Hmm, maybe I'll give it a shot. I'm nervous about getting the carpet yanked out from under me after spending a bunch of money on capture hardware. But, I can always add the new capture device on top of the existing ones so I have a fallback and then return that hardware down the road.
I already use Schedulesdirect, so EPG data is not a concern. I don't mind paying for service/etc - I just don't want to end up doing all that and have DRM preventing me from actually being able to use the service I paid for.
Refuses to take pill B because the patient claims it causes massive diarrhea is useful information that benefits everything from the FDA (and public at large) to the patient (maybe in the future the new pill C might get considered). A statement that the patient tends to forget to their their pills could lead to counseling or effort to reduce pill burden or suggestions for how to remember to take them rather than lots of time re-considering therapies that are likely to actually work. A statement that the patient is philosophically opposed to taking medications unless they are convinced the situation is dire could lead to more education, or allow future doctors to include more alternative therapies (dietitians, exercise recommendations, whatever), or more partnering to help the patient to understand the limits of non-pill therapies. A statement of "patient is non-compliant" doesn't really help anybody, unless you count future doctors who can collect a bill for an office visit while writing off the patient's concerns and not providing new options.
Oh, and sometimes the solution to these kinds of problems isn't more expensive doctor time. A more factually-based EMR could be used to refer a patient to lower-cost counseling or nursing services (phone a nurse, classes, etc).
...and that's the whole problem with obamacare, universal healthcare, and insurance in the first place. I should be able to have whatever facts are in my history for the sole purpose of discussing treatment with medical professionals in a secured, private way. All the idiots were convinced that a law that now forces everyone to buy insurance whether they want it or not, now guarantees that you'll be screwed as maximally as possible.
Uh, the whole point of mandatory insurance is that it can be bundled with a ban on exclusions for pre-existing conditions, which means that your medical history CAN'T be used against you. Obamacare was designed to do exactly what you want - allow medical records to be used for your benefit and not against you. Previously insurance companies could exclude pre-existing conditions, which means that companies had incentive to dig through your records looking for any excuse possible to deny your care.
I certainly won't say that I'm happy with all aspects of Obamacare, but the ban on exclusions for pre-existing conditions was a big win for just about everybody. The reason for mandatory insurance was to make this possible. If you require companies to treat pre-existing conditions but you don't require people to be insured, then people will wait until they're in the hospital to sign up for insurance and insurance rates will become prohibitive for everybody. The only way to avoid bans on pre-existing conditions is to have universal coverage. In most countries this is accomplished via taxes (something you can't opt out of), but as a compromise in Obamacare it was just made a penalty for anybody who doesn't sign up (a penalty which is likely to small to be effective - expect problems down the road - the penalty should be larger than the typical cost to buy insurance if you want to achieve universal coverage, or just create a tax-funded option and call it "free").
That's the problem. Our medical system is great at treating "average" patients, and horrible at treating any individual one. It doesn't do a good job of learning from individual experiences. It also tends to ignore those who do have knowledge of such things.
If somebody who has been healthy all their life is driven to the ER with a heart attack you have no choice but to treat them as an "average" patient - that's going to give them the best results based on your limited knowledge. However, when somebody who has been managing type 2 diabetes with insulin for a decade tells you that they think that the dose of insulin you're about to give them doesn't seem right, you should probably should at least engage in a conversation and weigh their words carefully. I know a diabetic who has had experiences varying from nurses who are very deferential to them with regard to sugar management to those who refuse to listen and they woke up in the ICU in a cold sweat fumbling for the call button in a state of delirium (their blood sugar was around the 40s I think, and their body temperature was in the 80s). This was actually when they were starting to get better (hence not being on IV insulin with frequent checks). The most you can do as a visitor is try to talk to as many nurses as you can and get the night shift one before you leave, but that is pretty grueling when a relative is in the hospital for a week.
It's appropriate to check on what is being prescribed and be involved in your care when you have the ability.
