Ubuntu's challenge is they had success by being 'boring'. They collected the recent stable releases at a given point in time and released them in a well managed distribution. (...) Of course it is ostensibly a business endeavor, and as a business endeavor, it has never found a viable path.
Ubuntu put the desktop first, Debian and Fedora were just testbeds for the server edition. I remember one of my first good impressions was that they had a splash screen while Debian just scrolled text. Because who cares on a server, right? The problem is that the desktop by itself doesn't create any money. People download the ISO and all you get is complaints when it doesn't work. You don't get a dollar for actually making it work. It's a nice way to get popularity and brand recognition, but the bait needs a hook to reel in some money.
Though I read somewhere that 90% of these (and other) drugs are made in the US, and then sold elsewhere as an afterthought to drive additional revenue. So in other words, European health care systems get a (mostly) free ride.
Sure, they're just giving a first-world market more than twice the size of the US a free ride. Reality is that they don't make that much money in Europe because we don't let them. It's my impression that in the US the doctors do pretty much as they please, if it's "in" to use a certain brand of medicine they just do. The insurance companies aren't going to tell them you could have saved $100 here and $200 there by using cheaper generics, the hospital would just tell the bean counters to stick to what they know.
Part of the universal healthcare is a lot more central direction of the medical side and purchasing. They're looking across the whole public health system, could we save money here using generics? And those recommendations get rolled out to hospitals, doctors and pharmacies. The brand drugs are always available for people that suffer side effects or don't get the intended effect from the generics, but basically you have to justify it. That means affecting doctors don't do you much good, they'll prescribe the cheap stuff first and the expensive stuff only when it's needed.
And in public healthcare, the sky is not the limit. In the US you have a lot of people who can't pay very much and a few that can pay a lot. Here either we pay for it or we don't, but if we do it's for everyone so there's has to be a reasonable cost/effect. Sure, we have a few that could afford to pay the most expensive drugs and private doctors in the world but the money is in selling to the public system. There's just not a big enough market outside it to really make money that matters. And they will say no if the cost is excessive compared to the results.
Former phone repair tech here, it's been this way since TouchID became a thing, with the iPhone5S I think?
The difference is that in past iPhones you could replace it with a third party button, you lost TouchID and had to log in with a PIN but otherwise it worked. Now it's Apple's button or no button at all. Maybe they just decided it's safer for some reason or it's just a side effect of a design change or maybe they had second hand sales that were unhappy they got a "fake" home button. Whatever the reason my guess is Apple won't budge and you'll probably not win a law suit so... that happened.
Other than the double charge loss, which stood out as kind of costly, this seems like a solid and sensible engineering project. What I'd really like to hear is someone to do a 10-year follow up on whether they met their cost estimates and what else was interesting (hopefully nothing).
I think the project is cool, but quite limited in application to Norwegian fjords. "Geologically, a fjord or fiord is a long, narrow inlet with steep sides or cliffs, created by glacial erosion."
Long = going around is pretty hopeless Narrow = sea distance is quite short Steep sides = big depths make tunnels or bridge supports super hard
All of these contribute to rather unique environment where electric ferries make sense. Currently there's 7 ferries on the main coast road and the estimated cost to make a "ferry free" road is $40 billion USD or about 8% of our GDP. It might even happen because so much of the oil and fishing industry is there, despite the - to me - unreasonable cost. So on a global perspective I think this will be a very small footnote that'll dwindle into total obscurity.
I disagree. RMS is supremely practical over long periods of time. His core message is "if you tie your fate to something you don't control, you will get burned." I've never seen this not be correct.
If you took that core message truly to heart, you'd be out on wilderness survival training near your prepper bug out shelter right now. The rest of us depend on lots of things, not just the software in our computers. Don't get me wrong, all other things being equal I'd take open source too but all other things are rarely equal...
This is good news and may yet help get more people on the Linux desktop.
I doubt it. If all my applications and games would run and hardware would work on Linux there's roughy three basic operations I'd need my WM to do. Start applications, switch applications, quit applications. Everything else is nice-to-have, it could look like RHL6 from last century and I'd manage. I was more excited last month with DaVinci Resolve created a free Linux version - they already had free Windows and Mac versions but only commercial Linux versions. A free professional NLE video editor, now that's useful. What the start menu looks like, WTF cares.
