Try avoiding the car when spending time in places like the Bay Area where you might live in a densely populated area and still have to walk 45 minutes each way to get to the nearest grocery store on foot, lots of it along roads with heavy traffic and no sidewalks.
Re:Switching XP - Amiga
on
AmigaOS 4
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
As much as there are valid reasons to use much memory, most of what we waste memory on now is purely bad software engineering. I used to have no problem running lots of different apps at once in 2MB RAM on my Amiga. Now, lots of apps will need more memory for good reasons - if I open hundreds of tabs in a web browser of course the documents will take a lot of memory - but that doesn't change the fact that we've gotten extremely complacent, and it comes at a cost. I'm writing this on a laptop with 1GB of memory that's at the moment extremely sluggish because of swapping. I'm not running much - certainly nothing justifying swapping just to change applications, but it does.
Re:It wasn't autobooting.
on
AmigaOS 4
·
· Score: 1
Cutting off anything wouldn't have done any good - the Amiga polled the disk drive every few seconds to check for a disk. And yes, it would autoboot from floppy, but no different from a PC, i.e. only when the OS wasn't already loaded.
You should read the Armageddon trilogy by Robert Rankin, where one of the books reveal that yes, the world is really the set of a TV soap opera that is immensely popular, where the script writer is this God fellow that's gone missing and Jesus' sister is very pissed off that she never got a proper part. And it features Elvis running around together with a time traveling sprout fighting the antichrist.
Just because western media has chosen to call these states communist does not make it so. They don't even call themselves communist, but socialist, just as the Soviet Union also never claimed to be communist, since making that claim would shake the very ideological foundation that the Soviet leaders used to excuse their massive abuses of power and lack of democracy. Their excuse was that the sacrifices of the people was needed to build a society that could once in the future become communist - Soviet leaders presented this future as anything from a couple of generations to a thousand years into the future, all the while they moved their country ever further away from the ideological principles they claimed to believe in.
You certainly appear to not have "considered what communism really implies".
For one, communism implies the withering away of the state. The state in Marxist theory has as it's primary purpose the oppression of one class by another, and so in a classless society the state would cease to exist in any meaningful form. Or did you miss that part of Marxist theory? It's the central thesis of Lenin's "State and Revolution"
Presumably you also missed the whole "classless" part. A society where the state retains power over the populace simply can't be communist as that power need to be exercised by someone, and those "someone" would have privileges that make them a separate class from the populace at large.
And unless you truly are brainwashed it should be blatantly obvious that countries like Cuba and China are as divided by class as countries like the US.
Nice argument, except that there is no such thing as "Standard English". English is defined entirely by usage, contrary to for instance French (Which is defined by the Académie française)
Tags are human assigned labels for something that we don't have better meta-data for, or where we don't want to be bothered with formalism. If you want something formal, go use a proper taxonomy/ontology and put bucketloads of OWL or RDF-schema data on your site to define relationships, or use format with well defined semantics to add information. Noone is stopping you, and there are cases where formally defining relationships is worthwhile, such as when you want software agents to be able to infer stuff about the data. But that's not what tagging is used for. Tagging is used for ad-hoc manual classification in situations where it is good enough
In Norway, murdering the entire school class would have gotten her 21 years, with reporting requirements to the police for the following 10-20 years at most. It's the maximum sentence allowed for any crime if I remember correctly.
Attacking the PS3 for it's high price and saying it doesn't has that much impact on early adopters is entirely consistent - if you read the rest of the message you'll see he points out that he thinks it does have an impact on the majority of console sales because most sales aren't planned purchases. Whether you agree with him or not doesn't mean he can't have it both ways.
At least part of the reason for the distinctive colour is to limit the appeal of resale by making it obvious that you're using a machine you shouldn't have in the first place. Presumably the for sale model will come in a different colour, so that people can trivially see if you're getting something taken of a kid.
They are not being "distributed to certain regions". The ministries of education in countries that want them arrange to buy them at cost, and any country or suitable organization is free to buy them for distribution to children. As it stands, the list of countries lined up so far is fairly diverse both in terms of economy and political systems.
The last time they were "invaded" by armed people, they retook the platform with force and held the "invaders" hostage. They've also in the past shot the the British navy... So I do suspect you might need to be armed with a bit more than beer and a hamburger.
