The original G3 network in the UK, 3, originally sold the service on the ability to video conference on phones. That was at least a couple of years ago.
I have a Zaurus. It spends most of its time sat in its 'shoe' and has been relegated really to an MP3 player. The Zaurus' feature is also its curse. It runs Linux and I've yet to find Linux software that is actually finished. I should not have to use a shell to use bluetooth.
...I do embedded software for digital television. I'm currently earning about $63K. I live in the north so my salary will be lower than the south east and London.
Are but that's the crux of the matter. There are facts. The whole lot isn't just guessed.
making outlandish assumptions
As compared with non-learned people making outlandish assumptions? In this case, of course, there has been lots of evidence over time and the theory (a plausable explanation that explains the *facts*) has been polished.
The thing is that most science comes down to one thing. Where we came from. If you replace that you have to throw away, physics, chemistry, astronomy, cosmology, geology, biology, anthropology...
Actually why I like the iPod is not its "coolness" or anything like that. Its just that I can't standing faffing with things. I spend all day trying to get set top boxes to do things they were not always designed to do. I really don't want the hassle with my consumer gear. So I have a Mac because it just works. iPods just work. Plug it in, sync, and that's that.
It's not pure statistics because someone had to set the test. Even with pure IQ tests you can come up with a test which has a slight male bias say. Look at the conclusions. Men have, on average, higher IQs than women but women do more with theirs. That is either the case, or, the test in some way favoured the males (accidentally or on purpose it doesn't matter) which created a gender skew in the statistics and in fact women don't do more with theirs, they just have a higher average IQ than the statistics suggest.
And yet somehow over the last 200 years America was at the fore front of science and technology.
Bollocks. I'm not decrying that in the last 100 years they have made a significant contribution to science and technology but not 200 years and even then in conjunction with other leading industrial nations.
The west was still wild 100 years ago. Meanwhile here in Europe we had Stephenson, Babbage, Ada Lovelace, Clerk Maxwell, Einstein, Plank, Heisenberg, Bohr, Boyle, Darwin, Swan to name a few.
Name a Georgean US scientist? (I.e one from the early 19 century). Name a Victorian invention, invented by a born and bred American?
Europe's and Japan's fledgling economies are such mostly because they save too much.
Bwa ha ha!
Obviously you don't know what 'fledgling' means. Japan's had a good economy for the last fifty years, which is a quarter the age of your country. The UK has had an economy for many many years longer than the US has existed. Two of the top four economies of the World are not fledgling.
The only reason the US dollar is more commonly used is because while you ummed and ahhed over whether you should fight someone during the 1939 to 1945 war, we were single handedly trying to defend Europe from tyrany whilst at the same time being decimated. We turned the tide, prevent our invasion, but could not retate Europe by ourselves. But as we were also fighting a front in the East in our protectorates we were going broke. Luckily the Japanese then bombed Perl Harbor and it forced the US to make a decision and enter the war. But because they came in half way through the US mainland was never threatened and so their industry wasn't decimated.
Basically we had the shit bombed out of us. The US didn't so the US became the monetary power in the years after the war. The trouble is that the US is trying to retain that position by financing with huge amounts of debt. It's unsustainable and eventually the economy collapses or some other action, often military, has to be taken in order to ensure resources.
people seem to think that cell phones MUST be answered, and ALWAYS pick up.
Nah! That's what voice mail is for. Actually among my friends SMS is by far the preferred way of communicating. Not actually speaking to one another. In fact, in order of use, phones are probably used for...
It's also illegal to place billboards/advertising by the side of major roads. I'm not sure exactly of the level, but motorways, and trunk routes are definitely not allowed to have them.
Farmers have got around that to some extent by parking trucks in their fields close to the road with advertisements on them but they are few and far between and some distance from the road. To be honest with the speeds we drive it can't have anything much more than "Buy Food" on it otherwise we can't read it in time.
Most roadside advertising is for pedestrians or is placed in railway stations, airports and the like where many people will be just sitting around.
So is this intending to rival the HDMI connector? VESA's will have to support encryption and DRM protocols for it to be taken up by the consumer digital video and television developers. It think they will have a hard ride.
That is very true for the older generation but not for anyone else any more. One of the things I like about where I live is that my city is big enough to have everything I need but small enough that I don't feel lost in it. London I like to visit but I wouldn't want to live there. No problem. London's only three hours away by car. Less so by train.
