Yup.
Fitaly is fantastic. I do thirty words per minute pretty easily. I used it on my Sony Clie and then on all the Windows Mobile PDAs I've had since. Can't recommend it enough.
Isn't this a bit like saying Serial Killer 5 - Rest of World 6 Billion?
Surely the point is that there is may be infringing code. And the article only ventures to say that "most of" the selected code is not copyrightable.
Articles misses the point slightly - the markets are being completely consumed by convergence with the mobile phone market.
A bit like asking "What's better, penny farthings or tanks"
Sure standalone devices have their uses, but time and time again I've come across people who just don't take their PDAs with them. One device is enough, and their phone always takes priority.
So what about a nice Symbian phone? I recommend the Moto A1000.
It would be really sad if what caused the failure of Nintendo was not them loosing money, or them not having fans, but companies being short sighted enough to drop support for Nintendo simply because it's not selling as well as Xbox and PS2
Um, surely:
Not selling well = Losing money + not having fans?
Some mistake?
That said, if you had friends who wouldn't say "nigger" if there was a black person in the room, but would when out amongst white people because "no one's going to get offended", I bet you wouldn't be so quick to say they weren't racist.
Your problems are *precisely* because you think WindowsXP does things right, which it doesn't. You should not be downloading arbitrary packages from the internet WHEN THE PACKAGES ARE PROVIDED BY THE DISTRO!!!!!
As someone else who's tried Linux, and just got far too annoyed with the difficulties installing programs, I really can't see why this should be the case.
Why shouldn't I download 'arbitrary' packages? As long as the program works I'm very happy. Maybe it'll fill up my harddrive quicker, but with 160GB to play around with, I'm not that concerned even if a piece of software is several times larger than it needs to be. I think it's fair to say that hard disk swallowers for me are media files, never apps.
If Windows can do it this way, and make it work, I don't see why the option can't work for Linux as well.
Then you are doing something wrong, and you should be careful not to give out false information when you haven't got enough experience to tell if you are just doing the wrong thing.
Well, of course he's doing something wrong, that's hardly the point is it? When I got bored after several hours of messing around with dependencies, and eventually deleted Mandrake, I'm sure I was doing something *wrong*, but point is that it is difficult to do the *right* thing. I hardly think the original poster needs this made clear? And I don't understand what you're getting up by telling him he shouldn't "provide false information".
Don't get me wrong, Linux looks very exciting, but for the moment it's just too time consuming. I'd hoped issues like this might have been cleared up in the meantime, but I guess not. Whenever I can do what I want without going anywhere near the command line, then I'll consider Linux. That's what it will take it to sell it to me.
BBC News is truly atrocious, particularly when any sort of tech issues are being covered.
The whole thing seems to be run by a group of work experience 6th formers.
Apart from the terrible reporting, many news items seem to be extremely thinly veiled press releases, the sort of commercialisation that the BBC is not meant to have anything to do with.
If it's so freaking great, then why can't they limit this to people who have *actually broken the law*
Well, 2 reasons really:
1. Like I said, 50% of those previously convicted can access a family members car. So...you can't kill someone with a car you don't have, but you can with one you don't own.
2. Whilst someone with a previous DUI is more likely to have an accident than someone who has not, the sheer majority of those driving without previous conviction means that only targeting only those with previous conviction will have very little effect. For example, we don't try to limit heart attacks by only gearing health promotion to those with previous heart attacks. We aim health promotion at everyone, because that's where the greatest gains can be made.
You can liken such problems to icebergs whose visible tips can neither be understood nor properly controlled if they are thought to constitute the entire problem. A population strategy to sink the iceberg rather than to attack its tip is necessary whenever risk is
widely diffused throughout the whole population.
I have to admit that this does seem very draconian, but imagine how much good it could bring.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/alcohol/imp aired_driving_pg2/NM.htm
An estimated total of 18,710 crashes in New Mexico involved alcohol which killed 206 and injured an estimated 6,700 people. Alcohol is a factor in 35% of New Mexico's crash costs. he estimated cost per injured survivor of an alcohol-related crash averaged $98,000.
Moreover, whilst it may seem expensive to implement, attaching an interlock to a car for a year after its operator is convicted of driving while intoxicated would reduce recidivism by an estimated 75% and alcohol-related fatalities by 7%. It would save almost $8,200 per vehicle equipped. Including equipment and case management costs, interlock costs would total approximately $990 per vehicle.
The above numbers can't be easily worked into a system where *every* car had an interlock installed, but it does show that installation costs can be retrieved.
