While I fully agree with you and would never use my free time to work more, I also sure as hell won't die thinking "damn, I wish I saw more of those TV episodes..."
On the other hand, "I wish I had spent more time walking and cuddling with my wife", "I wish I had gone out and done some volunteer work to help others", etc? Definitely.
I'm not sure what the source for your blogspot image is, but here's the UK Coke webpage. Notice the logo did change, perhaps not much compared to Pepsi, but it did.
The other difference is that renovations in China is a new thing.
1. China was a poor country, not so long ago, and a lot of it is still poor. People forget that a lot here, but 20 years ago, my parents wouldn't have been able to renovate if they wanted to, just based on materials cost.
2. Back then the government owned your house. Spending the money and effort to renovate, to have your apartment possibly re-appropriated, sounds like a lousy idea.
That takes care of the demand for such products, until very recently.
3. Space. You can definitely buy a hammer or a screwdriver, but something the size of a Home-Depot with flooring and kitchen kits and stuff? Yea, can you see that in the middle of Manhattan? It doesn't fit in the middle of Beijing either. And for people that don't live in cities? Go back to point 1.
I would say the North American Home Depot concept won't work. You have to modify your concept, and make it a one-stop shop: come in, choose materials, and pay someone to install it for you (ie hire the same cheap workers, but at least you chose all the materials). But eh, what do I know.
*sigh* Can people not believe outright the attention-whore headlines?
Check this:
As confirmed in an SEC filing last year, the shares in Cook’s renumeration package are set to vest at different times. Half of the 1m stock units – valued at $376m back in August 2011 – will vest (i.e. be passed on to Cook) in August 2016, with the remainder coming in August 2021, ten years after he assumed the role of CEO.
What that means is that, because the Apple stock exploded in value, and his compensation is linked to it, if the stock stays the same for the next 10 years, he makes 378 millions, so 37.8 millions per year (well, + 900k in base salary). Factor in inflation, and it'll be less in current dollars. If he does a bad job and the company tanks, his compensation decreases. If Apple (the stock, hopefully linked to the company, as it should be over 10 years) does well, so does he. What's so wrong with that? Don't confuse the accounting with reality; you're _required_ to account for stock options in your SEC filings, it doesn't mean Apple actually paid that much or that Cook made that much in a year.
Now of course you can still argue 38M$ is too much for a CEO, but in that regard, I don't think you should complain about Cook. He manages the largest company ever by market cap that _makes real products_, and earns 25 times less than a hedge fund manager that profited from the recession by moving money around (and yes, I only counted his 1 billion in pure compensation, not the 4 he made because he invested in himself).
Actually you got it just right. It used to be that the only serious threat was the US (because they might want, uh, huge.. tracts of land...), although now with the Arctic melting Russia might show up.
Also, if the US comes up here, the war might not end that quickly. The Canadian military, as little as they are, might be better prepared for resistance in winter, and invading/keeping such a large territory is difficult. And if not? The US will try to bring more baseball/American football in, and if you freaking dare touch the holy sanctity of hockey, you'll have the entire population up in arms. Beware of rabidly polite Canadians, eh.
I agree with your back-up plan, but I don't think the GP said to redesign all the cities in North America.
A friend of mine is an urban planner and he hates suburbs, because of the sprawl. I was in Florida lately, and while I enjoy the hot weather, I just didn't understand the long roads with not much on them (and didn't get why people would mow the grass on the side of the highway, but maybe that's just me). What's there is there however, you shouldn't destroy and rebuild for the fun of it.
One thing you can do though is change your future design decisions. Reduce urban sprawl by making it practical and cost-effective to live in the city: less taxes, more (cheap) condominium buildings. Think of how much that would save, no only in terms of pollution by driving, but the effort and money used by infrastructure (power grid, roads, water pipes, etc) over such big distances. Want to reduce car traffic? Make it impractical to drive a car. Increase fuel taxes, make parking expensive, and use that money to build better public transit (much, much better; the state of public transit in most of North America is appalling, of course people prefer driving). For the people that still want to live in a suburb, make it so they don't need to drive to get to the city, or anywhere in their town. That can be done without tearing down anything, but of course, it still requires immense political will.