What a shame it has come to the point where companies need this sort of inducement to come clean.
Companies will run slave plantations unless somebody forces them not to. Capitalism is useful but it'll throw you under the bus if it means higher profit, it's nobody's friend just raw application of economic power. Once you're past the size where anyone feels personally responsible and they only answer to shareholders who want return on interest it has no conscience, ethics or morality. So I'm not sure what you think is new or different here, the only time they don't act like total psychos is exactly when there's consequences. Otherwise they'd make Soylent Green out of you.
So Canada thinks they can spend $75,000 per year of money they take out of your income so you can further pay $3.50 for a one-way trip that takes 20 minutes, instead of paying $20 for that same trip. Their alternative is spending several billions for a bus system or hundreds of billions for a rail system with long transit times. Seems legit.
Well public transit is usually slow and limited because one driver can transport many passengers. What's the efficiency of Uber over, well, Uber? Basically it seems like a scheme to pay taxes to pay Uber instead of paying Uber to provide the exact same taxi service. Unless it's used as some quasi-bus service, I know we have that certain rural areas here in Norway. Essentially you can order transport to/from where the regular public transport ends in advance and you get that at a heavily discounted/subsidized rate because they can plan a pickup/drop-off route, for you it's a fixed price offer even if you happen to be the only one so you don't have to coordinate with anyone. I know they also organize something similar for the elderly to go shopping at a discounted rate to fill dead hours. It's door to door, but not really ordinary taxi service.
Courts don't work that way. Laws regularly are either poorly written or have constitutional problems and that requires a judge to either fix the law or turf it out. If a law has ambiguity , a judge will need to work out how to resolve that ambiguity. If it clashes with other laws , a judge will need to decide which law is correct , if it requires a subjective standard , a judge will need to refit that abstraction into a practical test. And if it's unconstitutional , a judge needs to kick it to the curb. Despite what people say "black letter law" tends to be incompetent law
There's interpretation and there's obstruction and circumvention. Clearly the point of dealership laws is to prevent direct sales to customers. Creating a subsidiary and granting a monopoly licence to yourself to sell to consumers is just pissing all over the intent of the law. There's lots of creative lawyers out there with absurd constructions and twisting of the law to create loopholes, for the most part a judge's job is to protect the spirit of the law and shut them down not encourage them. The only time I'd say a judge should really diverge from the law as written is if there's clear signs of a linguistic or logical failure in the wording of the bill. Unreasonable outcomes should be fixed by pardons and new bills, not redefined on a case by case basis by the judge.
I don't think this is incredibly bold. It just makes sense. All movies are available for piracy already. No one needs to break Netflix's DRM for that.
The threat to Netflix's business model is one thing, but DRM licensing contracts are from the innermost circles of hell and typically carry strict limitations and obscene penalties. So I'm guessing this will primarily be on Netflix's original programming, since they're not interesting in selling Netflix exclusives on disc or to TV networks anyway. They get a broader appeal, good PR as the more user friendly solution and potentially forcing the MPAA to follow suit while like you say not really risking anything at all.
This AC is being an AC, but he/she/it isn't completely wrong either. The Internet is becoming increasingly unusable. No matter what precautions you're taking, you're putting yourself at an unknown level of risk just by using it at all.
Except that it's a really big boat and a lot more prominent people than you do stupider shit without being snuffed out by black ops teams. And if it's Titanic heading for the iceberg, well then Hitler 2 will have dirt on the 99% of the population that don't care enough that Facebook and Google and everyone else is profiling them. Sure, you can opt out of the Internet. But when the information everyone else leaves is used to turn the country into a new totalitarian state you can't opt out of that.
What lots of people do will in practice make decisions for you too. Not just votes in an election, though obviously the majority rules there too. People vote with their wallets and when they don't vote for the same as me those services shut down because of lack of business. If people don't care about pollution or littering or killing off the local environment or the planet then the result will be the same for everyone. If the public doesn't care about privacy, well the expectation of privacy will cease to exist.