The smart, ambitious people apply to come into the US legally through the immigration process.
There are quotas and costs associated with it. Far more smart and ambitious people are interested in coming to the US than are granted work permits.
And you are also failing to make the distinction between legally immigrating or working in the US and being allowed to become a US citizen - it takes years before you can even apply for citizenship after you have legally immigrated.
People don't make decisions like that purely based on what makes economically the most sense. Relocating to a foreign country is a big step, even if you have a job lined up and know the language, and far more so if you don't, and even more so if you have a family to bring with you.
If it was true that so many people would come to the US, why aren't more people bothering to apply for visas? The answer is simple: While a lot might like the thought, it's a big step, and it would also cost them a lot of money, and they'd have no guarantee of getting a reasonable job or finding somewhere reasonable to live.
And for that matter, while you might think it's in people's best interest, to a lot of people the US isn't seen as nearly a great place as Americans like to believe it's seen as.
This eliminates the lowest rungs on the employment ladder, and dooms many people to years (and sometimes generations) of poverty.
That is only true if you have persistent high levels of unemployment, whereas not having a minimum wage tends to keep salaries down on the "bottom rungs" even when unemployment is low because there are always a supply of people with no experience.
Frankly, experience in most European countries, which tends to have far higher levels of minimum wages, is that there is little connection between minimum wage and unemployment. Some countries with high minimum wages have high unemployment rates and many don't - other economic factors have far more impact.
I don't know about the US, but I do know that in Europe the average education level of immigrants is far higher than the average education level of the overall population. People leaving their home country tend to be resourceful people.
Assuming the "surcharge" is reasonable, few people would want to stay illegal immigrants, as being illegal puts them at the mercy of unscrupulous employers and limits where they have a chance of getting employment, both of which keeps their salaries down, and also limits their access to various benefits. So the point of the suggestion is to implement a policy which makes it a win-win proposition for immigrants to register legally rather than avoid the government.
British welfare payments are hardly sufficient to live decently on, much less give you much room for sending money home. Most people sending money home are working, and paying taxes, and helping to fund British welfare, not "steal your tax".
As an immigrant myself, who is paying on average around 25K GBP a year in taxes and NI (in other words, I'm paying about an average UK salary), who's never received a single penny in welfare payments, I get rather pissed off at assholes like you making generalizations. In fact, all the immigrants I know fall in the "inventive" kind - at least half a dozen of which are co-founders of VC funded startups, and paying similar levels of tax as I am.
Eh.. Yes, you had this exact same "shit" under Thatcher. People just didn't talk as much about it because too much else went to hell thanks under her rule. "British welfare" is a joke compared to most of the rest of Europe, and Labour haven't done much to reverse the brutal cuts of the Thatcher era.
If only the immigrants (or 'economic migrants') in the UK were such visionaries. Right now, they just come to the UK to get a free council house and welfare.
Really? I came to the UK with a VC funded company I co-founded. We brought with us 20 people, all of who paid tax. We employed 30 more for a while. The company had to scale back a few years ago, but every single one of the people who left found other high paid jobs and are helping to fund UK. I currently work for another startup and pay almost as much in tax every year as the average UK person earn. Over the last year I was also offered another position in another UK startup, VC funded and again started by two immigrants. For that matter, most of the local businesses where I live in South London were started and and are run by immigrants. Relying on anecdotal evidence will invariably give us biased viewpoints.
But, as I've found out, apparently my experiences in the matter "doesn't really count" because I'm white, from Europe (Norway to be precise), and not muslim. Conveniently, people complaining about immigration almost invariably find ways to redefine the "immigrants" to mean "low paid poor people that look different from us" - I hope you're not one of the people stooping that low.
They take priority over British citizens, because they are a 'minority'.
Really? Can you cite proof, please?
In fact, people who arrive in the UK without a proper work permit, visa or right to work (as a EU/EEA member state citizen for instance) risk being put in detention centers. Of the ones that don't, most are hard working and pay their taxes.
Ever noticed how most parking attendants in the UK are black? Turns out almost the only people prepared to take the level of abuse a parking attendant gets are Nigerian immigrants. Similar situations are found in many other professions that "native" British people just don't want to take, or aren't performing well.
