"screen" will work exactly as it always have, even with the new defaults.
Except that the way you describe is not the way that screen has always worked. Instead of the straightforward invocation screen on the command line, now it has to be prefixed with all kinds of systemd-specific stuff that wasn't there before.
Escape room games are opening all over Europe. Stay in a hotel or backpacker's that attracts foreigners, and among the brochures of local attractions you're like to find a leaflet advertising "[City X]'s best escape game!". But I can't help but suspect this is a fad that's not going to remain popular more than another year or two. Converting a space to an elaborate escape room must require significant investment. Are these places even going to stay open long enough to pay it back?
You can just not check your e-mail all the time after hours... Even turn off the mail app on your phone. (Some phones you can schedule this!)
Some employers forbid their employees from turning off their work phones at any time. Furthermore, even if their isn't such a policy in place, any employee who doesn't respond after hours may be seen as "not a team player". Putting pressure on the employers not to allow employee e-mailing outside the working day may be the only way to tackle the problem.
If I recall correctly, the "protein fragments" were prions, and the human immune system is famously susceptible to some prion diseases (reading about Creutzfeld-Jakob patients is a very sobering thing and you may not sleep well for days afterwards).
I also think the novel was fairly weak as a work of fiction. However, the whole point of the book -- like much science fiction -- is to explore a certain idea, and I think that the idea behind Aurora is a thought-provoking one.
Kim Stanley Robinson's recent novel Aurora is skeptical of the idea that generational starships would work. KSR is best known for his Mars trilogy of two decades ago, which was a vision of terraforming that was criticized for being too optimistic. In the years since, he has delved into the science of ecosystems and come to believe that "life is a planetary thing", an ecology can only be maintained over the long term at a planetary scale, and at the small scale of a generation starship, it would quickly break down.
Thus Aurora has the inhabitants of the ship freaking out at the increasing amount of salt dumped into their plant production as time goes by, the loss of certain vital nutrients, and so forth. And while you might think that the crew only has to survive the couple of centuries of the journey until they arrive at their destination, the novel has a twist that shows how settling another inhabitable planet might not necessarily possible. Whether this book is an example of a sadly pessimistic or merely realistic trend in science-fiction is up to you.
Elsevier is publcally traded. Wouldn't that mean that its ownership has a fiduciary duty to shareholders to increase profits, so no one can buy it and reduce its income stream just out of idealism?
I work in a somewhat obscure field of linguistics and regional studies. Most of the journals that we publish in are run by learned societies or state academies in various countries. They are usually free to publish in and often open access (supported by state funding or dead men's endowments). Peer review is very rigorous.
When Sci-Hub appeared, I decided to do a search of topics related to my field. I was appalled to find discover that nearly all results (from journals belonging to big holdings like Elsevier) were terrible papers that would never pass muster in my fieldâ(TM)s mainstream journals: the discoveries they claim are obvious facts of the field at best, outright fallacies at worst. It's as if the big holdings are running publication mills for people who want to get a publication to their name thanks to weak peer review.
Plus the articles are often written in dreadful English or some other language that the author is non-native in, and language revision is sorely necessary. The big holdings seem to be pretty lax about the amount of editing their editors are supposed to do. I feel sorry for anyone who has ever paid for any of this shit. I'm happy that when I discovered this dark side of my field, it didn't cost me or an institution a cent to download a PDF from Sci-Hub.
Is this the reason why people use pirate sites for the papers? The extra 2 weeks?
Why wait two weeks when you can get the material instantly? Also, often when one requests a journal article through inter-library loan, it is often sent to your e-mail as a fairly low-quality scan, but if you get the same article through Sci-Hub, you get a high-resolution PDF that is a lot easier on the eyes.
Yeah, when they try to check your publications, and they end up in a paywall of 2 million bucks, it's dead obvious that you're not that rich to get access to it.
"Paywall" assumes that the person got the paper online. As I said, there are plenty of ways to get an article without paying, whether writing to the author to kindly ask for a PDF or xerox, visiting another institution whose library has the journal, or using inter-library loan.