Do you want to just say that or do you want to put in the time to read Man, Economy, and State, The Road to Serfdom, On Human Action, Economics in One Lesson, and I, Pencil
When your first link is to a 1500 page treatise on economic principles with no clear reference you remind me of the nutters who link to two hour long YouTube videos and anyone who doesn't watch it lose the argument.
Inflation is not really the problem, if you get paid good money convert it to gold, property or other item of real value. The problem is that many people don't get a fair value for their work. But what's the solution? You can let the free market handle it, but the buyers aren't interested in giving you a fair value, they want it as cheap as possible. Or you can try to let society decide through some form of socialism, but in practice that leads to some being more equal than others. Or we can go back to self-sufficiency, losing all advantages of scale and complex economic ecosystems. Or go UBI and decide that what you do isn't important, have some free money anyway.
A pipe with some fuel in it, that goes to the same place at the same speed as 60 years ago? This is what excites you?
My direct flight to Australia from California in about 13 hours is just a boring rerun of Magellan's voyage, then?
Are you saying your flight will be more newsworthy than Magellan's voyage? Now where's that TSA tip line... Also, I didn't know Magellan was Santa's half brother, 13 hours to sail halfway around the world I think you need some magic mermaids to pull your boat. Yes, the GP is kinda trolling but still... Musk is still putting cargo and satellites in orbit, I guess doing that cheaper is nice but if that was all we wouldn't care much. It's his ambitions for Mars that get people excited, but those are still way in the future. And he's "just" the transport company, we still need someone to fund the entire mission.
With the heavy - will the side boosters always be able to land at the launch site, or will they need 3 drone ships?
Depends on the payload, they get more capacity with drone ships and if it's heavy enough they'll just be expendable. But given that the Falcon Heavy has a far higher max capacity than the heaviest current heavy lift vehicle (Delta IV Heavy) most launches should be able to land all three at the launch site, I imagine that's the main plan to drive costs down. Launch, land, refurb, fuel, launch again. Using the barge will have a much longer turn-around time, risk of bad weather conditions both on landing at on return to port, exposure to salty spray from the ocean etc. while going back to the landing site will give you almost the same conditions as when launching. If SpaceX manages to make them durable and have a short turn-around they could become a real workhorse doing launch after launch after launch.
It sounds more like a problem with your users being drooling idiots.
Well I've run into some of these that manage to
a) create a pop-up window that covers almost the whole screen without the usual navigation b) throw the modal dialog in an infinite loop, you must check that little "stop creating dialogs" box to escape c) use a reload/redirect trigger/timer so you get sent to a new page with a new dialog if you break the b) loop
It's fucking annoying and I could very well understand a clueless user thinking he's been hacked. I've not managed to find any way out of the most annoying ones except to start killing chrome processes in the task manager until I find the right one. Or close the whole browser, but I don't have it set to continue with tabs from last time so that's real annoying.
Maybe the state made it impossible to get a copy of the laws without the annotations?
No, they didn't.
The Agreement requires that Lexis/Nexis provide Georgia's statutes in an un-annotated form on a website that the public can access for free using the Internet. The free public website contains only the statutory text and numbering of the O.C.G.A.
What doesn't have the force of law is copyrightable:
However, the Copyright Compendium makes clear that the Office may register annotations that summarize or comment upon legal materials unless the annotations have the force of law. Only those government documents having the force of law are uncopyrightable.
The annotations etc. are not law, strike one:
The statutory portion of such codification shall be merged with annotations, captions, catchlines, history lines, editorial notes, crossreferences, indices, title and chapter analyses, and other materials pursuant to the contract and shall be published by authority of the state pursuant to such contract and when so published shall be known and may be cited as the "Official Code of Georgia Annotated."
Strike two:
Unless otherwise provided in this Code, the descriptive headings or catchlines immediately preceding or within the text of the individual Code sections of this Code, except the Code section numbers included in the headings or catchlines immediately preceding the text of the Code sections, and title and chapter analyses do not constitute part of the law and shall in no manner limit or expand the construction of any Code section. All historical citations, title and chapter analyses, and notes set out in this Code are given for the purpose of convenient reference and do not constitute part of the law.