Yeah, that works great for you and me, but 2/3rds of the healthy Americans walking around out there would have trouble with that. Then consider those who aren't healthy. If you're lying on a bed in the ICU with sepsis and barely able to think about anything about the next episode of vomiting are you really going to stop and ask the nurse to explain what is in the 5th IV bag they changed in the last hour? Let's not even start on the people who just had a stroke.
I've seen the kind of behavior described above firsthand when in a hospital with a relative. Shifts change three times a day and even in the ICU they can't keep everything straight (with a 1:2 nurse ratio). The chart is 3 inches thick, so writing a note in there is of limited value.
A lot of medical care consists of catering to the "average" patient. That's the basis of all the clinical trial data, and the experience of the doctors. Sure, the average is a good place to start, but the system doesn't do a good job of learning how individual patients respond to treatment. Sure, the patient and their family doesn't have a medical degree so their concerns should be weighed accordingly, but many patients suffer with chronic diseases that require heavy management. A diabetic who has been on multiple injections or a pump and 6 other medications for five years probably has a MUCH better sense of how to manage their own blood sugars than a random nurse, and their advice should be weighed accordingly (though the nurse should certainly work with them to ensure that restricted diets / illness is accounted for).
Are those typically-paid prices, or typically-billed prices?
I've probably spent about three weeks of my life living in hospitals so far (as a visitor, not as a patient) and paying the bills from the resulting care. I'd say that in general the insurance companies pay 10 cents on the dollar.
ICU rates seem to be about $1k/day (billed at $10k/day). A major surgery probably runs $30-50k or so all-inclusive (I'm talking about bypass surgery, endarterectomies, etc - oh, billed at $100-200k).
It seems to me that many of the costs in healthcare are things that are sought but rarely paid, except by those who don't have an insurance company with the clout to deny them.
That said, I'll be the first to agree that many costs could be avoided entirely if we had better preventative care.
There is also a golden rule in life -- The one with the most gold makes the rules.
That always true on community distros though. Influence is power in large community-based distros, moreso than money.
I agree. I think Shuttleworth is just voicing his frustration with the very vocal few who dust up drama whenever they feel slighted like the recent announcement that Ubuntu Developer Summits will be held online and happen more frequently.
This is the conflict. Shuttleworth has a lot of money, but there are others who have a lot of influence. Why is it OK to use money to hire developers to work on one set of priorities, but it is not OK to use influence to get a lot of other developers to work on a different set of priorities? The former just tends to be a lot less visible and doesn't involve making a stink on public lists.
Mark wants to use his money to have Ubuntu achieve one vision, and others want to use their influence to have Ubuntu achieve other visions. Legally Canonical might own the name, but they can't really own the thing most people associate with Ubuntu as it was never really theirs to begin with.
I'm doing just that for locals, but all my cable channels are just SD right now.
I'm on FIOS, and I'd like to move to HD, but honestly trying to get the non-OTA channels in HD just sounds like a real PITA. They charge more for the tuners, and then I'd need an HDCP-remover and hardware that can encode in realtime (likely at poor quality levels for the bitrate - but maybe it is decent). The family will live with SD, so I probably will just get HD content from other sources if I want it.
I don't mind paying for my video - I just want to watch it the way I want to watch it. Give me an mpeg-4 stream - like every file sharing site on the planet already does for free. It isn't like all the HDCP/etc keeps the content off those sites - it can be done, and it only takes one person on the planet to do it.
Yup. But it really just compounds the problem. If remote employees are unproductive the problem is bad managers who can't measure the value of their work.
If you change the policy to one of "come in or you're fired" then anybody who can't come in or who can find a better gig loses their job. That is just even lazier management. The people who are complete dead weight who could never get another job anywhere will drive 75 miles each morning to keep the job they have - they'll punch in and out right on time under the new policy, and yet will do no useful work.