Add to that, living farther out is less expensive, more private, and you already have the car so why not use it.
- You're assuming you have a car. - Because it burns fuel destroying the environment. - You have to drive to bars and restaurants. (Which explains the high level of drink driving and the piss-water beer to reduce the problem) - There's no sense of neighbourhood.
I live where I do because I need ground for my dog. I actually can walk and after, at most ten minutes, be at three different bus routes, the local train station, a supermarket, a couple of pubs, an Italian restaurant and some small shops and take out places. I actually feel I'm living too much in suburbia and the people here keep themselves more to themselves.
In the previous city I lived in there was a park opposite the house where the dog was walked, shops and a whole variety of restaurants just around the corner and you could walk in to the centre of the city in fifteen minutes. It was only a few minutes by bus. I knew many of my neighbours well and we would get together for events. For example, the dog walkers who all walked their dog at the same time had a Christmas party in the park where we brought mulled wine in flasks, mince pies and treats for the dogs. There was real community spirit.
I know there's a different psyche in the US. It explains the foreign policy, explains the isolationism, it explains why cities are spread out and the suburbs are like they are. But there must be a reason. Victorian NY, Boston, SF etc weren't like that. Cheap cars in the fifties?
There's about 300 million in the US. There's roughly 60 million in the UK, 40 million in France, 100 million in Germany, 60 million in Italy and that's just the top four GDP wise in Europe.
The place *is* huge but what I wanted to know was why is it wasted? Why do people travel miles to work?
I wasn't intending to compare. But using the rather crass example of a city generally being a circle and population density being the same LA should be four times the diameter of my home town. Which means 32 miles across. LA is far more than that.
There's a balance between the extra sales you gain from selling to non Apple hardware users and the support nightmare of having hardware specifications you don't control. The advantage that Apple has with OS-X only running on their hardware is that they know their hardware intimately. They have a reputation and having people complain because OS-X doesn't run on their particular brand of motherboard etc will not help it one iota. Have you seen the number of drivers there are on a windows install disk?
You're explaining the symtoms but not the cause. *Why* do you have huge cities. *Why* do people drive miles to work. I live in a city of a million in the UK. I live four miles from its centre right on the end of suburbia and there are green hills and villages beyond me. I have a choice of two cable companies and ADSL. I have 2Mb ADSL (because I wanted a fixed IP and unrestricted usage). I drive ten miles to work across the country side and it takes me half an hour from door to door. I can go for a walk along a nice canal at lunch time to get some air.
When I worked in LA for a short time it took the same time to drive to work. Most of that was on soul destroying freeways. I couldn't walk anywhere and I had crappy broadband and smog. The nearest countryside was many miles away. Why do you put yourselves through it?
It's not the absolute wealth. It's never the absolute wealth. Neither is it the sales. It's the money made from the money used. I.e. the margins and the rate of return. Which would you prefer investing $1 million and getting $1000 back or investing $100,000 and getting $200 back? In that respect Apple's getting it absolutely right. Being a relatively low volume premium product manufacturer. It's simple economics.
Except that it comes from 1996. Okay then, what do you drive? What's it's performance? What did it cost you, what 'toys' does it have?
In my opinion a sub ten second car that does at least 40 mpg on motorways, has full leather, air con, decent sound system, decent build quality and a lower than everage mileage engine for a cost of £1500 is a bargain.
Even the old 140s and 240s had character. They weren't particularly fast (if fact they were damn right slow) but they had a certain something and went on for ever.
Yes the drivers do have a certain reputation like berks in Mercs, the arrogance of BMW drivers, the hogging of the right lane [in the UK] by Ford Mondeo driving commercial travellers etc. I don't know about the US though but over here that demographic is changing. The traditional drivers are not so keen on the newer models and they are being bought by professionals and young middle-class families now. XC70s and 90s seem to be quite prevalent in my area on the school run.
Of course, in the end, cars are just stationary vehicles which I have to avoid when riding one of these!.
Slashdot Mirror
The original G3 network in the UK, 3, originally sold the service on the ability to video conference on phones. That was at least a couple of years ago.
I have a Zaurus. It spends most of its time sat in its 'shoe' and has been relegated really to an MP3 player. The Zaurus' feature is also its curse. It runs Linux and I've yet to find Linux software that is actually finished. I should not have to use a shell to use bluetooth.
