick to the trail, and have easily identifiable landmarks to guide you (mountains, rivers, railroads, etc). If you are headed to the backcountry and require GPS, compass, etc. for navigation, you aren't as prepared as you think and should probably have someone experienced with you.
Here's an idea. Require anyone who wants to go up the mountain to carry insurance sufficient to cover the cost of rescue
Depending on the activity, this is already required in Colorado. You are required to have a fishing license if you want to fish. Part of the fee from the license goes to the Search and Rescue fund and pays for your rescue if you need it. While this is only for fishing, hunting, snowmobile, and boat licenses, most people who go into the backcountry will purchase a fishing license whether they are fishing or not. Of course, it doesn't cover any medical transport expenses, that is separate.
Rivers, like any other finite system, need management. Then there wouldn't be a problem with retaining rainwater....
You might want to do a little reading about how reality works. Colorado's rivers don't just keep flowing all year at full capacity if water isn't used. There are seasons and these seasons dictate water levels. During the winter, for example, water typically freezes because it is cold. It's pretty tough to make frozen water flow through a pipe. Also, the majority of the snow melts off in the spring, which means rivers run high and fast and if the water isn't stored in reservoirs it ends up somewhere else.
There is plenty of literature around that talks about how things work. If you're actually interested in learning something instead of just assuming you understand the situation, go ahead and do some reading for yourself.
It's a first-come first-served system. For the early settlers, they showed up and eventually decided that they needed to plan and develop irrigation systems so that land not encompassing a water way would remain useful.
Imagine a cattle farmer goes and settles some very inhospitable area way up in the mountains and relies on stream water to irrigate the hay. A lot of work goes into setting that up, and if some other guy shows up 20 years later and purchases land upstream from the cattle farmer, how do you stop them from using or otherwise diverting all the water out of the stream to the cattle farmer's determent?
Western water rights go back a long way, and in fact the system we have is an adaptation of the customs practiced here long before any of this land was part of the union. They call it the 'wild west' for a reason, and early settlers figured out how to manage themselves civilly without the need for the federal regulations that were a part of the East for so long.
Government isn't passing the onus onto you, they are trying to prevent you from passing the onus onto everyone else, and at a much higher cost, by mixing.
Well, if you're going to take it a step backwards (perfectly logical, it makes sense), then why not go even further and say the onus of sorting this stuff is being passed on to us by the corporations that sell everything with an excessive amount of packaging?
I know I'm not the only one that despises the hard plastic packages used for many small products. Someone here at work decided that we needed to buy a bunch of flash drives, and proceeded to not only waste money buying them from Best Buy at an absurd markup, but now someone has to spend an hour just taking them out of the packages without slicing their hand open. Man, I hate those damn packages!
And the packaging for food is just as bad. It is absurd how much crap is wrapped around food, though it does seem to be improving.
I don't know if I would call it "pretty messed up", Colorado's water laws are the way they are for a reason. This system has been in place since the 1800's and in pretty unlikely to change. And other than flash floods in the mountains, we don't often see flood stage water levels.
Though, if we receive a much higher than normal snowfall over the winter, and unseasonably warm weather very early, we could run into some flood danger when "mud season" begins (that's what we call the season between Winter and Summer, Spring is a myth).
From a social standpoint, why bother? The homeless are better recyclers than the average person. The cans in the allies around here are picked clean each and every night. Though, I generally just put all the good stuff (cans, bottles) in a separate bag and leave it on the curb. It is usually gone before nightfall.
It isn't so you "have to purchase city water", it has to do with how water rights work. Because Colorado supplies water to something like 18 states, often the water that fills our rivers is already owned by someone who lives in Kansas, Arizona, or wherever. Water rights are based on age, the oldest rights are the best rights. When someone with water rights needs water, they make a call for that water and it gets released from a reservoir. If people collect their own rainwater, they are reducing the supply available to those who already own water rights.