I've seen that sort of thing at work - often the metric is % of cases closed within some SLA. The problem with that is that a case that goes over the SLA is a lost case, and there is no reward for speed within the SLA.
So, everybody goes through the inbox cherry-picking the easy stuff and they churn it out to get good numbers. When somebody calls with a real mess they basically get no help - once the case is over the SLA it is a hot potato nobody wants to touch. That also means that the hero who wants to do it just to be a good employee gets no support from others as nobody else wants to touch it either.
The proper test of employee utilization is not some arbitrary measurement of VPN usage, it is to gradually increase the workload or decrease the timetable until there is a performance slip, then scale back by 10% (because most employees can work a bit above their continuous performace for short periods).
The proper test of employee utilization is to determine the value of the work they perform, and whether it exceeds what they are being paid. If the value of the work is lower then assign work until they're at least justified, and if they can't deliver fire them, and if nobody can deliver cancel the project as it has no ROI.
I guess if you can get more work for the same pay you'd be an idiot to not try, but the employee would have to be an idiot to let you get away with it.
If you are being paid the salary of a software engineer, and you are only doing 20 hours of work a week, and literally cannot think of anything else to do to fill your time that is productive work, then you have a major problem, and you are probably vastly overpaid.
Uh, if somebody is able to do enough work to justify a full salary in 20 hours a week, then I'd say they have a great thing going. If they're not going to be paid more to do more, and they're able to justify their salaries on their current work output, then only an idiot would work more.
But I can easily find you if I need to ask you something, instead of sending an e-mail I hope you read in a timely matter, or hoping you don't have your phone on silent.
If you come to find me at work you'll fine me with the door closed in a teleconf. If I come to find you at work I'll find you in the same condition. The concept at my workplace of trying to walk up to somebody and talk to them died a few layoffs ago.
I could even see an in-flight request for specific logs to be sent, but it isn't like you can change an engine in-flight so I'm not sure how much time that would really save.
They can't change an engine in-flight, but that doesn't mean they can't pressure hammer the valves or perform other creative maintenance during the flight.
You only do those kinds of tricks if the alternative is crashing/etc, or in something unmanned, or when there really is very little risk. Otherwise, the adage is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." An engine that needs maintenance soon is quite different from an engine that is on fire, etc.
Might be worth noting that the operation of the stone in the show is fairly different from the description on wikipedia. In the show they basically hold it up to the clouds and see the sun through it. In Wikipedia they describe having to adjust the angle the stone is held at to detect circles in the sky and use that to locate the sun. Whether they are equivalent descriptions I cannot say. When they demonstrated the stone on the show I guessed it was calcite and had something to do with the polarization of light, but I couldn't see how it would behave in quite the way they demonstrated it, and I might have been right about that much.
Japan doesn't have enough land? I could see saying not enough resources/etc, but they have a declining population. The reason the cities are so crowded is cultural - the transition from skyscrapers to farmland is a pretty sharp one in Japan.
Yup, makes way more sense to just get a 2kb event list sent during flight, and then the dispatchers can have the right maintenance team on the tarmac when the plane pulls in. They can plug in an ethernet cable and download whatever raw diagnostic logs they need to speed up the repairs.
I could even see an in-flight request for specific logs to be sent, but it isn't like you can change an engine in-flight so I'm not sure how much time that would really save.
Saving multi-TB of data on looped storage for such an expensive plane just makes sense. Bonus points if you can harden it to survive a crash. Streaming all that data in realtime, however, makes little sense. Even archiving it may be of limited use, but with planes being so expensive it probably doesn't hurt to have the data available "just in case."
NX wasn't designed for any application in particular, so of course it wasn't designed for Chromium, just as it wasn't designed for gedit, vim, emacs, xterm, etc.
Chromium has issues due to its dependence on client-side rendering, and inability to fall-back to something simpler when it is not available. Chromium also doesn't support running independently on more than one DISPLAY with clients running from the same profile. It was basically one of those 80% designs, which means it takes the market over by storm but drives power users nuts...