...I do embedded software for digital television. I'm currently earning about $63K. I live in the north so my salary will be lower than the south east and London.
people stumbling on a few interesting facts
Are but that's the crux of the matter. There are facts. The whole lot isn't just guessed.
making outlandish assumptions
As compared with non-learned people making outlandish assumptions? In this case, of course, there has been lots of evidence over time and the theory (a plausable explanation that explains the *facts*) has been polished.
The thing is that most science comes down to one thing. Where we came from. If you replace that you have to throw away, physics, chemistry, astronomy, cosmology, geology, biology, anthropology...
Actually why I like the iPod is not its "coolness" or anything like that. Its just that I can't standing faffing with things. I spend all day trying to get set top boxes to do things they were not always designed to do. I really don't want the hassle with my consumer gear. So I have a Mac because it just works. iPods just work. Plug it in, sync, and that's that.
It's not pure statistics because someone had to set the test. Even with pure IQ tests you can come up with a test which has a slight male bias say. Look at the conclusions. Men have, on average, higher IQs than women but women do more with theirs. That is either the case, or, the test in some way favoured the males (accidentally or on purpose it doesn't matter) which created a gender skew in the statistics and in fact women don't do more with theirs, they just have a higher average IQ than the statistics suggest.
And yet somehow over the last 200 years America was at the fore front of science and technology.
Bollocks. I'm not decrying that in the last 100 years they have made a significant contribution to science and technology but not 200 years and even then in conjunction with other leading industrial nations.
The west was still wild 100 years ago. Meanwhile here in Europe we had Stephenson, Babbage, Ada Lovelace, Clerk Maxwell, Einstein, Plank, Heisenberg, Bohr, Boyle, Darwin, Swan to name a few.
Name a Georgean US scientist? (I.e one from the early 19 century). Name a Victorian invention, invented by a born and bred American?
Europe's and Japan's fledgling economies are such mostly because they save too much.
Bwa ha ha!
Obviously you don't know what 'fledgling' means. Japan's had a good economy for the last fifty years, which is a quarter the age of your country. The UK has had an economy for many many years longer than the US has existed. Two of the top four economies of the World are not fledgling.
The only reason the US dollar is more commonly used is because while you ummed and ahhed over whether you should fight someone during the 1939 to 1945 war, we were single handedly trying to defend Europe from tyrany whilst at the same time being decimated. We turned the tide, prevent our invasion, but could not retate Europe by ourselves. But as we were also fighting a front in the East in our protectorates we were going broke. Luckily the Japanese then bombed Perl Harbor and it forced the US to make a decision and enter the war. But because they came in half way through the US mainland was never threatened and so their industry wasn't decimated.
Basically we had the shit bombed out of us. The US didn't so the US became the monetary power in the years after the war. The trouble is that the US is trying to retain that position by financing with huge amounts of debt. It's unsustainable and eventually the economy collapses or some other action, often military, has to be taken in order to ensure resources.
people seem to think that cell phones MUST be answered, and ALWAYS pick up.
Nah! That's what voice mail is for. Actually among my friends SMS is by far the preferred way of communicating. Not actually speaking to one another. In fact, in order of use, phones are probably used for...
- SMS/Test messages
- Photos
- Providing data connections
- Voice calls.
If work wants to contact me they can buy me a blackberry. They haven't so far and I wont give them my private number.
Mod parent funny! Lovely reference. I was thinking the very same thing.
It's also illegal to place billboards/advertising by the side of major roads. I'm not sure exactly of the level, but motorways, and trunk routes are definitely not allowed to have them.
Farmers have got around that to some extent by parking trucks in their fields close to the road with advertisements on them but they are few and far between and some distance from the road. To be honest with the speeds we drive it can't have anything much more than "Buy Food" on it otherwise we can't read it in time.
Most roadside advertising is for pedestrians or is placed in railway stations, airports and the like where many people will be just sitting around.
So is this intending to rival the HDMI connector? VESA's will have to support encryption and DRM protocols for it to be taken up by the consumer digital video and television developers. It think they will have a hard ride.
Brits think 100 miles is a long trip.
That is very true for the older generation but not for anyone else any more. One of the things I like about where I live is that my city is big enough to have everything I need but small enough that I don't feel lost in it. London I like to visit but I wouldn't want to live there. No problem. London's only three hours away by car. Less so by train.