Strike three:
Annotations; editorial notes; Code Revision Commission notes; research references; notes on law review articles; opinions of the Attorney General of Georgia; indexes; analyses; title, chapter, article, part, and subpart captions or headings, except as otherwise provided in the Code; catchlines of the Code sections or portions thereof, except as otherwise provided in the Code; and rules and regulations of state agencies, departments, boards, commissions, or other entities which are contained in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated are not enacted as statutes by the provisions of this Act.
Yes, it's a bit odd to have official commentary but they are not building codes incorporated by reference or anything like that. They're just there to help interpret the lawmaker's intention, should there be an ambiguity in the actual law. I think we do it pretty much the same way here.
But Scotland isn't a new entrant. They are already members of the EU, albeit through association with Great Britain. If Scotland votes for independence the EU can just interpret that not as the UK leaving and Scotland applying as a new member, but England leaving while Scotland retains it's current membership.
As I understand article 50, legally it's too late for that. Even if Scotland got independence tomorrow there is no provision to abort the exit process and if an agreement is not reached the treaties expire automatically. They can get more time, but only by an unanimous vote by the council. Other than that "If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49." where article 49 is the general application process. Which means Scotland would essentially have to qualify as a new country. I'm sure that if Scotland acts quick enough the EU could fast track the process so the beginning of their membership starts as the UK's end, but to formally follow the Lisbon treaty it'd probably have to be "new" which means they'd have to fulfill the current eligibility requirements. Besides the EU would probably want that, they hate the special deals some countries have.
Not only have Europe's demographics been utterly destroyed, but their overall EU economy and that of the member states is in utter turmoil. Greece has been a disaster for about a decade now. Spain is only slightly better off than Greece. Italy is barely hanging on. There are numerous banks, including at least one in the economic powerhouse of Germany, that are on the brink.
Sorry, but this is pretty much made up. Unemployment peaked around end of 2012 and is for the EA-19 (eurozone) now within 1% of the normal levels in the early 2000s. The full EU-28 is actually doing even better. Yes, a lot of big spender economies had to change things when Germany refused to let inflation run rampant but it also meant the government stopped skimming value from the private sector through printing money. All the other PIIGGS except Greece have sweated it out and taken steps to cut down public debt.
And despite what you might hear about Greece, they're a fart in the whole EU economy. Germany alone could clear out their entire public debt by increasing their debt/GDP ratio from 67% to 77%, still very much within financially solid levels. They just don't want other countries running around with credit cards and sticking Germany with the bill. I too have a great many concerns about the future of Europe culturally and demographically, but as an economic bloc the EU is doing just fine.
Scotland just voted to have a post-Brexit independence referendum. Without Scotland, there is no UK. Just the greater Welsh Hegemony.
Well it would get interesting as the EU doesn't let new entrants in on legacy deals. It's the euro, Schengen, full package if Scotland wants to rejoin. Which would mean they'd have to leave the pound and put real border control on the UK border.
You know a consultant is worth every dime when they're going to "explore the synergies". That phrase makes me wonder - did they hire *actual* consultants or parodies?
Wait until he discovers Dilbert is not a parody but a documentary...
What do you expect, it's like creating Linux software by writing a Win32 binary because you can run it in WINE. Regardless of the merits of XML, if the constraints demand that you produce it taking a detour through a different format certainly won't help.
I install qBittorrent about once every six months, then uninstall it again because it just doesn't do what I want it to do (specifically in terms of the interface and its handling of RSS feeds). I actually kept it installed for a while before what.cd died, specifically because it was whitelisted there.
May I ask what you feel is missing? It got an RSS feed reader, you can set up automatic download filters - simple and regex, pick what feeds each rule applies to, you can set quite a few other options for your RSS downloads than your regular downloads. I see it doesn't really have a smart filter to prevent multiple versions of the same episode from getting downloaded, but usually I just amend the filter until there's only one version in practice.
Slashdot Mirror
Ubuntu's challenge is they had success by being 'boring'. They collected the recent stable releases at a given point in time and released them in a well managed distribution. (...) Of course it is ostensibly a business endeavor, and as a business endeavor, it has never found a viable path.