You do realise that a coal power station would release more radioactive material in a few minutes of operation than TMI did, right?
Not bad, only an order of magnitude out.
Genuinely interested here - is it really only an order of magnitude out? If so you're saying you really do agree with the post you replied to, as I doubt most people would be bothered by the emissions of a coal plant over a few hours (which is more than an order of magnitude above a few minutes). Did you actually agree, or were you being sarcastic?
I really don't have a horse in this race. I think society needs to embrace nuclear power, but I don't trust the typical US corporation to run it.
Having a single source for short half-life medical isotopes for a country the size of Australia is just insane. It isn't like you can fly them from Japan or the US before they decay. Just flying them across Australia is probably pushing it.
Yeah, how dare they release a free supported operating system and try to leverage some income out of it to pay the bills. Hey, you can opt out of whatever you find appalling in *buntu.
The easiest way to opt out is to not install it in the first place.:)
Nobody is saying X11 isn't in need of improvement. The problem is that the 80% solution really doesn't meet everybody's needs. If all you want is a tablet that makes you a billion dollars the 80% solution is just fine. However, most linux users are the sorts of people who haven't been satisfied to date with the 80% solutions, so while a new one will make lots of money, it is unlikely to win over most of the current users.
(And speaking of shitty, useless software, how the fuck do you link directly to Google+ comments?)
You can't. The other thing that drives me nuts with G+ is that their Android client doesn't support the share function. No, the OTHER share function - the one present in every single other android application. I want to save a copy of a post or email a link to a post, not post it on my own feed...
Well, NX runs great until you run something that uses client-side rendering for everything, like chromium. Then you're reduced to sending gigantic bitmaps over the network again a la VNC.
That was the argument for having to rent your phone for $20/month from the phone company. That practice was banned, and for good reason. The irony is that before was banned people were doing all manner of exploits to make free calls, generally due to the prevalence of in-band signaling.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm, maybe I'll give it a shot. I'm nervous about getting the carpet yanked out from under me after spending a bunch of money on capture hardware. But, I can always add the new capture device on top of the existing ones so I have a fallback and then return that hardware down the road.
I already use Schedulesdirect, so EPG data is not a concern. I don't mind paying for service/etc - I just don't want to end up doing all that and have DRM preventing me from actually being able to use the service I paid for.
The facts also are more informative.
Refuses to take pill B because the patient claims it causes massive diarrhea is useful information that benefits everything from the FDA (and public at large) to the patient (maybe in the future the new pill C might get considered). A statement that the patient tends to forget to their their pills could lead to counseling or effort to reduce pill burden or suggestions for how to remember to take them rather than lots of time re-considering therapies that are likely to actually work. A statement that the patient is philosophically opposed to taking medications unless they are convinced the situation is dire could lead to more education, or allow future doctors to include more alternative therapies (dietitians, exercise recommendations, whatever), or more partnering to help the patient to understand the limits of non-pill therapies. A statement of "patient is non-compliant" doesn't really help anybody, unless you count future doctors who can collect a bill for an office visit while writing off the patient's concerns and not providing new options.
Oh, and sometimes the solution to these kinds of problems isn't more expensive doctor time. A more factually-based EMR could be used to refer a patient to lower-cost counseling or nursing services (phone a nurse, classes, etc).
...and that's the whole problem with obamacare, universal healthcare, and insurance in the first place. I should be able to have whatever facts are in my history for the sole purpose of discussing treatment with medical professionals in a secured, private way. All the idiots were convinced that a law that now forces everyone to buy insurance whether they want it or not, now guarantees that you'll be screwed as maximally as possible.
Uh, the whole point of mandatory insurance is that it can be bundled with a ban on exclusions for pre-existing conditions, which means that your medical history CAN'T be used against you. Obamacare was designed to do exactly what you want - allow medical records to be used for your benefit and not against you. Previously insurance companies could exclude pre-existing conditions, which means that companies had incentive to dig through your records looking for any excuse possible to deny your care.