I don't necessarily agree with this concept, but that's how it works. Out of all the things I would do if I could travel back in time, the first thing I would do is buy as many water rights in Colorado as I possibly could.
At my last house, my recycle bin was rarely even emptied. The waste people would refuse to take it because it was on the wrong side of the alley. I was supposed to put it on the opposite side while the houses on the opposite were to put theirs on my side. If that wasn't silly enough, the side where I would leave it was for parking, so I had to block people's cars in if they were to pick it up. Naturally, the people that parked there would move my bin in the morning or evening when they left for work or returned home and it would end up 30 yards down the alley next to someone else's house and not get emptied. I eventually stopped bothering, especially in the winter when there is three feet of snow on the ground.
Because government prefers to pass the onus on to citizens rather than take responsibility. Besides, they already have too much to do. Clearly citizens' time is less valuable than those who get paid to sort garbage.
The problem that net neutrality tries to address is where ISPs charge *providers* for fast access from customers. It's sort of like an extortion racket -- sorry, we're going to make your website's user experience crappy unless you pay up.
Where is this happening? If you tell me that Comcast throttles bittorrent traffic, well, that's a crap example. I like the idea of bittorrent, it's a good way to distribute stuff. Unfortunately, people use it to distribute stuff illegally. Comcast (or others, irrelevant) have every right to make sure illegal activities don't disrupt the network for everyone else. Sure, it may not be popular, but that's just too bad. Don't do illegal stuff if you aren't willing to pay the price.
And yes, there are perfectly legitimate uses for bittorrent. But why should Comcast be regulated so that the minority legitimate users of bittorrent are saved from being unfairly throttled? It seems to me there are better solutions than to blanket regulate everything.
If my ISP is throttling traffic from something I want to use, then I will likely switch service to another. Oh, but everyone says that ISPs are a monopoly, but are they? I have a handful of ISP choices where I live. I know not everyone does, but this isn't because they are monopolies necessarily, it's because it is very expensive to operate an ISP on a scale that is adequate. However, I see that as a short-term problem. Look at how far we have come in just the last 15 years. At one time your choices were limited to AOL, CompuServe, and Prodigy, and all you had was dial-up for access (reasonably speaking). Look at us today. ISPs are all over at a wide variety of speeds. In another 15 years the issue will probably be moot.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, a 7" screen? Who wants to watch video on a screen that size?
You do realize that people will use it for many things other than video, right? If they were building a portable digital TV, they would probably call it something different, like a portable digital TV.
You would think they would totally go after that market. Removing the phone aspect of it makes it cheaper and doesn't require the monthly fee, sure, but look at what that can do to the business market. Make these things affordable enough so that even a small business can purchase a dozen of them and you're talking about a very sweet tool for a wide variety of uses.
How do you define tablet? I would almost say that my Evo is a tablet. I know it isn't, but that's simply a matter of screen size. Make one a little bigger and that's exactly what it is.
Well since the GF is out of town I figured I would log some overtime while she's gone. I do have school to pay for, not to mention the (hush hush) ring I'm saving up for.
And yea, I would love to take a train, unfortunately I live in the city and work in the country. At least I commute against the grain, as it takes only about 35 minutes to drive there while those going the opposite direction are taking at least an hour.
It's the price you pay for living in the city. On the bright side, I am a five minute walk from the grocery store, nightlife, the park, and pretty much anything else I would want to do.
Please tell me you put as much thought into your landscaping as you did your home itself. It would be a shame to see such a well-thought out house be undermined by planting deciduous trees on the north and evergreens on the south (or some other equally moronic scenario).
Mod parent insane.
I'd call that "PoonRod". I don't know, it just has a nice ring to it.
In these days when the economy is in rough shape, unemployment is high, and jobs aren't easy to come by, where are people getting all this time to do this stuff?
