It would be nice if we could standardise this stuff. There are a few recharging matts* knocking around for sale at the moment, but all the systems are incompatible. Manufacturers won't build this into mobile phones etc. unless it's their own system or a standard.
Just when we're finally converging around USB as a standard charger, it looks like we're going to have half a dozen wireless charging systems (one for Fujitsu, one for Apple...).
*I do know that this isn't one of those, but it will still need infrastructure on the charged side.
Indeed. It occurred to me recently that something has to either not make sense or directly contradict observed reality to count as faith. Saying "I believe the sky is blue" is not an act of faith, but saying "I believe in life after death" is. This is because we can all see the sky is blue*, but equally most of us can see that the dead stay pretty dead.
Gravity isn't required to love us or save us. Or to give a blind toss about our existence or be conscious in any sense.
Of course, arguably you could say the same thing about the concept of god, but that would a) dilute the word beyond meaning and b) neglect that "gravity" does not come with the same emotional baggage as "god".
The real estate market is a very bad example, as it is easily one of the most distorted markets available. Consider that in the first quarter of 2010, Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac guaranteed 96.5% of new mortgages*, which is an indicator of state support of home ownership. Politically it's been a goal to extend home ownership, potentially beyond what is economically feasible.
In London, my home town, we have other problems, with restrictions on space, planning slowness, nimbyism from house owners, the large swathes of the city which are listed in some form or other, and the green belt effectively preventing any kind of free market. New entrants cannot easily enter the market for a variety of reasons, mostly artificial.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but if you look at the trading in futures or derivatives, they're much closer to a perfect market. And they still screw up because of "irrational exuberance".
I have an alternate conspiracy. I reckon they're doing it for a laugh. Every now and then they stop it and broadcast gibberish, just to see what the reaction is. That sounds like the Russians I know.
This is raw data, not a spending report. We also have spending reviews; before the general election they were on the HM Treasury Site but now they've been archived. Without the legal requirements for clarity associated with private sector financial reporting, civil servants are able to hide key data in impenetrable waffle. It is also a rather different kettle of fish to the US; our government is ludicrously centralised and almost all spending is from Whitehall. The report is thus so broad in scope as to almost be meaningless. It also makes wading through this raw transaction data much more daunting.
There's not much Socialism of a form Marx would recognise in Europe. There's a lot more Social Democracy.
I also dislike this argument "Oh, but we've never had true Socialism, just every single time someone tried to establish it it led to military dictatorship and starvation". It has a faint ring of no true Scotsman to it.
You could do worse than look at Jared Diamond's Collapse; that has some good stuff regarding peak wood (though he doesn't label it as such).
...did research to point out the horrors that Capitalism wrought upon the environment.
Come to Europe, see the horrors Socialism has wrought on the environment. Look at Easter Island where an ism that no longer exists destroyed the ecosystem. I think, in the spirit of the sentiments expressed in your comment, it would be nice to leave the isms out of this.
Quite. Here in the UK the convention is that no Parliament may be bound by its predecessors, with the actual effect that we can change our "constitution" with a simple majority vote in the Commons. Considering the power of the party whips, and the tendency to one-party rule, we do effectively have an elected dictator.
Less so this time round, with the coalition, but even they have shown they can change the constitution with a simple majority vote and are willing to do so without an explicit mandate.
Of course, it's also pretty clear that Branson is angling for a handout here, not really deeply interested in science or public policy. He has a pretty big self-interest in convincing people that the cause of the shutdown was government overreaction, in which case the government should compensate the airlines; rather than having people believe that the shutdown was a necessary reaction to the volcanic eruption.
It is an interesting point though. European regulations, intended to stop airlines leaving passengers in the lurch because they over-booked a flight, have made airlines the insurers of last resort for people stranded due to natural disaster. The airlines have incurred a lot of costs, not just on lost business but also on having to pay for accommodation and food for their passengers while they've been stranded. They're also liable for reasonable alternative means of transport. There's a nice summary on the BBC.
While this is nice for passengers, the airlines themselves have no-one to lean on. As this is an act of God, the insurance won't pay out. The government closed the airspace, and is the normal insurer of last resort for natural disasters (see Chile, Haiti etc.). While the summary rags on "greedy airlines", this is not the fault of an airline having mis-judged its margins but an unprecedented restriction on normal business. I think that there is a good case, in moral terms, for at least having the EU refund the costs brought on by passenger rights legislation.