Ubuntu put the desktop first, Debian and Fedora were just testbeds for the server edition. I remember one of my first good impressions was that they had a splash screen while Debian just scrolled text. Because who cares on a server, right? The problem is that the desktop by itself doesn't create any money. People download the ISO and all you get is complaints when it doesn't work. You don't get a dollar for actually making it work. It's a nice way to get popularity and brand recognition, but the bait needs a hook to reel in some money.
Though I read somewhere that 90% of these (and other) drugs are made in the US, and then sold elsewhere as an afterthought to drive additional revenue. So in other words, European health care systems get a (mostly) free ride.
Sure, they're just giving a first-world market more than twice the size of the US a free ride. Reality is that they don't make that much money in Europe because we don't let them. It's my impression that in the US the doctors do pretty much as they please, if it's "in" to use a certain brand of medicine they just do. The insurance companies aren't going to tell them you could have saved $100 here and $200 there by using cheaper generics, the hospital would just tell the bean counters to stick to what they know.
Part of the universal healthcare is a lot more central direction of the medical side and purchasing. They're looking across the whole public health system, could we save money here using generics? And those recommendations get rolled out to hospitals, doctors and pharmacies. The brand drugs are always available for people that suffer side effects or don't get the intended effect from the generics, but basically you have to justify it. That means affecting doctors don't do you much good, they'll prescribe the cheap stuff first and the expensive stuff only when it's needed.
And in public healthcare, the sky is not the limit. In the US you have a lot of people who can't pay very much and a few that can pay a lot. Here either we pay for it or we don't, but if we do it's for everyone so there's has to be a reasonable cost/effect. Sure, we have a few that could afford to pay the most expensive drugs and private doctors in the world but the money is in selling to the public system. There's just not a big enough market outside it to really make money that matters. And they will say no if the cost is excessive compared to the results.
Former phone repair tech here, it's been this way since TouchID became a thing, with the iPhone5S I think?
The difference is that in past iPhones you could replace it with a third party button, you lost TouchID and had to log in with a PIN but otherwise it worked. Now it's Apple's button or no button at all. Maybe they just decided it's safer for some reason or it's just a side effect of a design change or maybe they had second hand sales that were unhappy they got a "fake" home button. Whatever the reason my guess is Apple won't budge and you'll probably not win a law suit so... that happened.
Other than the double charge loss, which stood out as kind of costly, this seems like a solid and sensible engineering project. What I'd really like to hear is someone to do a 10-year follow up on whether they met their cost estimates and what else was interesting (hopefully nothing).
I think the project is cool, but quite limited in application to Norwegian fjords. "Geologically, a fjord or fiord is a long, narrow inlet with steep sides or cliffs, created by glacial erosion."
Long = going around is pretty hopeless
Narrow = sea distance is quite short
Steep sides = big depths make tunnels or bridge supports super hard
All of these contribute to rather unique environment where electric ferries make sense. Currently there's 7 ferries on the main coast road and the estimated cost to make a "ferry free" road is $40 billion USD or about 8% of our GDP. It might even happen because so much of the oil and fishing industry is there, despite the - to me - unreasonable cost. So on a global perspective I think this will be a very small footnote that'll dwindle into total obscurity.
I disagree. RMS is supremely practical over long periods of time. His core message is "if you tie your fate to something you don't control, you will get burned." I've never seen this not be correct.
If you took that core message truly to heart, you'd be out on wilderness survival training near your prepper bug out shelter right now. The rest of us depend on lots of things, not just the software in our computers. Don't get me wrong, all other things being equal I'd take open source too but all other things are rarely equal...
This is good news and may yet help get more people on the Linux desktop.
I doubt it. If all my applications and games would run and hardware would work on Linux there's roughy three basic operations I'd need my WM to do. Start applications, switch applications, quit applications. Everything else is nice-to-have, it could look like RHL6 from last century and I'd manage. I was more excited last month with DaVinci Resolve created a free Linux version - they already had free Windows and Mac versions but only commercial Linux versions. A free professional NLE video editor, now that's useful. What the start menu looks like, WTF cares.