As an atheist, I find it offensive that you believe I'm atheist because "oh, I never really thought about it." Do you realize a lot of atheists do not believe in any god precisely because they have thought about it, and found that there's no reason to believe in a god? As an atheist, I'm interested by religion, want to learn about different people and their culture, their beliefs. However, I've yet to talk to a believer in any god that can rationally, factually explain to me how it is that they know their god(s) exist(s).
Also, I'm not trying to convince a religious person that they're wrong. I don't really care, I know they are, but they're entitled to their opinion. It has nothing to do with moral compass; let's face it, a lot of religions promote great values. It's just that I personally feel that, as a believer, there's a part of your brain you must turn off to believe in an invisible, omniscient being, without factual proofs. The fact you can switch your brain off scares me a bit, because I find it irrational, and irrational people are unpredictable (though everyone is capable of violence).
Most rapists are not murderers. There might be overlap, but I'd say they're not thinking of killing someone when they're committing rape, there's a big gap in intention. Also, most rapes are not reported, whereas a person missing is more likely to attract attention, so they have a higher chance of getting caught if they murder a person.
On the other hand, I'd be okay with "eye for an eye". You rape someone, and your punishment is being raped (we can use a mechanical object) in public.
Stocks do _not_ work on that principle. If I buy 100% of the BitCoins in existence and everyone refuses to buy BitCoins, I have a big block of virtual data that is worth 0, because I can't use it in any way. If I buy 100% of Apple Inc., I get a company that employs people that makes money. I can choose to siphon all of that profit away and pay myself huge dividends, even if no one else wants to buy Apple stock.
People that don't understand the theory behind stocks compare it to a Ponzi scheme. I'm not saying some stocks aren't pumped and dumped like in a Ponzi scheme (from hotcake IPOs to penny stocks spam galore), but that's not how they're designed. It's only a zero sum game if the company pays 0 dividends and somehow crashes to the ground, but fundamentally, stocks do not work on the Ponzi principle.
Reminds me of a girl in high school. In grade 11 she asked that exact same question in chemistry class, "Madam, is the sun a star?". We looked at her with bewildered eyes.
Doesn't beat her exclamation in physics, though. "Sir, you're holding the mirror upside down!". The teacher was explaining optics and holding a round, concave mirror.
I think that's what he means... Back in the days, we loved FF1-3 (US) and 7. There wasn't a "hit and miss". It was good, the entire series. Now, though, people hate some of the FF games... that's burning the affection.:(
Don't you know, filesharers caused the economic crisis? If you've ever torrented a CD illegally and shared it (you must have, since you torrented it), that's like 270k of damage, assuming 12 tracks! If 1% of the population of the US is doing that, it's at least 3 million people, so 810 _billion_ dollars of damages caused to the poor recording industry!
Meanwhile, look at this guy having to cough up 675k, having to declare bankruptcy, default on his house and having his life ruined... but it's okay. Life is hard, there are lawyers to feed.
So.. every time there's a TSA story on Slashdot, I see this kind of comment. "Don't like it? Don't fly!"
Can we all agree that flying is not necessarily by choice? In economic terms, it's pretty inelastic. There are very few alternatives to flying, and in some cases, there are just no other options. I used to fly weekly, as a consultant, because driving/train would take you 1-2 days and a plane can do it in mere hours. Unless you never want to see your family on the weekends? And when I want to see the family that doesn't live close to me, I need to fly, because there's something in the way we call an "ocean", and I do not have 1 week to drive across the country and 3 weeks to take a boat (double that if I want to come back).
If you want to boycott a service, that service needs to be boycott-able, and flying _is not_ for most people. People like me cannot avoid it. The only thing we can do is raise a fuss, and say "okay this blows", by wearing t-shirts (because clearly, politicians don't listen that much, and I don't have a million to donate to a candidate).
Can we not generalize like this? I happen to be both a finance nazi, and this is annoying to me, not to mention downright dangerous if people start applying your rule without understanding it.