I'm not crticising the government for closing the airspace either, to clarify, I have nowhere near enough knowledge on volcanos or jet engines to form an opinion. I just think that we should note that the airlines have been forced into an uncomfortable, and I think unjust, position.
I'm working the UK and have a psuedo-relevant experience myself. I'm an Engineer and it is explicitly stated in my contract that I must work towards chartership (IChemE). The company pays for professional membership for all of its employees, but we're expected to study and work on it in our own time.
A lot of people are complaining about SMS being expensive. I suspect this poster is in the UK or EU, but here in the UK an unlimited SMS plan costs the same as a data plan on most carriers and contracts (3 being the possible exception).
A data plan is only useful really if you have a smartphone. 1GB of WAP browsing? Thanks but not thanks. People here are still more likely to have a large or unlimited text allowance than a data plan, though that probably won't continue for much longer with the explosion of smartphones.
Re:Linux is still not ready for desktop use
on
Ubuntu on a Dime
·
· Score: 1
No offense intended to the Ubuntu folks, but there's a reason the market often beats the volunteer efforts: it can pay for in addition to inspiring great performance.
"Volunteer efforts" are a part of the market too. You just mean paid-for.
It's pretty easy to second-guess; the Liberal Democrats haven't even bothered to campaign. I've had four letters and a leaflet from the Tories and a letter and a leaflet from Labour, but nothing from the LDs.
Slashdot Mirror
It would be nice if we could standardise this stuff. There are a few recharging matts* knocking around for sale at the moment, but all the systems are incompatible. Manufacturers won't build this into mobile phones etc. unless it's their own system or a standard.
Just when we're finally converging around USB as a standard charger, it looks like we're going to have half a dozen wireless charging systems (one for Fujitsu, one for Apple...).
*I do know that this isn't one of those, but it will still need infrastructure on the charged side.
Indeed. It occurred to me recently that something has to either not make sense or directly contradict observed reality to count as faith. Saying "I believe the sky is blue" is not an act of faith, but saying "I believe in life after death" is. This is because we can all see the sky is blue*, but equally most of us can see that the dead stay pretty dead.
*I live in London, granted, but we have our days.
Gravity isn't required to love us or save us. Or to give a blind toss about our existence or be conscious in any sense.
Of course, arguably you could say the same thing about the concept of god, but that would a) dilute the word beyond meaning and b) neglect that "gravity" does not come with the same emotional baggage as "god".
Bullshit. It just means they can't own it straight away. They might still be able to afford it over the long term.
The real estate market is a very bad example, as it is easily one of the most distorted markets available. Consider that in the first quarter of 2010, Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac guaranteed 96.5% of new mortgages*, which is an indicator of state support of home ownership. Politically it's been a goal to extend home ownership, potentially beyond what is economically feasible.
In London, my home town, we have other problems, with restrictions on space, planning slowness, nimbyism from house owners, the large swathes of the city which are listed in some form or other, and the green belt effectively preventing any kind of free market. New entrants cannot easily enter the market for a variety of reasons, mostly artificial.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but if you look at the trading in futures or derivatives, they're much closer to a perfect market. And they still screw up because of "irrational exuberance".
*http://www.economist.com/node/16640249?story_id=16640249
It helps prevent arbitrage, I guess. That's a good thing because it moves capital to where it is wanted/needed.
I have an alternate conspiracy. I reckon they're doing it for a laugh. Every now and then they stop it and broadcast gibberish, just to see what the reaction is. That sounds like the Russians I know.
It's the Daily Mail. They probably just made it up.
This is raw data, not a spending report. We also have spending reviews; before the general election they were on the HM Treasury Site but now they've been archived. Without the legal requirements for clarity associated with private sector financial reporting, civil servants are able to hide key data in impenetrable waffle. It is also a rather different kettle of fish to the US; our government is ludicrously centralised and almost all spending is from Whitehall. The report is thus so broad in scope as to almost be meaningless. It also makes wading through this raw transaction data much more daunting.
because the Communist Manifesto encourages violence (read it and you'll see it)
I have. The point you raise is the reason the west European Socialists eventually turned into Social Democrats, refuting the doctrine of Revolution.