Notice how Polish immigrants are changing the UK building industry? It's because British builders are shit - they overcharge, don't show up on time, and do an overall crappy job, while the Polish and other builders that come here do their jobs well and deliver on time. In fact, given the choice between hiring a British builder and a Polish builder, I'd likely pick the Polish guy even if I had to pay more. I have used a couple of skilled British builders, but they're the exception rather than the rule, and even the skilled ones tend not to understand the concept of delivering to an agreed timeframe.
Notice how nurses in the UK are often African or South Asian? In fact, this is one of the areas where immigration to the UK IS a problem, though not to the UK - the UK is sucking many developing nations dry of skilled workers, especially in the health field.
Immigrants cost me a fortune in tax. And they can't be bothered to learn the language, so now street signs in London can even be seen in Arabic!
Actually, immigrants save you a fortune in tax. It costs the UK far less to import skilled labour than paying child benefit, health care, school and university costs for a child born here and loose the tax revenues from the mother during maternity leave etc., and the immigrants that do come here to work far outnumbers the few that end up on benefits. Immigration is a net economic benefit to most industrialized countries that have reasonable unemployment rates.
The main issue with immigration is that in some professions it's "reverse aid" from developing nations to the developed nations.
And if you even think of bringing up citizens of poorer EU/EEA states, keep in mind that they are required to pay for themselves or leave unless they've been working in the UK for four years and apply for indefinite leave to remain (i.e. even though I've worked here for 6 years, if I become unable to pay my way myself, I could get throw straight out despite having paid around GBP 150k in taxes and n
Most people don't leave a company because the company sucks, they leave because they get a better offer, or because they don't like their manager. High turnover says little about how the company is to work for overall, and high turnover in a large company tends to say more about how people assess the company's economic outlook at hence their feeling of security or how they are rewarded, unless the there's a really bad management culture in the company.
If stock options and vesting periods didn't aid retention, they wouldn't be used, as stock options contribute to tremendous dilution rates for investors in tech companies. If you look at hiring patterns for companies using stock options you will see very clear correlations to vesting periods - a company that sees slowing growth will start seeing increased turnover of staff when more staff get close to the end of their vesting periods. You can try to pretend it isn't so, but in real life it is.
The people who don't care about the money aren't the ones that contribute to high turnover - they quickly find somewhere they are happy and end up staying longer than average, and are unlikely to take jobs in companies that don't look like a good fit for them in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
That was using a MiniITX board.
Try avoiding the car when spending time in places like the Bay Area where you might live in a densely populated area and still have to walk 45 minutes each way to get to the nearest grocery store on foot, lots of it along roads with heavy traffic and no sidewalks.
As much as there are valid reasons to use much memory, most of what we waste memory on now is purely bad software engineering. I used to have no problem running lots of different apps at once in 2MB RAM on my Amiga. Now, lots of apps will need more memory for good reasons - if I open hundreds of tabs in a web browser of course the documents will take a lot of memory - but that doesn't change the fact that we've gotten extremely complacent, and it comes at a cost. I'm writing this on a laptop with 1GB of memory that's at the moment extremely sluggish because of swapping. I'm not running much - certainly nothing justifying swapping just to change applications, but it does.
Cutting off anything wouldn't have done any good - the Amiga polled the disk drive every few seconds to check for a disk. And yes, it would autoboot from floppy, but no different from a PC, i.e. only when the OS wasn't already loaded.
It's a hashing function, you dimwit - any hash have an possibly infinite number of plaintexts unless the length of the input space is restricted.
You should read the Armageddon trilogy by Robert Rankin, where one of the books reveal that yes, the world is really the set of a TV soap opera that is immensely popular, where the script writer is this God fellow that's gone missing and Jesus' sister is very pissed off that she never got a proper part. And it features Elvis running around together with a time traveling sprout fighting the antichrist.
"Communist nation" is an oxymoron.
Just because western media has chosen to call these states communist does not make it so. They don't even call themselves communist, but socialist, just as the Soviet Union also never claimed to be communist, since making that claim would shake the very ideological foundation that the Soviet leaders used to excuse their massive abuses of power and lack of democracy. Their excuse was that the sacrifices of the people was needed to build a society that could once in the future become communist - Soviet leaders presented this future as anything from a couple of generations to a thousand years into the future, all the while they moved their country ever further away from the ideological principles they claimed to believe in.
