It is not that simple, I am afraid. I love Osmand, but it still has a long way to go. Searching for street names in cities that have been divided into districts - there are numerous examples in Germany (try Munich) and apparently Russia - is broken, offline routing fails more than it works. I enjoy the map display, and with an online routing service it is quite useful, but as a purely offline solution Osmand is not ready yet.
You're suggesting a 15" 1366x768 that weighs 5.4 pounds and is made of plastic. A Macbook Air is a 13" 1440x900 that weighs 2.96 pounds and has a metal case. [...]
Disregarding the weight, I have seen an MBA go dead after a drop from a common work desk, while my ThinkPad T-60, bought refurbished, has survived 4 years in emergency services and disaster relief. I have stopped counting the drops and bangs. The case is scratched, of course, and the keyboard looks its part. But nothing is broken, deformed or lost its functionality. So I suggest you look beyond the mere material of a laptop at how it performs in the real world.
This comes up quite often in this discussion. The only current mainstream desktop OS available for x86 that will not run on anything but a Mac is OS X. And that is not due to the technical superiority of Macs but legal restrictions Apple has put on it.
[...] only without the inevitable commercial conflicts of interest that would arise from such a secular gathering.
The rally was sponsored by a rabbinical group, Ichud Hakehillos Letohar Hamachane, that is linked to a software company that sells Internet filtering software to Orthodox Jews.
Not Germany, the single most retarded court in the whole of Germany. Hamburg is to copyright suits what Texas is to patent suits. The decision will almost certainly be struck down in the next round. They virtually always are.
If we only ever built technology that appeared immediately useful for at least 95% of the population we would still be trying to figure out how to transport messages across long distances without using a horse.
[...] Where a culture does not deny or even promotes something, be it slavery or the theft of intellectual property, that culture defines itself. Ancient Greece was a culture, in part, of slavery. China is a culture, in part, of theft.
Where a culture does not deny or even promotes something that it does not know or that it does not deem wrong, that culture is defined by other cultures who have those concepts and deem them wrong. Ancient Greece was in retrospect from our enlightened point of view a culture of slavery, because we have a concept of slavery, and this is seen as a bad thing because we, in our society, deem slavery bad. China is a culture of theft when it comes to "intellectual property" because we see it that way.
That's like saying the Somali pirates aren't pirates because there's nothing in their culture that makes it wrong. There shouldn't have to be laws for people not to steal, and people who steal are thieves whether there's a law saying so or not.
Laws are dependent on culture. Here in Germany we have a law that explicitly makes it a felony to deny the Holocaust. We also have laws (and would be willing to put up more if loopholes arose) that require services like Google StreetView to erase or blur out individually identifiable information - faces, number plates and, upon request from the owner, even whole buildings - from photographs. Both examples are rooted in our nation's history. Our neighbours may very well shake their heads over our "silly" laws. And we would not force our regulations on them. But we expect everyone to respect those laws when they are in or deal with our country.
So if China does not have a notion of legally guaranteed monopolies on ideas it is up to them and no-one else to decide whether copying a film or album or software constitutes thievery. And believe me, Chinese culture does have quite a good idea of what constitutes theft and how to punish people for it. You may remember the case of Wu Ying?
The books have been "free" for the students in the sense that they did not have to pay directly for them, but the schools certainly paid a lot for them, and because of copyright restrictions altering the material or reusing parts of it has been a minefield, with publishers having grown increasingly litigious over the last years. The initiative provides the books free in both senses (free beer and free speech) to the schools so they only pay for the actual costs they incur for distribution - almost nothing for e-books, a reasonable amount for print runs - and are free to use the content in (almost) any way they see fit.
Yes, along with the cost of food, clothing, mobility, energy, education and everything else. We should make everything cheaper, that would instantly solve the problem. Oh, wait, it would not. Because lower prices mean lower profits, which in turn mean lower wages, which in turn mean lower purchasing power, which is where we are now.
Our (as in: everyone but the poorest backwater countries) whole economic system is modeled on assumptions that may have worked in the 60ies but that are outdated. We rely on growth to sustain this astoundingly wasteful pyramid scheme. As soon as growth slows our economies falter. Growth is the single most misunderstood and misapplied concept in economics. Ever.
That is the point: A shortage of employees does not automatically drive salaries up. The low pay and bad (by comparison to your standard office job) working conditions are the prime reason for the massive shortage. Employers could pay more and improve conditions to attract more workers, but that would lower their profits - or, in the case of state-run services (like police and most of education) or industries where prices are heavily regulated by the state or other entities and subsidised through taxes (emergency services, nursing homes), cost everyone a little more taxes, which in turn lowers everyone's spendable income, which in turn cuts a little into the profits of everyone else.
