Sounds like a fair lot 'til you realize that this is for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and that your hourly wage is about 5 bucks.
Yeah, but you also would have zero living expenses. If you assume you would otherwise spend 2/3 of your income on rent, food, etc. then this is like getting €15/hour, rather than €5.
the UAC stuff is definitely better than XP. Its also a well designed UI for it given the problem being solved
I beg to differ. If it actually were well-designed, it'd be okay, but it's not. The biggest problem is that UAC often pops up two or three slightly different windows to complete the same action. For example, if I'm trying to open something from the Internet, IE will pop up a warning dialog, then UAC will pop up one, then UAC will pop up another (different) one. (I wish I could give you a more specific example, but I can't think of one right now.)
Anyway, UAC and DRM were just examples of how MS screwed up Vista. There are other things, like how my laptop now sometimes takes 30 seconds or more to sleep or wake up, as Vista inexplicably thrashes the hard drive (this is with soft sleep, not hibernate -- it shouldn't be trying to save the RAM to disk). Or how my battery life is now significantly worse than it had been with XP.
(Similarly, the path issue was just an example of stuff they fixed in Vista. Another notable fix is that stylus erasers now work in the tablet input panel, whereas before one could only get rid of text by scratching it out).
On *nix boxes I find that I tend to use sudo to elevate my level for one task and then forget to change it back, leaving me open to accidentally fscking my system.
Uh, sudo is "per-task" too (it only runs that particular program with root permissions, although you can invoke it again within a certain interval without having to type in your password again). Perhaps you're thinking of su?
No, vista is differently -- but equally -- broke. MS did fix stuff like having stupid directory names (e.g. "Documents and Settings" -> "users"), etc., but compensated by adding UAC and DRM stupidity.
(and they aren't going to chase anybody up for a lousy quid fifty; it'll cost them more than that in ink just printing the address on the envelope)
You forget that this is a public university. Not only are they petty enough to demand the buck fifty, but they'll put holds on his registration to do it! They don't have to go after him; he'll come crawling back when he can't register for classes.
However, once you buy in with Microsoft on one of these deals, it's a whole lot more.
Yeah, it's a death warrant for your company too, just as it's always been for anyone "partnering" with Microsoft over the years (whether Linux was involved or not)! Even companies too big to die (e.g. IBM) were at least maimed as a result of that kind of deal (e.g. decline of OS/2, loss of PC marketshare).
Honestly, this should be no surprise to anyone by now.
Somewhat, but in the end X still gets 100 votes to Y's 50.
But it's not -- those 150 votes are split into two completely separate elections. Party X is running candidates foo and bar in districts A and B respectively, while party Y is running baz and quux. If party X gerrymanders the districts, fooandbar win (getting two seats in [whatever]), while if party Y gerrymanders the districts, foo wins but bar loses (and quux wins instead).
Let's say you have 150 people, where 100 of them vote for political party X and the other 50 favor party Y. You want to put these people into 2 districts. But how do you distribute them?
First, lets assume that you favor party X. In that case, you want to put 50 X-type and 25 Y-type people in each district, allowing party X to win elections in both.
Now, assume you favor party Y. In this case, you want to put all 50 Y-types in one district, along with 25 X-types, allowing party Y to win that district. (The other district just gets 100% X-types; you don't have enough support to do anything about that.)
Anyway, the gist of it is that, depending on how you divide people, you can give an advantage to one or the other political party. That's the basis of gerrymandering. Get it now?
Let us say you want to pass a state law or a national constitutional amendment that bars gerrymandering. How exactly would you word such a statute? It needs to remain flexible enough so that electoral districts can be changed in the future in response to population changes, but still not allow the "crazy shape" districts that are now common.
Define an algorithm that takes population distribution (but not race, age, political affiliation, etc.) as input, and tries to make districts of equal population while minimizing the ratio of circumference to surface area (i.e., trying to make the districts as close to circular as possible). Then just implement it and run it after every census.
Actually, there were (relatively) a lot of cars from the late 80s and early 90s that got better mileage than most cars do today: Geo Metro XFI (51 mpg), Honda CRX HF (50 mpg), your Citroën, etc. But what you seem to not realize is that those cars were also a heck of a lot lighter than modern ones, because they weren't weighed down with airbags, ABS, etc. It's much harder for a modern car to achieve that same efficiency and still meet safety regulations (let alone customer expectations, which are also a lot higher).
Well, considering that, you'd think it'd be safer than other small cars in side impacts, because the door reinforcements are higher off the ground. Also, because it's so short, the side impact actually hits the A and B pillars, the front and back wheels (at the same time!), etc -- the stuff that's rather more solid than the doors.
In a side-impact crash, I would expect the Smart to be more likely to roll and get less smashed-in, meaning that the occupants would be at greater risk for whiplash but less risk for entrapment or getting crushed.
I meant non-hybrid only, although I didn't say it, as I was only talking about cars of a similar size to the Smart (and Toyota doesn't make any hybrids that small).
Of course, you aren't kidding about Hondas: why would anybody be impressed by the Smart car when they could have gotten a 70mpg Insight any time in the past 8 years?!
Yeah, I forgot to qualify my statement with "non-hybrid." Also, I should have checked fueleconomy.gov more thoroughly: strangely enough, the Corolla actually gets up to 37mpg, edging out the Yaris even though it's a bigger car.
But it doesn't really matter, because the Prius (or any other current Toyota hybrid) is obviously not in the same size class as the Smart Fortwo.
Besides, you can park perpendicularly in a street that only allows parallel parking.
You say that as if it's somehow difficult to parallel park any of the other cheaper small cars in the US (e.g. Hyundai Accent, Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit, etc.).
Slashdot Mirror
No, it qualifies as "Open Source" -- what it doesn't qualify for is being called "Free Software."