Or it might take longer to access the papers than it took for you to create your work?
PhD theses are usually written over a period of 3-5 years. Inter-library loan takes 2 weeks, even for very obscure publications. There is nothing that one will cite, that will take a significant amount of time to reach one.
Do you actually have any experience in academia? The world you describe is a fantasy one.
It's not possible for academics to refer to a paper obtained from pirate source.
What a ridiculous claim. A PhD committee has no way of telling where you got your cited publications from. It is extremely common for students and researchers to visit another city for a few days to use libraries there and look at some publications they don't have access to at their own institution. It is extremely common for students and researchers to make use of interlibrary loan. No one will know that an item in your bibliography came from SciHub and not any of those other, mainstream ways of getting publications.
Being a plebeian and not being part of the Academy means that most likely the value of sci-hub to you is 0. If that isn't the case, I'd really like to hear of your situation.
Plenty of people finish an M.A. and want to take some time off to travel the world or whatever before they start a PhD. Their formal relationship to the university is terminated, so they cannot access the university's subscriptions (not all universities offer alumni access to databases), but they need to keep up with what's happening in the field while they are away.
The publication process has to be paid for by either the readers (traditional publishing) or the scientists (open-access publishing).
Open access is not always paid for by the scientists. I recently published a paper in a peer-reviewed open access journal and didn't have to provide anything more than the manuscript. The journal in question is issued by a country's academy of sciences, and all costs are evidently covered by the state and some rich men's endowments.
Amazon doesn't want to sell more Kindles as much as it wants to increase its sales of ebooks, and the Kindle is just a way to do that. (IIRC, at one time, even when the Kindle was selling like hotcakes, Amazon was still making a loss on every Kindle sold).
I'm not sure that Amazon would think bundling a free ebook with an ordered hard copy would be in its best interest, for that would encourage people to keep ordering hard copies. There are hints that Amazon wants to move away from selling physical media products (a lot of its CDs sales, for example, were shifted onto third-party merchants), because the profit margins are higher when one doesn't have to deal with warehouses and shipping.
Scholars in many fields would tell you that the vast majority of the publications that they have to consult are not available on the internet. There are lots of things that are considered the state of the art in my own field, but because no one has taken them up since the dawn of personal computing, one has to read up on them from, say, a Soviet publication from the 1970s or some manuscript held in a state archive. Sometimes a person summarizes some of that state-of-the-art in an online venue like Wikipedia or some other researcher's blog, but they leave out lots of important detail, so no, the Internet isn't some wonderful source of reliable knowledge; at best it can only draw your attention to the print resources you have to dredge up from library stacks.
Even when books are digitized (and that's an effort I've often had to take on myself, spending hours in front of the scanner to get things I can read on my Kindle when traveling), they tend to only be simple non-searchable scans, as OCR software generally chokes on text with a mixture of languages and lots of non-Latin-1 diacritics.
Things are gradually changing, and certainly more recent journal issues will be available online, but we're still a long way away from all human knowledge being readily available through this series of tubes.
A penny plus shipping works out to, what, $4? Meanwhile, you could have got a Kindle and then downloaded all the books you want for free from ebook pirating sites. The Kindle swiftly pays for itself. (You don't need to buy from Amazon. You can get ebooks from anywhere to load on your Kindle, and you can keep your library backed up somewhere else in case you ever lose or replace your Kindle.)
I can admire the bibliophilia. I also still buy books and enjoy building a collection. But the books worth adding to a collection cost quite a bit more than a penny plus shipping. At those low prices, you are mostly getting ragged paperbacks with yellowing paper and broken spines, so why bother spending any money at all for them? Better just to read cheap literature on the Kindle from ebook pirate sites, and save your book-buying money for nice, elegant hardbacks.
I am well aware that many asylum seekers are highly educated. I spent some time in Aleppo before the war and made the acquaintance of many members of the cityâ(TM)s intelligentsia: highly educated, secular, and Western-leaning. All of them ended up fleeing to Turkey, where now they feel they are wasting their lives in endless waiting, and it's a damn shame.