One example that slipped my mind in my first post is cleaning companies: They essentially work as a cartel. Pay is about the same everywhere. Each company is desperately looking for employees, but they still will not offer more money than their competition. Instead they systematically overwork their existing staff - which does not have any real alternative than to swallow it, since the other companies are just as bad.
As to the question how they have enough time for a second job: We have laws in place that regulate maximum working hours per week in many professions. And to preempt any complaint about that: A lot of them serve for the protection of not just the employee but also the customers. You do not want your bus driver or paramedic to be on the end of a 16 hour shift at the end of an 80 hour week when you need their services. You really don't. Also having few people work long hours creates less jobs than having more people work shorter hours, so even longer hours would not solve any problems. So people have to work on the side since they cannot do sufficient hours on their day job and the hours there do not pay enough to support oneself, let alone a family.
uigrad's nice cozy theory that an overabundance of jobs somehow magically improves working conditions is just that: a theory. It works in those few industries where there is enough money to throw around on employees without losing profits from the start. Looking at Chinese sweat shops something tells me this is not even the case in his/her example. It is a very naive view on capitalism. One that may hold water in a purely academic discussion about an ideal capitalistic market, but one that does not survive a reality check.
[...] The jobs will not get better until there are as many jobs available as there are people to fill them.
Oh really? That must be why here in Germany all of our 'social' fields - from the police to emergency services to fire departments to kindergartens to schools to hospitals to nursing homes to... - are going through the worst all around shortage of employees of all levels of qualification since WWII, and of the people who do work there a substantial and steadily growing number needs to work a second job on the side just to keep themselves afloat. Yeah, your model works incredibly well...for the employers.
Since its foundation? Do you even know what the EU is? Socialist is pretty much the least applicable term. It is, first and foremost, a trade market. Everything else it does is "collateral damage", aimed at stabilising said market.
Why should you ever need to cite a Wikipedia article? Or the EB, for that matter? Their articles are based on scientific publications, and those you should cite. An encyclopedia can only ever serve as a reference, as you rightly called it yourself, not as a source. It condenses years or sometimes decades worth of scientific research into a five minute read and translates it into terms that a layperson can make sense of with little or no prior knowledge, using only other entries as references. Unless you are writing a paper on an encyclopedia, you should never cite one.
Wine differs significantly from a virtual machine:
You do not need a Windows license. Windows 7 Home Premium starts at 57 € for OEM/system builder, 124 € for retail version. Professional and Ultimate go for around 200 €.
A VM is a full operating system, so it needs drivers, updates etc., in addition to updates for the applications you want to run. Under Wine you only have to deal with the latter yourself, the rest is handled by your distro's automatic updater.
Integrating a VM seamlessly into your desktop is quite a hurdle and can only go so far in my experience. Under Wine my applications are almost native. Sharing files and doing other magic works transparently and without much manual intervention.
Wine does have its flaws, and many applications are a lost cause. But my experience so far has been that if it works, it rocks.
A terrorist who knows he has a 50% chance to be uncovered while trying to hijack a plane may prefer to simply blow up the queue in front of the body scanners.
Which is why 58 countries have capital punishment and we have been hearing a lot lately about countries from a certain corner of the world respecting theshit out of this right to live. Oh, I am sorry, what was your point again?
The majority of animal rights activists do not want to abolish the eating of animals. They just want to see them treated as humanely as possible: No unnecessary pain, no killing for fun or sport (as in TFA), no medical experiments, acceptable living conditions. Is that so wrong? Do living creatures who are proven to be capable of feeling pain and distress not have a right to be treated fairly?
[...] I can guarantee there was no danger posed to anyone on that highway [...]
TFA does not state exactly how close the shooters were to the highway, but if they were in visible range their mere presence, waving guns and shooting in the direction of the passing vehicles, could easily have been enough to cause an accident. Similarly a model helicopter crashing onto a car or slamming into the front of a lorry is quite a shot from "no danger posed to anyone". Disasters have sprung from lesser things, you know.
Dedicated barcode scanners may still be required in places like high rack warehouses where the barcodes are too far away for a camera to reliably pick up. One such place I frequently pick up parts from uses gun-shaped laser scanners so that codes can be scanned from distances up to 10 meters away. Try doing that with your tablet/smart phone camera. Also hardware scanners, in my limited experience, locate and read the codes incredibly fast and reliably. The camera-driven apps I have so far played with on my Android phone take their time and often miss codes if they are recorded at larger angles. They sure have their uses, but in some commercial settings the drawbacks of the camera-driven solutions may well add up to a $ amount in additional work or time that justifies buying hardware scanners.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh dear, I smell an attitude on this blog.