I certainly won't say that I'm happy with all aspects of Obamacare, but the ban on exclusions for pre-existing conditions was a big win for just about everybody. The reason for mandatory insurance was to make this possible. If you require companies to treat pre-existing conditions but you don't require people to be insured, then people will wait until they're in the hospital to sign up for insurance and insurance rates will become prohibitive for everybody. The only way to avoid bans on pre-existing conditions is to have universal coverage. In most countries this is accomplished via taxes (something you can't opt out of), but as a compromise in Obamacare it was just made a penalty for anybody who doesn't sign up (a penalty which is likely to small to be effective - expect problems down the road - the penalty should be larger than the typical cost to buy insurance if you want to achieve universal coverage, or just create a tax-funded option and call it "free").
That's the problem. Our medical system is great at treating "average" patients, and horrible at treating any individual one. It doesn't do a good job of learning from individual experiences. It also tends to ignore those who do have knowledge of such things.
If somebody who has been healthy all their life is driven to the ER with a heart attack you have no choice but to treat them as an "average" patient - that's going to give them the best results based on your limited knowledge. However, when somebody who has been managing type 2 diabetes with insulin for a decade tells you that they think that the dose of insulin you're about to give them doesn't seem right, you should probably should at least engage in a conversation and weigh their words carefully. I know a diabetic who has had experiences varying from nurses who are very deferential to them with regard to sugar management to those who refuse to listen and they woke up in the ICU in a cold sweat fumbling for the call button in a state of delirium (their blood sugar was around the 40s I think, and their body temperature was in the 80s). This was actually when they were starting to get better (hence not being on IV insulin with frequent checks). The most you can do as a visitor is try to talk to as many nurses as you can and get the night shift one before you leave, but that is pretty grueling when a relative is in the hospital for a week.
It's appropriate to check on what is being prescribed and be involved in your care when you have the ability.
Yeah, that works great for you and me, but 2/3rds of the healthy Americans walking around out there would have trouble with that. Then consider those who aren't healthy. If you're lying on a bed in the ICU with sepsis and barely able to think about anything about the next episode of vomiting are you really going to stop and ask the nurse to explain what is in the 5th IV bag they changed in the last hour? Let's not even start on the people who just had a stroke.
I've seen the kind of behavior described above firsthand when in a hospital with a relative. Shifts change three times a day and even in the ICU they can't keep everything straight (with a 1:2 nurse ratio). The chart is 3 inches thick, so writing a note in there is of limited value.
A lot of medical care consists of catering to the "average" patient. That's the basis of all the clinical trial data, and the experience of the doctors. Sure, the average is a good place to start, but the system doesn't do a good job of learning how individual patients respond to treatment. Sure, the patient and their family doesn't have a medical degree so their concerns should be weighed accordingly, but many patients suffer with chronic diseases that require heavy management. A diabetic who has been on multiple injections or a pump and 6 other medications for five years probably has a MUCH better sense of how to manage their own blood sugars than a random nurse, and their advice should be weighed accordingly (though the nurse should certainly work with them to ensure that restricted diets / illness is accounted for).
Are those typically-paid prices, or typically-billed prices?
I've probably spent about three weeks of my life living in hospitals so far (as a visitor, not as a patient) and paying the bills from the resulting care. I'd say that in general the insurance companies pay 10 cents on the dollar.
ICU rates seem to be about $1k/day (billed at $10k/day). A major surgery probably runs $30-50k or so all-inclusive (I'm talking about bypass surgery, endarterectomies, etc - oh, billed at $100-200k).
It seems to me that many of the costs in healthcare are things that are sought but rarely paid, except by those who don't have an insurance company with the clout to deny them.
That said, I'll be the first to agree that many costs could be avoided entirely if we had better preventative care.