Cor, driverless highways. Aren't they called railways/roads?
Add to that, living farther out is less expensive, more private, and you already have the car so why not use it.
- You're assuming you have a car.
- Because it burns fuel destroying the environment.
- You have to drive to bars and restaurants. (Which explains the high level of drink driving and the piss-water beer to reduce the problem)
- There's no sense of neighbourhood.
I live where I do because I need ground for my dog. I actually can walk and after, at most ten minutes, be at three different bus routes, the local train station, a supermarket, a couple of pubs, an Italian restaurant and some small shops and take out places. I actually feel I'm living too much in suburbia and the people here keep themselves more to themselves.
In the previous city I lived in there was a park opposite the house where the dog was walked, shops and a whole variety of restaurants just around the corner and you could walk in to the centre of the city in fifteen minutes. It was only a few minutes by bus. I knew many of my neighbours well and we would get together for events. For example, the dog walkers who all walked their dog at the same time had a Christmas party in the park where we brought mulled wine in flasks, mince pies and treats for the dogs. There was real community spirit.
I know there's a different psyche in the US. It explains the foreign policy, explains the isolationism, it explains why cities are spread out and the suburbs are like they are. But there must be a reason. Victorian NY, Boston, SF etc weren't like that. Cheap cars in the fifties?
A ton of people?
There's about 300 million in the US. There's roughly 60 million in the UK, 40 million in France, 100 million in Germany, 60 million in Italy and that's just the top four GDP wise in Europe.
The place *is* huge but what I wanted to know was why is it wasted? Why do people travel miles to work?
I wasn't intending to compare. But using the rather crass example of a city generally being a circle and population density being the same LA should be four times the diameter of my home town. Which means 32 miles across. LA is far more than that.
There's a balance between the extra sales you gain from selling to non Apple hardware users and the support nightmare of having hardware specifications you don't control. The advantage that Apple has with OS-X only running on their hardware is that they know their hardware intimately. They have a reputation and having people complain because OS-X doesn't run on their particular brand of motherboard etc will not help it one iota. Have you seen the number of drivers there are on a windows install disk?
And the inability to brew beer doesn't make you one!
You're explaining the symtoms but not the cause. *Why* do you have huge cities. *Why* do people drive miles to work. I live in a city of a million in the UK. I live four miles from its centre right on the end of suburbia and there are green hills and villages beyond me. I have a choice of two cable companies and ADSL. I have 2Mb ADSL (because I wanted a fixed IP and unrestricted usage). I drive ten miles to work across the country side and it takes me half an hour from door to door. I can go for a walk along a nice canal at lunch time to get some air.
When I worked in LA for a short time it took the same time to drive to work. Most of that was on soul destroying freeways. I couldn't walk anywhere and I had crappy broadband and smog. The nearest countryside was many miles away. Why do you put yourselves through it?
It's not the absolute wealth. It's never the absolute wealth. Neither is it the sales. It's the money made from the money used. I.e. the margins and the rate of return. Which would you prefer investing $1 million and getting $1000 back or investing $100,000 and getting $200 back? In that respect Apple's getting it absolutely right. Being a relatively low volume premium product manufacturer. It's simple economics.
We're talking about software patents here and those do mean fuck all outside of the US.
Not that the US patent office means fuck all out side of the US.
Except that it comes from 1996. Okay then, what do you drive? What's it's performance? What did it cost you, what 'toys' does it have?
In my opinion a sub ten second car that does at least 40 mpg on motorways, has full leather, air con, decent sound system, decent build quality and a lower than everage mileage engine for a cost of £1500 is a bargain.
So is this soulless?.
Even the old 140s and 240s had character. They weren't particularly fast (if fact they were damn right slow) but they had a certain something and went on for ever.
Yes the drivers do have a certain reputation like berks in Mercs, the arrogance of BMW drivers, the hogging of the right lane [in the UK] by Ford Mondeo driving commercial travellers etc. I don't know about the US though but over here that demographic is changing. The traditional drivers are not so keen on the newer models and they are being bought by professionals and young middle-class families now. XC70s and 90s seem to be quite prevalent in my area on the school run.
Of course, in the end, cars are just stationary vehicles which I have to avoid when riding one of these!.