Yeah, but you also would have zero living expenses. If you assume you would otherwise spend 2/3 of your income on rent, food, etc. then this is like getting €15/hour, rather than €5.
Not in this case -- all they've done is made it easier to type (and less likely to break software), which is a good thing.
I beg to differ. If it actually were well-designed, it'd be okay, but it's not. The biggest problem is that UAC often pops up two or three slightly different windows to complete the same action. For example, if I'm trying to open something from the Internet, IE will pop up a warning dialog, then UAC will pop up one, then UAC will pop up another (different) one. (I wish I could give you a more specific example, but I can't think of one right now.)
Anyway, UAC and DRM were just examples of how MS screwed up Vista. There are other things, like how my laptop now sometimes takes 30 seconds or more to sleep or wake up, as Vista inexplicably thrashes the hard drive (this is with soft sleep, not hibernate -- it shouldn't be trying to save the RAM to disk). Or how my battery life is now significantly worse than it had been with XP.
(Similarly, the path issue was just an example of stuff they fixed in Vista. Another notable fix is that stylus erasers now work in the tablet input panel, whereas before one could only get rid of text by scratching it out).
Uh, sudo is "per-task" too (it only runs that particular program with root permissions, although you can invoke it again within a certain interval without having to type in your password again). Perhaps you're thinking of su?
FYI, "hanging" is apparently a fancy word for "terraced."
No, vista is differently -- but equally -- broke. MS did fix stuff like having stupid directory names (e.g. "Documents and Settings" -> "users"), etc., but compensated by adding UAC and DRM stupidity.
Congratulations, Captain Obvious -- you got the joke!
You forget that this is a public university. Not only are they petty enough to demand the buck fifty, but they'll put holds on his registration to do it! They don't have to go after him; he'll come crawling back when he can't register for classes.
I'm sorry, you must have confused me with a socialist. Perhaps you replied to the wrong person?
Yeah, it's a death warrant for your company too, just as it's always been for anyone "partnering" with Microsoft over the years (whether Linux was involved or not)! Even companies too big to die (e.g. IBM) were at least maimed as a result of that kind of deal (e.g. decline of OS/2, loss of PC marketshare).
Honestly, this should be no surprise to anyone by now.
It's "Novell", damnit! Two 'l's. There's nothing "novel" about Novell, so don't mix them up!
...crap. Well, so much for that!
Yeah, it's great: on Slashdot, as long as I continue to write intelligently, nobody will every realize I'm a college student!
Well, gerrymandering applies to any sort of district-based voting, so it's not just the House, but also state legislature, local stuff, etc. as well.
But it's not -- those 150 votes are split into two completely separate elections. Party X is running candidates foo and bar in districts A and B respectively, while party Y is running baz and quux. If party X gerrymanders the districts, foo and bar win (getting two seats in [whatever]), while if party Y gerrymanders the districts, foo wins but bar loses (and quux wins instead).
Let's say you have 150 people, where 100 of them vote for political party X and the other 50 favor party Y. You want to put these people into 2 districts. But how do you distribute them?
First, lets assume that you favor party X. In that case, you want to put 50 X-type and 25 Y-type people in each district, allowing party X to win elections in both.
Now, assume you favor party Y. In this case, you want to put all 50 Y-types in one district, along with 25 X-types, allowing party Y to win that district. (The other district just gets 100% X-types; you don't have enough support to do anything about that.)
Anyway, the gist of it is that, depending on how you divide people, you can give an advantage to one or the other political party. That's the basis of gerrymandering. Get it now?
Define an algorithm that takes population distribution (but not race, age, political affiliation, etc.) as input, and tries to make districts of equal population while minimizing the ratio of circumference to surface area (i.e., trying to make the districts as close to circular as possible). Then just implement it and run it after every census.
Weather and cargo.
Actually, there were (relatively) a lot of cars from the late 80s and early 90s that got better mileage than most cars do today: Geo Metro XFI (51 mpg), Honda CRX HF (50 mpg), your Citroën, etc. But what you seem to not realize is that those cars were also a heck of a lot lighter than modern ones, because they weren't weighed down with airbags, ABS, etc. It's much harder for a modern car to achieve that same efficiency and still meet safety regulations (let alone customer expectations, which are also a lot higher).
Well, considering that, you'd think it'd be safer than other small cars in side impacts, because the door reinforcements are higher off the ground. Also, because it's so short, the side impact actually hits the A and B pillars, the front and back wheels (at the same time!), etc -- the stuff that's rather more solid than the doors.
In a side-impact crash, I would expect the Smart to be more likely to roll and get less smashed-in, meaning that the occupants would be at greater risk for whiplash but less risk for entrapment or getting crushed.
I meant non-hybrid only, although I didn't say it, as I was only talking about cars of a similar size to the Smart (and Toyota doesn't make any hybrids that small).
Of course, you aren't kidding about Hondas: why would anybody be impressed by the Smart car when they could have gotten a 70mpg Insight any time in the past 8 years?!
Yeah, I forgot to qualify my statement with "non-hybrid." Also, I should have checked fueleconomy.gov more thoroughly: strangely enough, the Corolla actually gets up to 37mpg, edging out the Yaris even though it's a bigger car.
But it doesn't really matter, because the Prius (or any other current Toyota hybrid) is obviously not in the same size class as the Smart Fortwo.
For that matter, who in the world would consider a Smart car sexy?!
Now, if you were talking about the roadster or the Crossblade, you might have a point, we'd only be getting the ugly ones in the US anyway!
That's okay; the Smart Fortwo only seats two people anyway (hence the name), so it can't carry soccor moms' "babies!"
You say that as if it's somehow difficult to parallel park any of the other cheaper small cars in the US (e.g. Hyundai Accent, Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit, etc.).