You certainly appear to not have "considered what communism really implies".
For one, communism implies the withering away of the state. The state in Marxist theory has as it's primary purpose the oppression of one class by another, and so in a classless society the state would cease to exist in any meaningful form. Or did you miss that part of Marxist theory? It's the central thesis of Lenin's "State and Revolution"
Presumably you also missed the whole "classless" part. A society where the state retains power over the populace simply can't be communist as that power need to be exercised by someone, and those "someone" would have privileges that make them a separate class from the populace at large. And unless you truly are brainwashed it should be blatantly obvious that countries like Cuba and China are as divided by class as countries like the US.
Nice argument, except that there is no such thing as "Standard English". English is defined entirely by usage, contrary to for instance French (Which is defined by the Académie française)
Tags are human assigned labels for something that we don't have better meta-data for, or where we don't want to be bothered with formalism. If you want something formal, go use a proper taxonomy/ontology and put bucketloads of OWL or RDF-schema data on your site to define relationships, or use format with well defined semantics to add information. Noone is stopping you, and there are cases where formally defining relationships is worthwhile, such as when you want software agents to be able to infer stuff about the data. But that's not what tagging is used for. Tagging is used for ad-hoc manual classification in situations where it is good enough
In Norway, murdering the entire school class would have gotten her 21 years, with reporting requirements to the police for the following 10-20 years at most. It's the maximum sentence allowed for any crime if I remember correctly.
Attacking the PS3 for it's high price and saying it doesn't has that much impact on early adopters is entirely consistent - if you read the rest of the message you'll see he points out that he thinks it does have an impact on the majority of console sales because most sales aren't planned purchases. Whether you agree with him or not doesn't mean he can't have it both ways.
At least part of the reason for the distinctive colour is to limit the appeal of resale by making it obvious that you're using a machine you shouldn't have in the first place. Presumably the for sale model will come in a different colour, so that people can trivially see if you're getting something taken of a kid.
They are not being "distributed to certain regions". The ministries of education in countries that want them arrange to buy them at cost, and any country or suitable organization is free to buy them for distribution to children. As it stands, the list of countries lined up so far is fairly diverse both in terms of economy and political systems.
I've lived in Britain for 6 years now, and I still can't remember how much a stone is.
Tried "man emacs" lately? Or used gcc? Just to give two examples of projects he initiated and wrote the original versions of.
The last time they were "invaded" by armed people, they retook the platform with force and held the "invaders" hostage. They've also in the past shot the the British navy... So I do suspect you might need to be armed with a bit more than beer and a hamburger.
There are quotas and costs associated with it. Far more smart and ambitious people are interested in coming to the US than are granted work permits.
And you are also failing to make the distinction between legally immigrating or working in the US and being allowed to become a US citizen - it takes years before you can even apply for citizenship after you have legally immigrated.
If it was true that so many people would come to the US, why aren't more people bothering to apply for visas? The answer is simple: While a lot might like the thought, it's a big step, and it would also cost them a lot of money, and they'd have no guarantee of getting a reasonable job or finding somewhere reasonable to live.
And for that matter, while you might think it's in people's best interest, to a lot of people the US isn't seen as nearly a great place as Americans like to believe it's seen as.
That is only true if you have persistent high levels of unemployment, whereas not having a minimum wage tends to keep salaries down on the "bottom rungs" even when unemployment is low because there are always a supply of people with no experience.
Frankly, experience in most European countries, which tends to have far higher levels of minimum wages, is that there is little connection between minimum wage and unemployment. Some countries with high minimum wages have high unemployment rates and many don't - other economic factors have far more impact.
I don't know about the US, but I do know that in Europe the average education level of immigrants is far higher than the average education level of the overall population. People leaving their home country tend to be resourceful people.
Assuming the "surcharge" is reasonable, few people would want to stay illegal immigrants, as being illegal puts them at the mercy of unscrupulous employers and limits where they have a chance of getting employment, both of which keeps their salaries down, and also limits their access to various benefits. So the point of the suggestion is to implement a policy which makes it a win-win proposition for immigrants to register legally rather than avoid the government.