There is also a golden rule in life -- The one with the most gold makes the rules.
That always true on community distros though. Influence is power in large community-based distros, moreso than money.
I agree. I think Shuttleworth is just voicing his frustration with the very vocal few who dust up drama whenever they feel slighted like the recent announcement that Ubuntu Developer Summits will be held online and happen more frequently.
This is the conflict. Shuttleworth has a lot of money, but there are others who have a lot of influence. Why is it OK to use money to hire developers to work on one set of priorities, but it is not OK to use influence to get a lot of other developers to work on a different set of priorities? The former just tends to be a lot less visible and doesn't involve making a stink on public lists.
Mark wants to use his money to have Ubuntu achieve one vision, and others want to use their influence to have Ubuntu achieve other visions. Legally Canonical might own the name, but they can't really own the thing most people associate with Ubuntu as it was never really theirs to begin with.
I'm doing just that for locals, but all my cable channels are just SD right now.
I'm on FIOS, and I'd like to move to HD, but honestly trying to get the non-OTA channels in HD just sounds like a real PITA. They charge more for the tuners, and then I'd need an HDCP-remover and hardware that can encode in realtime (likely at poor quality levels for the bitrate - but maybe it is decent). The family will live with SD, so I probably will just get HD content from other sources if I want it.
I don't mind paying for my video - I just want to watch it the way I want to watch it. Give me an mpeg-4 stream - like every file sharing site on the planet already does for free. It isn't like all the HDCP/etc keeps the content off those sites - it can be done, and it only takes one person on the planet to do it.
Yup. But it really just compounds the problem. If remote employees are unproductive the problem is bad managers who can't measure the value of their work.
If you change the policy to one of "come in or you're fired" then anybody who can't come in or who can find a better gig loses their job. That is just even lazier management. The people who are complete dead weight who could never get another job anywhere will drive 75 miles each morning to keep the job they have - they'll punch in and out right on time under the new policy, and yet will do no useful work.
I've seen that sort of thing at work - often the metric is % of cases closed within some SLA. The problem with that is that a case that goes over the SLA is a lost case, and there is no reward for speed within the SLA.
So, everybody goes through the inbox cherry-picking the easy stuff and they churn it out to get good numbers. When somebody calls with a real mess they basically get no help - once the case is over the SLA it is a hot potato nobody wants to touch. That also means that the hero who wants to do it just to be a good employee gets no support from others as nobody else wants to touch it either.
What you measure is what you get.
The proper test of employee utilization is not some arbitrary measurement of VPN usage, it is to gradually increase the workload or decrease the timetable until there is a performance slip, then scale back by 10% (because most employees can work a bit above their continuous performace for short periods).
The proper test of employee utilization is to determine the value of the work they perform, and whether it exceeds what they are being paid. If the value of the work is lower then assign work until they're at least justified, and if they can't deliver fire them, and if nobody can deliver cancel the project as it has no ROI.
I guess if you can get more work for the same pay you'd be an idiot to not try, but the employee would have to be an idiot to let you get away with it.
If you are being paid the salary of a software engineer, and you are only doing 20 hours of work a week, and literally cannot think of anything else to do to fill your time that is productive work, then you have a major problem, and you are probably vastly overpaid.
Uh, if somebody is able to do enough work to justify a full salary in 20 hours a week, then I'd say they have a great thing going. If they're not going to be paid more to do more, and they're able to justify their salaries on their current work output, then only an idiot would work more.
But I can easily find you if I need to ask you something, instead of sending an e-mail I hope you read in a timely matter, or hoping you don't have your phone on silent.
If you come to find me at work you'll fine me with the door closed in a teleconf. If I come to find you at work I'll find you in the same condition. The concept at my workplace of trying to walk up to somebody and talk to them died a few layoffs ago.
They can't change an engine in-flight, but that doesn't mean they can't pressure hammer the valves or perform other creative maintenance during the flight.