What a shame it has come to the point where companies need this sort of inducement to come clean.
Companies will run slave plantations unless somebody forces them not to. Capitalism is useful but it'll throw you under the bus if it means higher profit, it's nobody's friend just raw application of economic power. Once you're past the size where anyone feels personally responsible and they only answer to shareholders who want return on interest it has no conscience, ethics or morality. So I'm not sure what you think is new or different here, the only time they don't act like total psychos is exactly when there's consequences. Otherwise they'd make Soylent Green out of you.
So Canada thinks they can spend $75,000 per year of money they take out of your income so you can further pay $3.50 for a one-way trip that takes 20 minutes, instead of paying $20 for that same trip. Their alternative is spending several billions for a bus system or hundreds of billions for a rail system with long transit times. Seems legit.
Well public transit is usually slow and limited because one driver can transport many passengers. What's the efficiency of Uber over, well, Uber? Basically it seems like a scheme to pay taxes to pay Uber instead of paying Uber to provide the exact same taxi service. Unless it's used as some quasi-bus service, I know we have that certain rural areas here in Norway. Essentially you can order transport to/from where the regular public transport ends in advance and you get that at a heavily discounted/subsidized rate because they can plan a pickup/drop-off route, for you it's a fixed price offer even if you happen to be the only one so you don't have to coordinate with anyone. I know they also organize something similar for the elderly to go shopping at a discounted rate to fill dead hours. It's door to door, but not really ordinary taxi service.
Well I called that and got a ride... it wasn't Uber though!
Uber oder unter... doesn't the customer decide?
Courts don't work that way. Laws regularly are either poorly written or have constitutional problems and that requires a judge to either fix the law or turf it out. If a law has ambiguity , a judge will need to work out how to resolve that ambiguity. If it clashes with other laws , a judge will need to decide which law is correct , if it requires a subjective standard , a judge will need to refit that abstraction into a practical test. And if it's unconstitutional , a judge needs to kick it to the curb. Despite what people say "black letter law" tends to be incompetent law
There's interpretation and there's obstruction and circumvention. Clearly the point of dealership laws is to prevent direct sales to customers. Creating a subsidiary and granting a monopoly licence to yourself to sell to consumers is just pissing all over the intent of the law. There's lots of creative lawyers out there with absurd constructions and twisting of the law to create loopholes, for the most part a judge's job is to protect the spirit of the law and shut them down not encourage them. The only time I'd say a judge should really diverge from the law as written is if there's clear signs of a linguistic or logical failure in the wording of the bill. Unreasonable outcomes should be fixed by pardons and new bills, not redefined on a case by case basis by the judge.
I don't think this is incredibly bold. It just makes sense. All movies are available for piracy already. No one needs to break Netflix's DRM for that.
The threat to Netflix's business model is one thing, but DRM licensing contracts are from the innermost circles of hell and typically carry strict limitations and obscene penalties. So I'm guessing this will primarily be on Netflix's original programming, since they're not interesting in selling Netflix exclusives on disc or to TV networks anyway. They get a broader appeal, good PR as the more user friendly solution and potentially forcing the MPAA to follow suit while like you say not really risking anything at all.
This AC is being an AC, but he/she/it isn't completely wrong either. The Internet is becoming increasingly unusable. No matter what precautions you're taking, you're putting yourself at an unknown level of risk just by using it at all.
Except that it's a really big boat and a lot more prominent people than you do stupider shit without being snuffed out by black ops teams. And if it's Titanic heading for the iceberg, well then Hitler 2 will have dirt on the 99% of the population that don't care enough that Facebook and Google and everyone else is profiling them. Sure, you can opt out of the Internet. But when the information everyone else leaves is used to turn the country into a new totalitarian state you can't opt out of that.
What lots of people do will in practice make decisions for you too. Not just votes in an election, though obviously the majority rules there too. People vote with their wallets and when they don't vote for the same as me those services shut down because of lack of business. If people don't care about pollution or littering or killing off the local environment or the planet then the result will be the same for everyone. If the public doesn't care about privacy, well the expectation of privacy will cease to exist.