You can use a rule of thumb for P/E analysis, but it's just that, a rule of thumb. You cannot automatically say that a P/E above 17 makes the company overvalued, because they might have a growth potential that justifies it. For example, AAPL in 2007. You also cannot say that a company with a low P/E is undervalued, there might be good reasons why its P/E is so low.
Basically, your rule of thumb is valid based on your comfort level with risk and your assumptions about the maturity level of a company (and its industry and the state of the market etc.). To you, a P/E of 15 is roughly fairly valued, but if someone has a good reason to think Apple can keep growing at the same pace it had for a couple more years, then yes 15 might look cheap to them.
What's more interesting in this case, though, is that unlike MSFT at the height of the dotcom bubble, AAPL _seems_ valued fairly/conservatively and it's still worth that much... Makes you realize the commercial success that they've achieved in the past 10 years, turning around a company on the brink of bankruptcy into a cash-printing machine (alchemists of yore would be jealous. Apple is effectively taking plastic and metal and trading it for gold!) .
Shh, please. How dare you tell them that the "Moonlight Sonata", like all sonatas, has three movements, and that people only know the first?
Let them fiddle on an iPhone (aside: can the iPhone or any other phone/tablet even detect 5-7 different fingers on the screen?) and enjoy the action/response of a mechanical piano yourself.:)
So, wait, by that very definition, if a state is governed by an organization like, let's say, the Hamas (or take your favourite pick), it's no longer a culprit of terrorism?
There's a few countries in that "axis of evil" that would be happy.
Wow. That's.. a lot of hate right there, most of the time misplaced.
There's a good, I wouldn't say amazing, but a good IT industry here, because the Quebec government subsidizes IT jobs. The nightly anti-government protests have mostly stopped, and haven't been in the news for a bit (also, if you think 50 people marching with their babies protesting a law that forbids protesting is political instability, erm, reconsider wanting to live in a democracy). You do pay a lot of taxes, which is annoying, but you get services, and yes, a non-zero amount is wasted due to corruption and just plain incompetence, like everywhere. True, your kids are expected to learn French, as the province is in majority francophone, tough luck. However you can easily function as a pure anglophone in Montreal itself, as most of my colleagues can prove to you (I'd say English is making a resurgence in the city). Street shootings are not daily occurrences; I've been here for over almost 20 years now, and have never seen one, except on the news, like, again, most other places. Some neighbourhoods are bad-ish, and poor; don't live there if you don't want to. If there's an official policy of assimilation, it's not working, precisely because no one is banning English TV or the Internet.
No, it's not a perfect place. In terms of employment and taxes? Alberta is way, way better, did you see that boom in Calgary? But then it's colder, the distances are greater, and it's just plain more boring than Montreal in summer. Win some and lose some.
Also, Canada: Newfoundland, PEI, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia. That's 10 provinces, minus Quebec, 9. We also have 3 territories, did you know?... Man, I hope you weren't educated in Canada, because if you can't tell the number of provinces in your own country, your education system must suck more than Quebec's.:)
That all depends on the camera you have. On my camera, I only have one wheel, and so yes next to shift+wheel for shutter speed, but you do know bigger cameras have more buttons and two wheels, one for aperture and one for shutter speed?:) Try 'em out, you might realize some models have all the buttons you want, not to mention that if you know your ISO button, pressing it + wheel doesn't require you to think or look.
But you have it right, camera manufacturers _get_ UI (mostly). Car manufacturers, on the other hand... It seems the more expensive your car, the more electronics gimmicks they put, at the detriment of good interface. Good lord people, I do not, ever, want a single button/knob that changes everything from the radio to the A/C to the mode of the car. That would just remind me of the Onion spoof on the Mac with a single clickwheel as keyboard.
You know, unfortunately I don't believe this is part of "hacker" culture... this is part of rape culture, which is what permeates our entire society. I spoke to a few women friends, and this is the sort of things that happens _all the time_, at school, in bars, at the shopping mall... a hand that glides on their hips, a smack on their ass, a grope of their breasts.