You only do those kinds of tricks if the alternative is crashing/etc, or in something unmanned, or when there really is very little risk. Otherwise, the adage is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." An engine that needs maintenance soon is quite different from an engine that is on fire, etc.
Might be worth noting that the operation of the stone in the show is fairly different from the description on wikipedia. In the show they basically hold it up to the clouds and see the sun through it. In Wikipedia they describe having to adjust the angle the stone is held at to detect circles in the sky and use that to locate the sun. Whether they are equivalent descriptions I cannot say. When they demonstrated the stone on the show I guessed it was calcite and had something to do with the polarization of light, but I couldn't see how it would behave in quite the way they demonstrated it, and I might have been right about that much.
Japan doesn't have enough land? I could see saying not enough resources/etc, but they have a declining population. The reason the cities are so crowded is cultural - the transition from skyscrapers to farmland is a pretty sharp one in Japan.
What about fuselage rivet #3248? Don't leave that out! (Uh, assuming they actually use rivets.)
Yup, makes way more sense to just get a 2kb event list sent during flight, and then the dispatchers can have the right maintenance team on the tarmac when the plane pulls in. They can plug in an ethernet cable and download whatever raw diagnostic logs they need to speed up the repairs.
I could even see an in-flight request for specific logs to be sent, but it isn't like you can change an engine in-flight so I'm not sure how much time that would really save.
Saving multi-TB of data on looped storage for such an expensive plane just makes sense. Bonus points if you can harden it to survive a crash. Streaming all that data in realtime, however, makes little sense. Even archiving it may be of limited use, but with planes being so expensive it probably doesn't hurt to have the data available "just in case."
NX wasn't designed for any application in particular, so of course it wasn't designed for Chromium, just as it wasn't designed for gedit, vim, emacs, xterm, etc.
Chromium has issues due to its dependence on client-side rendering, and inability to fall-back to something simpler when it is not available. Chromium also doesn't support running independently on more than one DISPLAY with clients running from the same profile. It was basically one of those 80% designs, which means it takes the market over by storm but drives power users nuts...
You do realise that a coal power station would release more radioactive material in a few minutes of operation than TMI did, right?
Not bad, only an order of magnitude out.
Genuinely interested here - is it really only an order of magnitude out? If so you're saying you really do agree with the post you replied to, as I doubt most people would be bothered by the emissions of a coal plant over a few hours (which is more than an order of magnitude above a few minutes). Did you actually agree, or were you being sarcastic?
I really don't have a horse in this race. I think society needs to embrace nuclear power, but I don't trust the typical US corporation to run it.
Having a single source for short half-life medical isotopes for a country the size of Australia is just insane. It isn't like you can fly them from Japan or the US before they decay. Just flying them across Australia is probably pushing it.
Yeah, how dare they release a free supported operating system and try to leverage some income out of it to pay the bills. Hey, you can opt out of whatever you find appalling in *buntu.
The easiest way to opt out is to not install it in the first place. :)
Nobody is saying X11 isn't in need of improvement. The problem is that the 80% solution really doesn't meet everybody's needs. If all you want is a tablet that makes you a billion dollars the 80% solution is just fine. However, most linux users are the sorts of people who haven't been satisfied to date with the 80% solutions, so while a new one will make lots of money, it is unlikely to win over most of the current users.
(And speaking of shitty, useless software, how the fuck do you link directly to Google+ comments?)
You can't. The other thing that drives me nuts with G+ is that their Android client doesn't support the share function. No, the OTHER share function - the one present in every single other android application. I want to save a copy of a post or email a link to a post, not post it on my own feed...
Well, NX runs great until you run something that uses client-side rendering for everything, like chromium. Then you're reduced to sending gigantic bitmaps over the network again a la VNC.
That was the argument for having to rent your phone for $20/month from the phone company. That practice was banned, and for good reason. The irony is that before was banned people were doing all manner of exploits to make free calls, generally due to the prevalence of in-band signaling.