But again, Zaha Hadid who came to the UK as a student, using a very different procedure that the UK had already had a long time to tweak, is a very different case than the wave of asylum seekers confronting Europe in the past few years.
At the time of her death, just a reminder that she also represents why Immigration and Refugee asylum is essential.
Zaha Hadid (after receiving a secular upbringing and attending an American university) came to the UK for graduate studies. I don't see anyone complaining about people who do that: indeed, the UK has made such foreign students a major source of revenue for higher education. I don't think that Zaha Hadid's case says much about the desirability or not of asylum seekers.
That is obviously a ridiculous idea. If anything, it would be much better to put mirrors into space, since we have the ability to create reflective surfaces with the power-to-weight ratio of something like 100 MW/mt, whereas full energy conversion systems are much, much heavier.
(Non-laser) visible light is scattered by the atmosphere. Radio waves, on the other hand, can be directed at a collection point.
but the discovery can go to the RIAA, who then claims you don't have proof that you ever owned any of these CDs, and thus must have acquired these files illegally. Billion dollar lawsuit.
The lawsuits that the RIAA began to pursue in the age of filesharing were against people who distributed copyright files (or at least had a collection of shares in e.g. Kazaa that other people on the internet could download), as distributing is illegal. Receipt or possession of copies of music files, however, is not illegal.
Pi2 makes a great Kodi system but falls short on 1080i/p. It needs just a bit more power hopefully this new Pi will do it.
You aren't overclocking it then, I guess. I use my Pi2 as a Kodi-based media center, usually watching Blu-Ray rips, and I have had no problems whatsoever with stuttering or slowness. The overclocking I've done (values recommended by OSMC) is very gentle, not the kind that puts the board at risk.
AMAZON: give positive reviews on line, get free stuff.
You don't necessary have to give positive reviews. I've been among the top 1000 reviewers for a decade or so. Just due to my ranking, companies started offering me stuff, but they didn't seem to care (or even notice) that my few thousand reviews ranged liberally from one to five stars, and that if something was crap I wasn't afraid to call it crap. Indeed, even after I accepted free products in exchange for an honest review, I have found the bulk of these to be Chinese crap, at best merely satisfactory for their purpose, and usually horrible, and I've said so in my review. And yet, those same companies continue to offer me the next product they are trying to develop hype for.
I am aware that a lot of reviewers who accept free stuff give invariably positive reviews to keep the goods flowing, but I really don't think that is necessary if your reviewer ranking is squarely in the top 1000. You'll continue to receive free stuff even if you are brutally honest.
Slashdot Mirror
Manufacturing most plastics requires petroleum. You can't get that from an asteroid, it has to be lifted off the ground.
Except that the way you describe is not the way that screen has always worked. Instead of the straightforward invocation screen on the command line, now it has to be prefixed with all kinds of systemd-specific stuff that wasn't there before.
If you have a GNU Screen session, then you're still technically logged in, innit?
Escape room games are opening all over Europe. Stay in a hotel or backpacker's that attracts foreigners, and among the brochures of local attractions you're like to find a leaflet advertising "[City X]'s best escape game!". But I can't help but suspect this is a fad that's not going to remain popular more than another year or two. Converting a space to an elaborate escape room must require significant investment. Are these places even going to stay open long enough to pay it back?
Some employers forbid their employees from turning off their work phones at any time. Furthermore, even if their isn't such a policy in place, any employee who doesn't respond after hours may be seen as "not a team player". Putting pressure on the employers not to allow employee e-mailing outside the working day may be the only way to tackle the problem.
If I recall correctly, the "protein fragments" were prions, and the human immune system is famously susceptible to some prion diseases (reading about Creutzfeld-Jakob patients is a very sobering thing and you may not sleep well for days afterwards).
I also think the novel was fairly weak as a work of fiction. However, the whole point of the book -- like much science fiction -- is to explore a certain idea, and I think that the idea behind Aurora is a thought-provoking one.