But this is the sort of thing that goes unpunished, because no one seems to care. Read the first comment of Valerie's blog. It's written by a security guard at DEFCON, saying "As to the bribe cards last year, we were just having fun." The bribe cards, from her blog post, are cards with punch-holes or something that you can punch every time a woman shows you her tits. Really guys? Just having fun?
It sucks being a woman. Every man has the physical strength to overpower you, and there are just so many with rapist behaviour that you always feel threatened. However, I'm glad this gets talked about. It's a first step in the right direction, and guys that are not retards need to be aware and act to prevent such behaviour in others.
Banning abortion IS taking away a woman's liberty. Or do you not consider having something grow within you for 8 months and suffering the physiological and mental consequences not important?
Can someone help me understand what "Book file contains links from competitor" means?
From my understanding, that means she _linked_ Amazon directly through her e-book, which is not the same as "mentions Amazon". As some previous posters have said, iTunes carries content that talks about Amazon. If the difference here is that she links directly to a competitor's website through her book, well, I would understand why Apple doesn't allow it.
That raises a second good point, why does China generate so much CO2? Their inhabitants' lifestyle, on average, is far less demanding on the environment than Americans, and most probably Europeans (that one I can't judge very well, having only lived 3 years in Europe when I was young). China does an amazing amount of recycling (oh, don't worry, not for environmental reasons. For economic reasons, because you can sell paper, metal and plastic by weight), you need to pay for water, there is an increasing quantity of cars but most families still don't have one, etc. How could they have a similar carbon footprint to an European?
My guess is actually that it's not the people that need to be blamed, but the industries. The per-capita footprint is just the country's footprint divided by the number of inhabitants, and fact is, there are a lot of manufacturing plants and industries in China. However, many of those are producing for the international market (yes yes, they're stealing your jobs, we get it). I wonder what would happen to the developed world's carbon footprint if those industries were brought back? I'm sure there are better ways to produce, cleaner ways to mine rare earths, but the environmental impact cannot possibly be zero.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny, but that's also how I'd describe Applebees.
Seriously, what's up with all that salt? I think KFC actually tastes better, and that's something...
While I fully agree with you and would never use my free time to work more, I also sure as hell won't die thinking "damn, I wish I saw more of those TV episodes..."
On the other hand, "I wish I had spent more time walking and cuddling with my wife", "I wish I had gone out and done some volunteer work to help others", etc? Definitely.
I'm not sure what the source for your blogspot image is, but here's the UK Coke webpage. Notice the logo did change, perhaps not much compared to Pepsi, but it did.
The other difference is that renovations in China is a new thing.
1. China was a poor country, not so long ago, and a lot of it is still poor. People forget that a lot here, but 20 years ago, my parents wouldn't have been able to renovate if they wanted to, just based on materials cost. 2. Back then the government owned your house. Spending the money and effort to renovate, to have your apartment possibly re-appropriated, sounds like a lousy idea.
That takes care of the demand for such products, until very recently.
3. Space. You can definitely buy a hammer or a screwdriver, but something the size of a Home-Depot with flooring and kitchen kits and stuff? Yea, can you see that in the middle of Manhattan? It doesn't fit in the middle of Beijing either. And for people that don't live in cities? Go back to point 1.
I would say the North American Home Depot concept won't work. You have to modify your concept, and make it a one-stop shop: come in, choose materials, and pay someone to install it for you (ie hire the same cheap workers, but at least you chose all the materials). But eh, what do I know.
*sigh* Can people not believe outright the attention-whore headlines?
Check this: As confirmed in an SEC filing last year, the shares in Cook’s renumeration package are set to vest at different times. Half of the 1m stock units – valued at $376m back in August 2011 – will vest (i.e. be passed on to Cook) in August 2016, with the remainder coming in August 2021, ten years after he assumed the role of CEO.
What that means is that, because the Apple stock exploded in value, and his compensation is linked to it, if the stock stays the same for the next 10 years, he makes 378 millions, so 37.8 millions per year (well, + 900k in base salary). Factor in inflation, and it'll be less in current dollars. If he does a bad job and the company tanks, his compensation decreases. If Apple (the stock, hopefully linked to the company, as it should be over 10 years) does well, so does he. What's so wrong with that? Don't confuse the accounting with reality; you're _required_ to account for stock options in your SEC filings, it doesn't mean Apple actually paid that much or that Cook made that much in a year.