There's not much Socialism of a form Marx would recognise in Europe. There's a lot more Social Democracy.
I also dislike this argument "Oh, but we've never had true Socialism, just every single time someone tried to establish it it led to military dictatorship and starvation". It has a faint ring of no true Scotsman to it.
You could do worse than look at Jared Diamond's Collapse; that has some good stuff regarding peak wood (though he doesn't label it as such).
...did research to point out the horrors that Capitalism wrought upon the environment.
Come to Europe, see the horrors Socialism has wrought on the environment. Look at Easter Island where an ism that no longer exists destroyed the ecosystem. I think, in the spirit of the sentiments expressed in your comment, it would be nice to leave the isms out of this.
Quite. Here in the UK the convention is that no Parliament may be bound by its predecessors, with the actual effect that we can change our "constitution" with a simple majority vote in the Commons. Considering the power of the party whips, and the tendency to one-party rule, we do effectively have an elected dictator.
Less so this time round, with the coalition, but even they have shown they can change the constitution with a simple majority vote and are willing to do so without an explicit mandate.
The Pope is German. Not that I think that helps much.
Apple has (for all intents and purposes) one phone on one carrier.
Some of us live in Europe, you insensitive clod!
I have no idea what you're talking about. BBC wheeled out Flight 9 every hour of the airspace closure.
Of course, it's also pretty clear that Branson is angling for a handout here, not really deeply interested in science or public policy. He has a pretty big self-interest in convincing people that the cause of the shutdown was government overreaction, in which case the government should compensate the airlines; rather than having people believe that the shutdown was a necessary reaction to the volcanic eruption.
It is an interesting point though. European regulations, intended to stop airlines leaving passengers in the lurch because they over-booked a flight, have made airlines the insurers of last resort for people stranded due to natural disaster. The airlines have incurred a lot of costs, not just on lost business but also on having to pay for accommodation and food for their passengers while they've been stranded. They're also liable for reasonable alternative means of transport. There's a nice summary on the BBC.
While this is nice for passengers, the airlines themselves have no-one to lean on. As this is an act of God, the insurance won't pay out. The government closed the airspace, and is the normal insurer of last resort for natural disasters (see Chile, Haiti etc.). While the summary rags on "greedy airlines", this is not the fault of an airline having mis-judged its margins but an unprecedented restriction on normal business. I think that there is a good case, in moral terms, for at least having the EU refund the costs brought on by passenger rights legislation.
I'm not crticising the government for closing the airspace either, to clarify, I have nowhere near enough knowledge on volcanos or jet engines to form an opinion. I just think that we should note that the airlines have been forced into an uncomfortable, and I think unjust, position.
I'm working the UK and have a psuedo-relevant experience myself. I'm an Engineer and it is explicitly stated in my contract that I must work towards chartership (IChemE). The company pays for professional membership for all of its employees, but we're expected to study and work on it in our own time.
A lot of people are complaining about SMS being expensive. I suspect this poster is in the UK or EU, but here in the UK an unlimited SMS plan costs the same as a data plan on most carriers and contracts (3 being the possible exception).
A data plan is only useful really if you have a smartphone. 1GB of WAP browsing? Thanks but not thanks. People here are still more likely to have a large or unlimited text allowance than a data plan, though that probably won't continue for much longer with the explosion of smartphones.
Spoken like someone who's never had to use Windows ME.
It's over London now, entirely unnoticeable here.
No offense intended to the Ubuntu folks, but there's a reason the market often beats the volunteer efforts: it can pay for in addition to inspiring great performance.
"Volunteer efforts" are a part of the market too. You just mean paid-for.
In my personal experience, it's the paid-for ones that are substandard. I've seen MacAfee corporate bring the entire office grinding to a halt.
It's pretty easy to second-guess; the Liberal Democrats haven't even bothered to campaign. I've had four letters and a leaflet from the Tories and a letter and a leaflet from Labour, but nothing from the LDs.
I didn't get your point; CNN and MSNBC and the BBC would be all over it if it were Bush.