Personally, between work, school, and girlfriend, I am often at a crossroads where I must only choose two of the three. Girlfriend has been in Norway for over two weeks, and school doesn't start until the 30th, so I've just had work and I still only manage to pull about 50 hours a week. It seems to me there are lot of people who are lucky and have enough free time, or there are a lot of people slacking off in other areas of their life. Hell, it took me 30 minutes just to find a parking spot when I got home at midnight last night.
Except that SAR is often run by volunteers.
I also assume your paper map self updates to take into account new routes and new paths.
Seriously? A good USGS topo is going to be more relevant than your typical Google Maps based GPS. They are cheap (~$8 for one grid), water proof, tear proof, and give you a lot more detail than you will find on a little screen. They are also very easy to update yourself. I scribble all kinds of notes on my maps based on what I actually see when I get somewhere. Not to mention they might save your ass from getting shot from wandering onto private land, as they detail BLM, NFS, NPS, and private land.
I go into the backcountry quite often. And while one the reasons I bought a new phone (Evo) was for it's capabilities as a backcountry digital swiss army knife, I have found that I have never needed GPS or a compass to safely navigate A to B to A.
The best thing you can do is to study the map while on your way to the parking area. If you know where you are going, you won't have a need for GPS or a compass because you will already know which direction is which. Get on the trail, stick to the trail, and have easily identifiable landmarks to guide you (mountains, rivers, railroads, etc). If you are headed to the backcountry and require GPS, compass, etc. for navigation, you aren't as prepared as you think and should probably have someone experienced with you.
so we could call 999
I thought they changed the number to 0118 999 881 999 119 7253.
Taxes are a heavy burden on my household
At first I read that as, "Texans are a heavy burden..." and I thought, hey, this guy knows what he's talking about!
Here's an idea. Require anyone who wants to go up the mountain to carry insurance sufficient to cover the cost of rescue
Depending on the activity, this is already required in Colorado. You are required to have a fishing license if you want to fish. Part of the fee from the license goes to the Search and Rescue fund and pays for your rescue if you need it. While this is only for fishing, hunting, snowmobile, and boat licenses, most people who go into the backcountry will purchase a fishing license whether they are fishing or not. Of course, it doesn't cover any medical transport expenses, that is separate.
Read
Rivers, like any other finite system, need management. Then there wouldn't be a problem with retaining rainwater....
You might want to do a little reading about how reality works. Colorado's rivers don't just keep flowing all year at full capacity if water isn't used. There are seasons and these seasons dictate water levels. During the winter, for example, water typically freezes because it is cold. It's pretty tough to make frozen water flow through a pipe. Also, the majority of the snow melts off in the spring, which means rivers run high and fast and if the water isn't stored in reservoirs it ends up somewhere else.
There is plenty of literature around that talks about how things work. If you're actually interested in learning something instead of just assuming you understand the situation, go ahead and do some reading for yourself.
I don't know, it seems to be working okay so far.
It's a first-come first-served system. For the early settlers, they showed up and eventually decided that they needed to plan and develop irrigation systems so that land not encompassing a water way would remain useful.
Imagine a cattle farmer goes and settles some very inhospitable area way up in the mountains and relies on stream water to irrigate the hay. A lot of work goes into setting that up, and if some other guy shows up 20 years later and purchases land upstream from the cattle farmer, how do you stop them from using or otherwise diverting all the water out of the stream to the cattle farmer's determent?
Western water rights go back a long way, and in fact the system we have is an adaptation of the customs practiced here long before any of this land was part of the union. They call it the 'wild west' for a reason, and early settlers figured out how to manage themselves civilly without the need for the federal regulations that were a part of the East for so long.
Government isn't passing the onus onto you, they are trying to prevent you from passing the onus onto everyone else, and at a much higher cost, by mixing.
Well, if you're going to take it a step backwards (perfectly logical, it makes sense), then why not go even further and say the onus of sorting this stuff is being passed on to us by the corporations that sell everything with an excessive amount of packaging?