Kim Stanley Robinson's recent novel Aurora is skeptical of the idea that generational starships would work. KSR is best known for his Mars trilogy of two decades ago, which was a vision of terraforming that was criticized for being too optimistic. In the years since, he has delved into the science of ecosystems and come to believe that "life is a planetary thing", an ecology can only be maintained over the long term at a planetary scale, and at the small scale of a generation starship, it would quickly break down.
Thus Aurora has the inhabitants of the ship freaking out at the increasing amount of salt dumped into their plant production as time goes by, the loss of certain vital nutrients, and so forth. And while you might think that the crew only has to survive the couple of centuries of the journey until they arrive at their destination, the novel has a twist that shows how settling another inhabitable planet might not necessarily possible. Whether this book is an example of a sadly pessimistic or merely realistic trend in science-fiction is up to you.
Elsevier is publcally traded. Wouldn't that mean that its ownership has a fiduciary duty to shareholders to increase profits, so no one can buy it and reduce its income stream just out of idealism?
I work in a somewhat obscure field of linguistics and regional studies. Most of the journals that we publish in are run by learned societies or state academies in various countries. They are usually free to publish in and often open access (supported by state funding or dead men's endowments). Peer review is very rigorous.
When Sci-Hub appeared, I decided to do a search of topics related to my field. I was appalled to find discover that nearly all results (from journals belonging to big holdings like Elsevier) were terrible papers that would never pass muster in my fieldâ(TM)s mainstream journals: the discoveries they claim are obvious facts of the field at best, outright fallacies at worst. It's as if the big holdings are running publication mills for people who want to get a publication to their name thanks to weak peer review.
Plus the articles are often written in dreadful English or some other language that the author is non-native in, and language revision is sorely necessary. The big holdings seem to be pretty lax about the amount of editing their editors are supposed to do. I feel sorry for anyone who has ever paid for any of this shit. I'm happy that when I discovered this dark side of my field, it didn't cost me or an institution a cent to download a PDF from Sci-Hub.
Why wait two weeks when you can get the material instantly? Also, often when one requests a journal article through inter-library loan, it is often sent to your e-mail as a fairly low-quality scan, but if you get the same article through Sci-Hub, you get a high-resolution PDF that is a lot easier on the eyes.
"Paywall" assumes that the person got the paper online. As I said, there are plenty of ways to get an article without paying, whether writing to the author to kindly ask for a PDF or xerox, visiting another institution whose library has the journal, or using inter-library loan.
PhD theses are usually written over a period of 3-5 years. Inter-library loan takes 2 weeks, even for very obscure publications. There is nothing that one will cite, that will take a significant amount of time to reach one.
Do you actually have any experience in academia? The world you describe is a fantasy one.
What a ridiculous claim. A PhD committee has no way of telling where you got your cited publications from. It is extremely common for students and researchers to visit another city for a few days to use libraries there and look at some publications they don't have access to at their own institution. It is extremely common for students and researchers to make use of interlibrary loan. No one will know that an item in your bibliography came from SciHub and not any of those other, mainstream ways of getting publications.
Plenty of people finish an M.A. and want to take some time off to travel the world or whatever before they start a PhD. Their formal relationship to the university is terminated, so they cannot access the university's subscriptions (not all universities offer alumni access to databases), but they need to keep up with what's happening in the field while they are away.
Open access is not always paid for by the scientists. I recently published a paper in a peer-reviewed open access journal and didn't have to provide anything more than the manuscript. The journal in question is issued by a country's academy of sciences, and all costs are evidently covered by the state and some rich men's endowments.
Amazon doesn't want to sell more Kindles as much as it wants to increase its sales of ebooks, and the Kindle is just a way to do that. (IIRC, at one time, even when the Kindle was selling like hotcakes, Amazon was still making a loss on every Kindle sold).
I'm not sure that Amazon would think bundling a free ebook with an ordered hard copy would be in its best interest, for that would encourage people to keep ordering hard copies. There are hints that Amazon wants to move away from selling physical media products (a lot of its CDs sales, for example, were shifted onto third-party merchants), because the profit margins are higher when one doesn't have to deal with warehouses and shipping.