I guess you missed the OMG ponies theme? This is by far not the worst theme /. has had on April 1st.
It's right there in the titleâ"they have an electric CEO!
And he's a general, they've taken over the military already. Run, run for the hills!
Do you want to just say that or do you want to put in the time to read Man, Economy, and State, The Road to Serfdom, On Human Action, Economics in One Lesson, and I, Pencil
When your first link is to a 1500 page treatise on economic principles with no clear reference you remind me of the nutters who link to two hour long YouTube videos and anyone who doesn't watch it lose the argument.
Inflation is not really the problem, if you get paid good money convert it to gold, property or other item of real value. The problem is that many people don't get a fair value for their work. But what's the solution? You can let the free market handle it, but the buyers aren't interested in giving you a fair value, they want it as cheap as possible. Or you can try to let society decide through some form of socialism, but in practice that leads to some being more equal than others. Or we can go back to self-sufficiency, losing all advantages of scale and complex economic ecosystems. Or go UBI and decide that what you do isn't important, have some free money anyway.
A pipe with some fuel in it, that goes to the same place at the same speed as 60 years ago? This is what excites you?
My direct flight to Australia from California in about 13 hours is just a boring rerun of Magellan's voyage, then?
Are you saying your flight will be more newsworthy than Magellan's voyage? Now where's that TSA tip line... Also, I didn't know Magellan was Santa's half brother, 13 hours to sail halfway around the world I think you need some magic mermaids to pull your boat. Yes, the GP is kinda trolling but still... Musk is still putting cargo and satellites in orbit, I guess doing that cheaper is nice but if that was all we wouldn't care much. It's his ambitions for Mars that get people excited, but those are still way in the future. And he's "just" the transport company, we still need someone to fund the entire mission.
With the heavy - will the side boosters always be able to land at the launch site, or will they need 3 drone ships?
Depends on the payload, they get more capacity with drone ships and if it's heavy enough they'll just be expendable. But given that the Falcon Heavy has a far higher max capacity than the heaviest current heavy lift vehicle (Delta IV Heavy) most launches should be able to land all three at the launch site, I imagine that's the main plan to drive costs down. Launch, land, refurb, fuel, launch again. Using the barge will have a much longer turn-around time, risk of bad weather conditions both on landing at on return to port, exposure to salty spray from the ocean etc. while going back to the landing site will give you almost the same conditions as when launching. If SpaceX manages to make them durable and have a short turn-around they could become a real workhorse doing launch after launch after launch.
It sounds more like a problem with your users being drooling idiots.
Well I've run into some of these that manage to
a) create a pop-up window that covers almost the whole screen without the usual navigation
b) throw the modal dialog in an infinite loop, you must check that little "stop creating dialogs" box to escape
c) use a reload/redirect trigger/timer so you get sent to a new page with a new dialog if you break the b) loop
It's fucking annoying and I could very well understand a clueless user thinking he's been hacked. I've not managed to find any way out of the most annoying ones except to start killing chrome processes in the task manager until I find the right one. Or close the whole browser, but I don't have it set to continue with tabs from last time so that's real annoying.
Maybe the state made it impossible to get a copy of the laws without the annotations?
No, they didn't.
The Agreement requires that Lexis/Nexis provide Georgia's statutes in an un-annotated form on a website that the public can access for free using the Internet. The free public website contains only the statutory text and numbering of the O.C.G.A.
What doesn't have the force of law is copyrightable:
However, the Copyright Compendium makes clear that the Office may register annotations that summarize or comment upon legal materials unless the annotations have the force of law. Only those government documents having the force of law are uncopyrightable.
The annotations etc. are not law, strike one:
The statutory portion of such codification shall be merged with annotations, captions, catchlines, history lines, editorial notes, crossreferences, indices, title and chapter analyses, and other materials pursuant to the contract and shall be published by authority of the state pursuant to such contract and when so published shall be known and may be cited as the "Official Code of Georgia Annotated."