It is not that simple, I am afraid. I love Osmand, but it still has a long way to go. Searching for street names in cities that have been divided into districts - there are numerous examples in Germany (try Munich) and apparently Russia - is broken, offline routing fails more than it works. I enjoy the map display, and with an online routing service it is quite useful, but as a purely offline solution Osmand is not ready yet.
You're suggesting a 15" 1366x768 that weighs 5.4 pounds and is made of plastic. A Macbook Air is a 13" 1440x900 that weighs 2.96 pounds and has a metal case. [...]
Disregarding the weight, I have seen an MBA go dead after a drop from a common work desk, while my ThinkPad T-60, bought refurbished, has survived 4 years in emergency services and disaster relief. I have stopped counting the drops and bangs. The case is scratched, of course, and the keyboard looks its part. But nothing is broken, deformed or lost its functionality. So I suggest you look beyond the mere material of a laptop at how it performs in the real world.
It will run any OS you like.
This comes up quite often in this discussion. The only current mainstream desktop OS available for x86 that will not run on anything but a Mac is OS X. And that is not due to the technical superiority of Macs but legal restrictions Apple has put on it.
[...] only without the inevitable commercial conflicts of interest that would arise from such a secular gathering.
The rally was sponsored by a rabbinical group, Ichud Hakehillos Letohar Hamachane, that is linked to a software company that sells Internet filtering software to Orthodox Jews.
Oh, I am sorry, what was your point?
Not Germany, the single most retarded court in the whole of Germany. Hamburg is to copyright suits what Texas is to patent suits. The decision will almost certainly be struck down in the next round. They virtually always are.
[...] Ellison failing to have an answer offhand to a technical question is not a failing. [...]
It is when the whole bloody lawsuit - or what is left of it - rests on just this one question.
How exactly is Google in on this?
If we only ever built technology that appeared immediately useful for at least 95% of the population we would still be trying to figure out how to transport messages across long distances without using a horse.
The reality is so objective, actually, that it seems to be a non-issue in those cultures. Nice talking to you.
[...] Where a culture does not deny or even promotes something, be it slavery or the theft of intellectual property, that culture defines itself. Ancient Greece was a culture, in part, of slavery. China is a culture, in part, of theft.
Where a culture does not deny or even promotes something that it does not know or that it does not deem wrong, that culture is defined by other cultures who have those concepts and deem them wrong. Ancient Greece was in retrospect from our enlightened point of view a culture of slavery, because we have a concept of slavery, and this is seen as a bad thing because we, in our society, deem slavery bad. China is a culture of theft when it comes to "intellectual property" because we see it that way.
That's like saying the Somali pirates aren't pirates because there's nothing in their culture that makes it wrong. There shouldn't have to be laws for people not to steal, and people who steal are thieves whether there's a law saying so or not.
Laws are dependent on culture. Here in Germany we have a law that explicitly makes it a felony to deny the Holocaust. We also have laws (and would be willing to put up more if loopholes arose) that require services like Google StreetView to erase or blur out individually identifiable information - faces, number plates and, upon request from the owner, even whole buildings - from photographs. Both examples are rooted in our nation's history. Our neighbours may very well shake their heads over our "silly" laws. And we would not force our regulations on them. But we expect everyone to respect those laws when they are in or deal with our country.
So if China does not have a notion of legally guaranteed monopolies on ideas it is up to them and no-one else to decide whether copying a film or album or software constitutes thievery. And believe me, Chinese culture does have quite a good idea of what constitutes theft and how to punish people for it. You may remember the case of Wu Ying?
The books have been "free" for the students in the sense that they did not have to pay directly for them, but the schools certainly paid a lot for them, and because of copyright restrictions altering the material or reusing parts of it has been a minefield, with publishers having grown increasingly litigious over the last years. The initiative provides the books free in both senses (free beer and free speech) to the schools so they only pay for the actual costs they incur for distribution - almost nothing for e-books, a reasonable amount for print runs - and are free to use the content in (almost) any way they see fit.
I am running a large number of my Steam purchased games on Linux through Wine. So yes, I do need that beefy GPU.
Yes, along with the cost of food, clothing, mobility, energy, education and everything else. We should make everything cheaper, that would instantly solve the problem. Oh, wait, it would not. Because lower prices mean lower profits, which in turn mean lower wages, which in turn mean lower purchasing power, which is where we are now.
Our (as in: everyone but the poorest backwater countries) whole economic system is modeled on assumptions that may have worked in the 60ies but that are outdated. We rely on growth to sustain this astoundingly wasteful pyramid scheme. As soon as growth slows our economies falter. Growth is the single most misunderstood and misapplied concept in economics. Ever.