I know I'm not the only one that despises the hard plastic packages used for many small products. Someone here at work decided that we needed to buy a bunch of flash drives, and proceeded to not only waste money buying them from Best Buy at an absurd markup, but now someone has to spend an hour just taking them out of the packages without slicing their hand open. Man, I hate those damn packages!
And the packaging for food is just as bad. It is absurd how much crap is wrapped around food, though it does seem to be improving.
That's why we have reservoirs.
I don't know if I would call it "pretty messed up", Colorado's water laws are the way they are for a reason. This system has been in place since the 1800's and in pretty unlikely to change. And other than flash floods in the mountains, we don't often see flood stage water levels.
Though, if we receive a much higher than normal snowfall over the winter, and unseasonably warm weather very early, we could run into some flood danger when "mud season" begins (that's what we call the season between Winter and Summer, Spring is a myth).
From a privacy standpoint, sure.
From a social standpoint, why bother? The homeless are better recyclers than the average person. The cans in the allies around here are picked clean each and every night. Though, I generally just put all the good stuff (cans, bottles) in a separate bag and leave it on the curb. It is usually gone before nightfall.
Colorado's water laws are probably similar.
It isn't so you "have to purchase city water", it has to do with how water rights work. Because Colorado supplies water to something like 18 states, often the water that fills our rivers is already owned by someone who lives in Kansas, Arizona, or wherever. Water rights are based on age, the oldest rights are the best rights. When someone with water rights needs water, they make a call for that water and it gets released from a reservoir. If people collect their own rainwater, they are reducing the supply available to those who already own water rights.
I don't necessarily agree with this concept, but that's how it works. Out of all the things I would do if I could travel back in time, the first thing I would do is buy as many water rights in Colorado as I possibly could.
At my last house, my recycle bin was rarely even emptied. The waste people would refuse to take it because it was on the wrong side of the alley. I was supposed to put it on the opposite side while the houses on the opposite were to put theirs on my side. If that wasn't silly enough, the side where I would leave it was for parking, so I had to block people's cars in if they were to pick it up. Naturally, the people that parked there would move my bin in the morning or evening when they left for work or returned home and it would end up 30 yards down the alley next to someone else's house and not get emptied. I eventually stopped bothering, especially in the winter when there is three feet of snow on the ground.
Because government prefers to pass the onus on to citizens rather than take responsibility. Besides, they already have too much to do. Clearly citizens' time is less valuable than those who get paid to sort garbage.
Where did I see Brazil? I'm not high. I promise.
They engage in politics. This is an exciting development.
The problem that net neutrality tries to address is where ISPs charge *providers* for fast access from customers. It's sort of like an extortion racket -- sorry, we're going to make your website's user experience crappy unless you pay up.
Where is this happening? If you tell me that Comcast throttles bittorrent traffic, well, that's a crap example. I like the idea of bittorrent, it's a good way to distribute stuff. Unfortunately, people use it to distribute stuff illegally. Comcast (or others, irrelevant) have every right to make sure illegal activities don't disrupt the network for everyone else. Sure, it may not be popular, but that's just too bad. Don't do illegal stuff if you aren't willing to pay the price.
And yes, there are perfectly legitimate uses for bittorrent. But why should Comcast be regulated so that the minority legitimate users of bittorrent are saved from being unfairly throttled? It seems to me there are better solutions than to blanket regulate everything.
If my ISP is throttling traffic from something I want to use, then I will likely switch service to another. Oh, but everyone says that ISPs are a monopoly, but are they? I have a handful of ISP choices where I live. I know not everyone does, but this isn't because they are monopolies necessarily, it's because it is very expensive to operate an ISP on a scale that is adequate. However, I see that as a short-term problem. Look at how far we have come in just the last 15 years. At one time your choices were limited to AOL, CompuServe, and Prodigy, and all you had was dial-up for access (reasonably speaking). Look at us today. ISPs are all over at a wide variety of speeds. In another 15 years the issue will probably be moot.