Strike two:
Unless otherwise provided in this Code, the descriptive headings or catchlines immediately preceding or within the text of the individual Code sections of this Code, except the Code section numbers included in the headings or catchlines immediately preceding the text of the Code sections, and title and chapter analyses do not constitute part of the law and shall in no manner limit or expand the construction of any Code section. All historical citations, title and chapter analyses, and notes set out in this Code are given for the purpose of convenient reference and do not constitute part of the law.
Strike three:
Annotations; editorial notes; Code Revision Commission notes; research references; notes on law review articles; opinions of the Attorney General of Georgia; indexes; analyses; title, chapter, article, part, and subpart captions or headings, except as otherwise provided in the Code; catchlines of the Code sections or portions thereof, except as otherwise provided in the Code; and rules and regulations of state agencies, departments, boards, commissions, or other entities which are contained in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated are not enacted as statutes by the provisions of this Act.
Yes, it's a bit odd to have official commentary but they are not building codes incorporated by reference or anything like that. They're just there to help interpret the lawmaker's intention, should there be an ambiguity in the actual law. I think we do it pretty much the same way here.
But Scotland isn't a new entrant. They are already members of the EU, albeit through association with Great Britain. If Scotland votes for independence the EU can just interpret that not as the UK leaving and Scotland applying as a new member, but England leaving while Scotland retains it's current membership.
As I understand article 50, legally it's too late for that. Even if Scotland got independence tomorrow there is no provision to abort the exit process and if an agreement is not reached the treaties expire automatically. They can get more time, but only by an unanimous vote by the council. Other than that "If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49." where article 49 is the general application process. Which means Scotland would essentially have to qualify as a new country. I'm sure that if Scotland acts quick enough the EU could fast track the process so the beginning of their membership starts as the UK's end, but to formally follow the Lisbon treaty it'd probably have to be "new" which means they'd have to fulfill the current eligibility requirements. Besides the EU would probably want that, they hate the special deals some countries have.
Not only have Europe's demographics been utterly destroyed, but their overall EU economy and that of the member states is in utter turmoil. Greece has been a disaster for about a decade now. Spain is only slightly better off than Greece. Italy is barely hanging on. There are numerous banks, including at least one in the economic powerhouse of Germany, that are on the brink.
Sorry, but this is pretty much made up. Unemployment peaked around end of 2012 and is for the EA-19 (eurozone) now within 1% of the normal levels in the early 2000s. The full EU-28 is actually doing even better. Yes, a lot of big spender economies had to change things when Germany refused to let inflation run rampant but it also meant the government stopped skimming value from the private sector through printing money. All the other PIIGGS except Greece have sweated it out and taken steps to cut down public debt.
And despite what you might hear about Greece, they're a fart in the whole EU economy. Germany alone could clear out their entire public debt by increasing their debt/GDP ratio from 67% to 77%, still very much within financially solid levels. They just don't want other countries running around with credit cards and sticking Germany with the bill. I too have a great many concerns about the future of Europe culturally and demographically, but as an economic bloc the EU is doing just fine.
Scotland just voted to have a post-Brexit independence referendum. Without Scotland, there is no UK. Just the greater Welsh Hegemony.
Well it would get interesting as the EU doesn't let new entrants in on legacy deals. It's the euro, Schengen, full package if Scotland wants to rejoin. Which would mean they'd have to leave the pound and put real border control on the UK border.
You know a consultant is worth every dime when they're going to "explore the synergies". That phrase makes me wonder - did they hire *actual* consultants or parodies?
Wait until he discovers Dilbert is not a parody but a documentary...
What do you expect, it's like creating Linux software by writing a Win32 binary because you can run it in WINE. Regardless of the merits of XML, if the constraints demand that you produce it taking a detour through a different format certainly won't help.
I install qBittorrent about once every six months, then uninstall it again because it just doesn't do what I want it to do (specifically in terms of the interface and its handling of RSS feeds). I actually kept it installed for a while before what.cd died, specifically because it was whitelisted there.
May I ask what you feel is missing? It got an RSS feed reader, you can set up automatic download filters - simple and regex, pick what feeds each rule applies to, you can set quite a few other options for your RSS downloads than your regular downloads. I see it doesn't really have a smart filter to prevent multiple versions of the same episode from getting downloaded, but usually I just amend the filter until there's only one version in practice.