That is the point: A shortage of employees does not automatically drive salaries up. The low pay and bad (by comparison to your standard office job) working conditions are the prime reason for the massive shortage. Employers could pay more and improve conditions to attract more workers, but that would lower their profits - or, in the case of state-run services (like police and most of education) or industries where prices are heavily regulated by the state or other entities and subsidised through taxes (emergency services, nursing homes), cost everyone a little more taxes, which in turn lowers everyone's spendable income, which in turn cuts a little into the profits of everyone else.
One example that slipped my mind in my first post is cleaning companies: They essentially work as a cartel. Pay is about the same everywhere. Each company is desperately looking for employees, but they still will not offer more money than their competition. Instead they systematically overwork their existing staff - which does not have any real alternative than to swallow it, since the other companies are just as bad.
As to the question how they have enough time for a second job: We have laws in place that regulate maximum working hours per week in many professions. And to preempt any complaint about that: A lot of them serve for the protection of not just the employee but also the customers. You do not want your bus driver or paramedic to be on the end of a 16 hour shift at the end of an 80 hour week when you need their services. You really don't. Also having few people work long hours creates less jobs than having more people work shorter hours, so even longer hours would not solve any problems. So people have to work on the side since they cannot do sufficient hours on their day job and the hours there do not pay enough to support oneself, let alone a family.
uigrad's nice cozy theory that an overabundance of jobs somehow magically improves working conditions is just that: a theory. It works in those few industries where there is enough money to throw around on employees without losing profits from the start. Looking at Chinese sweat shops something tells me this is not even the case in his/her example. It is a very naive view on capitalism. One that may hold water in a purely academic discussion about an ideal capitalistic market, but one that does not survive a reality check.
[...] The jobs will not get better until there are as many jobs available as there are people to fill them.
Oh really? That must be why here in Germany all of our 'social' fields - from the police to emergency services to fire departments to kindergartens to schools to hospitals to nursing homes to... - are going through the worst all around shortage of employees of all levels of qualification since WWII, and of the people who do work there a substantial and steadily growing number needs to work a second job on the side just to keep themselves afloat. Yeah, your model works incredibly well...for the employers.
Since its foundation? Do you even know what the EU is? Socialist is pretty much the least applicable term. It is, first and foremost, a trade market. Everything else it does is "collateral damage", aimed at stabilising said market.
Why should you ever need to cite a Wikipedia article? Or the EB, for that matter? Their articles are based on scientific publications, and those you should cite. An encyclopedia can only ever serve as a reference, as you rightly called it yourself, not as a source. It condenses years or sometimes decades worth of scientific research into a five minute read and translates it into terms that a layperson can make sense of with little or no prior knowledge, using only other entries as references. Unless you are writing a paper on an encyclopedia, you should never cite one.
Nothing was ever done about these situations sadly.
Nothing? They made a whole movie genre out of them! What more could you ask for?
Wine does have its flaws, and many applications are a lost cause. But my experience so far has been that if it works, it rocks.
A terrorist who knows he has a 50% chance to be uncovered while trying to hijack a plane may prefer to simply blow up the queue in front of the body scanners.
FTFY.
A human has right to live.
Which is why 58 countries have capital punishment and we have been hearing a lot lately about countries from a certain corner of the world respecting the shit out of this right to live. Oh, I am sorry, what was your point again?
The majority of animal rights activists do not want to abolish the eating of animals. They just want to see them treated as humanely as possible: No unnecessary pain, no killing for fun or sport (as in TFA), no medical experiments, acceptable living conditions. Is that so wrong? Do living creatures who are proven to be capable of feeling pain and distress not have a right to be treated fairly?
[...] I can guarantee there was no danger posed to anyone on that highway [...]
TFA does not state exactly how close the shooters were to the highway, but if they were in visible range their mere presence, waving guns and shooting in the direction of the passing vehicles, could easily have been enough to cause an accident. Similarly a model helicopter crashing onto a car or slamming into the front of a lorry is quite a shot from "no danger posed to anyone". Disasters have sprung from lesser things, you know.
Dedicated barcode scanners may still be required in places like high rack warehouses where the barcodes are too far away for a camera to reliably pick up. One such place I frequently pick up parts from uses gun-shaped laser scanners so that codes can be scanned from distances up to 10 meters away. Try doing that with your tablet/smart phone camera. Also hardware scanners, in my limited experience, locate and read the codes incredibly fast and reliably. The camera-driven apps I have so far played with on my Android phone take their time and often miss codes if they are recorded at larger angles. They sure have their uses, but in some commercial settings the drawbacks of the camera-driven solutions may well add up to a $ amount in additional work or time that justifies buying hardware scanners.