Now of course you can still argue 38M$ is too much for a CEO, but in that regard, I don't think you should complain about Cook. He manages the largest company ever by market cap that _makes real products_, and earns 25 times less than a hedge fund manager that profited from the recession by moving money around (and yes, I only counted his 1 billion in pure compensation, not the 4 he made because he invested in himself).
Actually you got it just right. It used to be that the only serious threat was the US (because they might want, uh, huge.. tracts of land...), although now with the Arctic melting Russia might show up.
Also, if the US comes up here, the war might not end that quickly. The Canadian military, as little as they are, might be better prepared for resistance in winter, and invading/keeping such a large territory is difficult. And if not? The US will try to bring more baseball/American football in, and if you freaking dare touch the holy sanctity of hockey, you'll have the entire population up in arms. Beware of rabidly polite Canadians, eh.
I agree with your back-up plan, but I don't think the GP said to redesign all the cities in North America.
A friend of mine is an urban planner and he hates suburbs, because of the sprawl. I was in Florida lately, and while I enjoy the hot weather, I just didn't understand the long roads with not much on them (and didn't get why people would mow the grass on the side of the highway, but maybe that's just me). What's there is there however, you shouldn't destroy and rebuild for the fun of it.
One thing you can do though is change your future design decisions. Reduce urban sprawl by making it practical and cost-effective to live in the city: less taxes, more (cheap) condominium buildings. Think of how much that would save, no only in terms of pollution by driving, but the effort and money used by infrastructure (power grid, roads, water pipes, etc) over such big distances. Want to reduce car traffic? Make it impractical to drive a car. Increase fuel taxes, make parking expensive, and use that money to build better public transit (much, much better; the state of public transit in most of North America is appalling, of course people prefer driving). For the people that still want to live in a suburb, make it so they don't need to drive to get to the city, or anywhere in their town. That can be done without tearing down anything, but of course, it still requires immense political will.
That exists. Better Place, a Shai Agassi project (ex-SAP executive), which is exactly what you describe.
As an atheist, I find it offensive that you believe I'm atheist because "oh, I never really thought about it." Do you realize a lot of atheists do not believe in any god precisely because they have thought about it, and found that there's no reason to believe in a god? As an atheist, I'm interested by religion, want to learn about different people and their culture, their beliefs. However, I've yet to talk to a believer in any god that can rationally, factually explain to me how it is that they know their god(s) exist(s).
Also, I'm not trying to convince a religious person that they're wrong. I don't really care, I know they are, but they're entitled to their opinion. It has nothing to do with moral compass; let's face it, a lot of religions promote great values. It's just that I personally feel that, as a believer, there's a part of your brain you must turn off to believe in an invisible, omniscient being, without factual proofs. The fact you can switch your brain off scares me a bit, because I find it irrational, and irrational people are unpredictable (though everyone is capable of violence).
I'd argue that's false.
Most rapists are not murderers. There might be overlap, but I'd say they're not thinking of killing someone when they're committing rape, there's a big gap in intention. Also, most rapes are not reported, whereas a person missing is more likely to attract attention, so they have a higher chance of getting caught if they murder a person.
On the other hand, I'd be okay with "eye for an eye". You rape someone, and your punishment is being raped (we can use a mechanical object) in public.
Stocks do _not_ work on that principle. If I buy 100% of the BitCoins in existence and everyone refuses to buy BitCoins, I have a big block of virtual data that is worth 0, because I can't use it in any way. If I buy 100% of Apple Inc., I get a company that employs people that makes money. I can choose to siphon all of that profit away and pay myself huge dividends, even if no one else wants to buy Apple stock.
People that don't understand the theory behind stocks compare it to a Ponzi scheme. I'm not saying some stocks aren't pumped and dumped like in a Ponzi scheme (from hotcake IPOs to penny stocks spam galore), but that's not how they're designed. It's only a zero sum game if the company pays 0 dividends and somehow crashes to the ground, but fundamentally, stocks do not work on the Ponzi principle.