Scholars in many fields would tell you that the vast majority of the publications that they have to consult are not available on the internet. There are lots of things that are considered the state of the art in my own field, but because no one has taken them up since the dawn of personal computing, one has to read up on them from, say, a Soviet publication from the 1970s or some manuscript held in a state archive. Sometimes a person summarizes some of that state-of-the-art in an online venue like Wikipedia or some other researcher's blog, but they leave out lots of important detail, so no, the Internet isn't some wonderful source of reliable knowledge; at best it can only draw your attention to the print resources you have to dredge up from library stacks.
Even when books are digitized (and that's an effort I've often had to take on myself, spending hours in front of the scanner to get things I can read on my Kindle when traveling), they tend to only be simple non-searchable scans, as OCR software generally chokes on text with a mixture of languages and lots of non-Latin-1 diacritics.
Things are gradually changing, and certainly more recent journal issues will be available online, but we're still a long way away from all human knowledge being readily available through this series of tubes.
I'm sure that John McAfee has already spent all the money on bath salts.
A penny plus shipping works out to, what, $4? Meanwhile, you could have got a Kindle and then downloaded all the books you want for free from ebook pirating sites. The Kindle swiftly pays for itself. (You don't need to buy from Amazon. You can get ebooks from anywhere to load on your Kindle, and you can keep your library backed up somewhere else in case you ever lose or replace your Kindle.)
I can admire the bibliophilia. I also still buy books and enjoy building a collection. But the books worth adding to a collection cost quite a bit more than a penny plus shipping. At those low prices, you are mostly getting ragged paperbacks with yellowing paper and broken spines, so why bother spending any money at all for them? Better just to read cheap literature on the Kindle from ebook pirate sites, and save your book-buying money for nice, elegant hardbacks.
I am well aware that many asylum seekers are highly educated. I spent some time in Aleppo before the war and made the acquaintance of many members of the cityâ(TM)s intelligentsia: highly educated, secular, and Western-leaning. All of them ended up fleeing to Turkey, where now they feel they are wasting their lives in endless waiting, and it's a damn shame.
But again, Zaha Hadid who came to the UK as a student, using a very different procedure that the UK had already had a long time to tweak, is a very different case than the wave of asylum seekers confronting Europe in the past few years.
Zaha Hadid (after receiving a secular upbringing and attending an American university) came to the UK for graduate studies. I don't see anyone complaining about people who do that: indeed, the UK has made such foreign students a major source of revenue for higher education. I don't think that Zaha Hadid's case says much about the desirability or not of asylum seekers.
(Non-laser) visible light is scattered by the atmosphere. Radio waves, on the other hand, can be directed at a collection point.
Burden's on you (or the OP), my friend. Link to a case where the RIAA sued somewhere for mere possession of copied MP3s.
The lawsuits that the RIAA began to pursue in the age of filesharing were against people who distributed copyright files (or at least had a collection of shares in e.g. Kazaa that other people on the internet could download), as distributing is illegal. Receipt or possession of copies of music files, however, is not illegal.
You aren't overclocking it then, I guess. I use my Pi2 as a Kodi-based media center, usually watching Blu-Ray rips, and I have had no problems whatsoever with stuttering or slowness. The overclocking I've done (values recommended by OSMC) is very gentle, not the kind that puts the board at risk .
You don't necessary have to give positive reviews. I've been among the top 1000 reviewers for a decade or so. Just due to my ranking, companies started offering me stuff, but they didn't seem to care (or even notice) that my few thousand reviews ranged liberally from one to five stars, and that if something was crap I wasn't afraid to call it crap. Indeed, even after I accepted free products in exchange for an honest review, I have found the bulk of these to be Chinese crap, at best merely satisfactory for their purpose, and usually horrible, and I've said so in my review. And yet, those same companies continue to offer me the next product they are trying to develop hype for.
I am aware that a lot of reviewers who accept free stuff give invariably positive reviews to keep the goods flowing, but I really don't think that is necessary if your reviewer ranking is squarely in the top 1000. You'll continue to receive free stuff even if you are brutally honest.