As an immigrant myself, who is paying on average around 25K GBP a year in taxes and NI (in other words, I'm paying about an average UK salary), who's never received a single penny in welfare payments, I get rather pissed off at assholes like you making generalizations. In fact, all the immigrants I know fall in the "inventive" kind - at least half a dozen of which are co-founders of VC funded startups, and paying similar levels of tax as I am.
Eh.. Yes, you had this exact same "shit" under Thatcher. People just didn't talk as much about it because too much else went to hell thanks under her rule. "British welfare" is a joke compared to most of the rest of Europe, and Labour haven't done much to reverse the brutal cuts of the Thatcher era.
Really? I came to the UK with a VC funded company I co-founded. We brought with us 20 people, all of who paid tax. We employed 30 more for a while. The company had to scale back a few years ago, but every single one of the people who left found other high paid jobs and are helping to fund UK. I currently work for another startup and pay almost as much in tax every year as the average UK person earn. Over the last year I was also offered another position in another UK startup, VC funded and again started by two immigrants. For that matter, most of the local businesses where I live in South London were started and and are run by immigrants. Relying on anecdotal evidence will invariably give us biased viewpoints.
But, as I've found out, apparently my experiences in the matter "doesn't really count" because I'm white, from Europe (Norway to be precise), and not muslim. Conveniently, people complaining about immigration almost invariably find ways to redefine the "immigrants" to mean "low paid poor people that look different from us" - I hope you're not one of the people stooping that low.
They take priority over British citizens, because they are a 'minority'.
Really? Can you cite proof, please?
In fact, people who arrive in the UK without a proper work permit, visa or right to work (as a EU/EEA member state citizen for instance) risk being put in detention centers. Of the ones that don't, most are hard working and pay their taxes.
Ever noticed how most parking attendants in the UK are black? Turns out almost the only people prepared to take the level of abuse a parking attendant gets are Nigerian immigrants. Similar situations are found in many other professions that "native" British people just don't want to take, or aren't performing well.
Notice how Polish immigrants are changing the UK building industry? It's because British builders are shit - they overcharge, don't show up on time, and do an overall crappy job, while the Polish and other builders that come here do their jobs well and deliver on time. In fact, given the choice between hiring a British builder and a Polish builder, I'd likely pick the Polish guy even if I had to pay more. I have used a couple of skilled British builders, but they're the exception rather than the rule, and even the skilled ones tend not to understand the concept of delivering to an agreed timeframe.
Notice how nurses in the UK are often African or South Asian? In fact, this is one of the areas where immigration to the UK IS a problem, though not to the UK - the UK is sucking many developing nations dry of skilled workers, especially in the health field.
Immigrants cost me a fortune in tax. And they can't be bothered to learn the language, so now street signs in London can even be seen in Arabic!
Actually, immigrants save you a fortune in tax. It costs the UK far less to import skilled labour than paying child benefit, health care, school and university costs for a child born here and loose the tax revenues from the mother during maternity leave etc., and the immigrants that do come here to work far outnumbers the few that end up on benefits. Immigration is a net economic benefit to most industrialized countries that have reasonable unemployment rates.
The main issue with immigration is that in some professions it's "reverse aid" from developing nations to the developed nations.
And if you even think of bringing up citizens of poorer EU/EEA states, keep in mind that they are required to pay for themselves or leave unless they've been working in the UK for four years and apply for indefinite leave to remain (i.e. even though I've worked here for 6 years, if I become unable to pay my way myself, I could get throw straight out despite having paid around GBP 150k in taxes and n
If stock options and vesting periods didn't aid retention, they wouldn't be used, as stock options contribute to tremendous dilution rates for investors in tech companies. If you look at hiring patterns for companies using stock options you will see very clear correlations to vesting periods - a company that sees slowing growth will start seeing increased turnover of staff when more staff get close to the end of their vesting periods. You can try to pretend it isn't so, but in real life it is.
The people who don't care about the money aren't the ones that contribute to high turnover - they quickly find somewhere they are happy and end up staying longer than average, and are unlikely to take jobs in companies that don't look like a good fit for them in the first place.