Reminds me of a girl in high school. In grade 11 she asked that exact same question in chemistry class, "Madam, is the sun a star?". We looked at her with bewildered eyes.
Doesn't beat her exclamation in physics, though. "Sir, you're holding the mirror upside down!". The teacher was explaining optics and holding a round, concave mirror.
I think that's what he means... Back in the days, we loved FF1-3 (US) and 7. There wasn't a "hit and miss". It was good, the entire series. Now, though, people hate some of the FF games... that's burning the affection. :(
Don't you know, filesharers caused the economic crisis? If you've ever torrented a CD illegally and shared it (you must have, since you torrented it), that's like 270k of damage, assuming 12 tracks! If 1% of the population of the US is doing that, it's at least 3 million people, so 810 _billion_ dollars of damages caused to the poor recording industry!
Meanwhile, look at this guy having to cough up 675k, having to declare bankruptcy, default on his house and having his life ruined... but it's okay. Life is hard, there are lawyers to feed.
So.. every time there's a TSA story on Slashdot, I see this kind of comment. "Don't like it? Don't fly!"
Can we all agree that flying is not necessarily by choice? In economic terms, it's pretty inelastic. There are very few alternatives to flying, and in some cases, there are just no other options. I used to fly weekly, as a consultant, because driving/train would take you 1-2 days and a plane can do it in mere hours. Unless you never want to see your family on the weekends? And when I want to see the family that doesn't live close to me, I need to fly, because there's something in the way we call an "ocean", and I do not have 1 week to drive across the country and 3 weeks to take a boat (double that if I want to come back).
If you want to boycott a service, that service needs to be boycott-able, and flying _is not_ for most people. People like me cannot avoid it. The only thing we can do is raise a fuss, and say "okay this blows", by wearing t-shirts (because clearly, politicians don't listen that much, and I don't have a million to donate to a candidate).
Can we not generalize like this? I happen to be both a finance nazi, and this is annoying to me, not to mention downright dangerous if people start applying your rule without understanding it.
You can use a rule of thumb for P/E analysis, but it's just that, a rule of thumb. You cannot automatically say that a P/E above 17 makes the company overvalued, because they might have a growth potential that justifies it. For example, AAPL in 2007. You also cannot say that a company with a low P/E is undervalued, there might be good reasons why its P/E is so low.
Basically, your rule of thumb is valid based on your comfort level with risk and your assumptions about the maturity level of a company (and its industry and the state of the market etc.). To you, a P/E of 15 is roughly fairly valued, but if someone has a good reason to think Apple can keep growing at the same pace it had for a couple more years, then yes 15 might look cheap to them.
What's more interesting in this case, though, is that unlike MSFT at the height of the dotcom bubble, AAPL _seems_ valued fairly/conservatively and it's still worth that much... Makes you realize the commercial success that they've achieved in the past 10 years, turning around a company on the brink of bankruptcy into a cash-printing machine (alchemists of yore would be jealous. Apple is effectively taking plastic and metal and trading it for gold!) .
Shh, please. How dare you tell them that the "Moonlight Sonata", like all sonatas, has three movements, and that people only know the first?
:)
Let them fiddle on an iPhone (aside: can the iPhone or any other phone/tablet even detect 5-7 different fingers on the screen?) and enjoy the action/response of a mechanical piano yourself.
So, wait, by that very definition, if a state is governed by an organization like, let's say, the Hamas (or take your favourite pick), it's no longer a culprit of terrorism?
There's a few countries in that "axis of evil" that would be happy.
Wow. That's.. a lot of hate right there, most of the time misplaced.
:)
There's a good, I wouldn't say amazing, but a good IT industry here, because the Quebec government subsidizes IT jobs. The nightly anti-government protests have mostly stopped, and haven't been in the news for a bit (also, if you think 50 people marching with their babies protesting a law that forbids protesting is political instability, erm, reconsider wanting to live in a democracy). You do pay a lot of taxes, which is annoying, but you get services, and yes, a non-zero amount is wasted due to corruption and just plain incompetence, like everywhere. True, your kids are expected to learn French, as the province is in majority francophone, tough luck. However you can easily function as a pure anglophone in Montreal itself, as most of my colleagues can prove to you (I'd say English is making a resurgence in the city). Street shootings are not daily occurrences; I've been here for over almost 20 years now, and have never seen one, except on the news, like, again, most other places. Some neighbourhoods are bad-ish, and poor; don't live there if you don't want to. If there's an official policy of assimilation, it's not working, precisely because no one is banning English TV or the Internet.
No, it's not a perfect place. In terms of employment and taxes? Alberta is way, way better, did you see that boom in Calgary? But then it's colder, the distances are greater, and it's just plain more boring than Montreal in summer. Win some and lose some.
Also, Canada: Newfoundland, PEI, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia. That's 10 provinces, minus Quebec, 9. We also have 3 territories, did you know?... Man, I hope you weren't educated in Canada, because if you can't tell the number of provinces in your own country, your education system must suck more than Quebec's.
That all depends on the camera you have. On my camera, I only have one wheel, and so yes next to shift+wheel for shutter speed, but you do know bigger cameras have more buttons and two wheels, one for aperture and one for shutter speed? :) Try 'em out, you might realize some models have all the buttons you want, not to mention that if you know your ISO button, pressing it + wheel doesn't require you to think or look.
But you have it right, camera manufacturers _get_ UI (mostly). Car manufacturers, on the other hand... It seems the more expensive your car, the more electronics gimmicks they put, at the detriment of good interface. Good lord people, I do not, ever, want a single button/knob that changes everything from the radio to the A/C to the mode of the car. That would just remind me of the Onion spoof on the Mac with a single clickwheel as keyboard.
You know, unfortunately I don't believe this is part of "hacker" culture... this is part of rape culture, which is what permeates our entire society. I spoke to a few women friends, and this is the sort of things that happens _all the time_, at school, in bars, at the shopping mall... a hand that glides on their hips, a smack on their ass, a grope of their breasts.
But this is the sort of thing that goes unpunished, because no one seems to care. Read the first comment of Valerie's blog. It's written by a security guard at DEFCON, saying "As to the bribe cards last year, we were just having fun." The bribe cards, from her blog post, are cards with punch-holes or something that you can punch every time a woman shows you her tits. Really guys? Just having fun?
It sucks being a woman. Every man has the physical strength to overpower you, and there are just so many with rapist behaviour that you always feel threatened. However, I'm glad this gets talked about. It's a first step in the right direction, and guys that are not retards need to be aware and act to prevent such behaviour in others.
Banning abortion IS taking away a woman's liberty. Or do you not consider having something grow within you for 8 months and suffering the physiological and mental consequences not important?
Can someone help me understand what "Book file contains links from competitor" means?
From my understanding, that means she _linked_ Amazon directly through her e-book, which is not the same as "mentions Amazon". As some previous posters have said, iTunes carries content that talks about Amazon. If the difference here is that she links directly to a competitor's website through her book, well, I would understand why Apple doesn't allow it.
The first sign of being a hipster is proclaiming you're not a hipster.
Sorry, had to.
That raises a second good point, why does China generate so much CO2? Their inhabitants' lifestyle, on average, is far less demanding on the environment than Americans, and most probably Europeans (that one I can't judge very well, having only lived 3 years in Europe when I was young). China does an amazing amount of recycling (oh, don't worry, not for environmental reasons. For economic reasons, because you can sell paper, metal and plastic by weight), you need to pay for water, there is an increasing quantity of cars but most families still don't have one, etc. How could they have a similar carbon footprint to an European?
My guess is actually that it's not the people that need to be blamed, but the industries. The per-capita footprint is just the country's footprint divided by the number of inhabitants, and fact is, there are a lot of manufacturing plants and industries in China. However, many of those are producing for the international market (yes yes, they're stealing your jobs, we get it). I wonder what would happen to the developed world's carbon footprint if those industries were brought back? I'm sure there are better ways to produce, cleaner ways to mine rare earths, but the environmental impact cannot possibly be zero.