I also thought that
www.vv.se/traf_sak/t2000/909.pdf
was interesting.
It says that whilst using Ignition Interlocks on *just* the cars of those with DUI, is effective, but not ideal because 50% of these people have access to non-interlock cars within their family.
Also, existing interlocks have security features to limit circumvention, e.g. by measuring CO2 concentrations to make sure it's expired human air.
At the end of the day though, you might find some way around the interlock. In that case you'd just prosecute more heavily in those who'd circumvented and had an accident.
On the other hand, 30 seconds to start your car is ridiculous. There's no reason this couldn't be reduced in the future. My diesel VW Golf takes about 10seconds to start.
It seems to me that if this device was properly implemented it could almost eliminate the 6700 annual injuries that occur because of drunk driving, and at almost no cost to the end-user.
Just my 0.02
Slashdot Mirror
Yup. Fitaly is fantastic. I do thirty words per minute pretty easily. I used it on my Sony Clie and then on all the Windows Mobile PDAs I've had since. Can't recommend it enough.
Isn't this a bit like saying Serial Killer 5 - Rest of World 6 Billion? Surely the point is that there is may be infringing code. And the article only ventures to say that "most of" the selected code is not copyrightable.
Genesis, fluffy weird stuff
<literal>common sense stuff</literal>
Of course! What could be clearer! Thankfully the Bible is very clear about what is not currently true i.e. 'poetic'.
Articles misses the point slightly - the markets are being completely consumed by convergence with the mobile phone market.
A bit like asking "What's better, penny farthings or tanks"
Sure standalone devices have their uses, but time and time again I've come across people who just don't take their PDAs with them. One device is enough, and their phone always takes priority.
So what about a nice Symbian phone? I recommend the Moto A1000.
That said, if you had friends who wouldn't say "nigger" if there was a black person in the room, but would when out amongst white people because "no one's going to get offended", I bet you wouldn't be so quick to say they weren't racist.
But I see your point.
As someone else who's tried Linux, and just got far too annoyed with the difficulties installing programs, I really can't see why this should be the case.
Why shouldn't I download 'arbitrary' packages? As long as the program works I'm very happy. Maybe it'll fill up my harddrive quicker, but with 160GB to play around with, I'm not that concerned even if a piece of software is several times larger than it needs to be. I think it's fair to say that hard disk swallowers for me are media files, never apps.
If Windows can do it this way, and make it work, I don't see why the option can't work for Linux as well.
Then you are doing something wrong, and you should be careful not to give out false information when you haven't got enough experience to tell if you are just doing the wrong thing.
Well, of course he's doing something wrong, that's hardly the point is it? When I got bored after several hours of messing around with dependencies, and eventually deleted Mandrake, I'm sure I was doing something *wrong*, but point is that it is difficult to do the *right* thing. I hardly think the original poster needs this made clear? And I don't understand what you're getting up by telling him he shouldn't "provide false information".
Don't get me wrong, Linux looks very exciting, but for the moment it's just too time consuming. I'd hoped issues like this might have been cleared up in the meantime, but I guess not. Whenever I can do what I want without going anywhere near the command line, then I'll consider Linux. That's what it will take it to sell it to me.
BBC News is truly atrocious, particularly when any sort of tech issues are being covered. The whole thing seems to be run by a group of work experience 6th formers. Apart from the terrible reporting, many news items seem to be extremely thinly veiled press releases, the sort of commercialisation that the BBC is not meant to have anything to do with.
If it's so freaking great, then why can't they limit this to people who have *actually broken the law* Well, 2 reasons really: 1. Like I said, 50% of those previously convicted can access a family members car. So...you can't kill someone with a car you don't have, but you can with one you don't own. 2. Whilst someone with a previous DUI is more likely to have an accident than someone who has not, the sheer majority of those driving without previous conviction means that only targeting only those with previous conviction will have very little effect. For example, we don't try to limit heart attacks by only gearing health promotion to those with previous heart attacks. We aim health promotion at everyone, because that's where the greatest gains can be made. You can liken such problems to icebergs whose visible tips can neither be understood nor properly controlled if they are thought to constitute the entire problem. A population strategy to sink the iceberg rather than to attack its tip is necessary whenever risk is widely diffused throughout the whole population.
I have to admit that this does seem very draconian, but imagine how much good it could bring. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/alcohol/imp aired_driving_pg2/NM.htm
An estimated total of 18,710 crashes in New Mexico involved alcohol which killed 206 and injured an estimated 6,700 people. Alcohol is a factor in 35% of New Mexico's crash costs. he estimated cost per injured survivor of an alcohol-related crash averaged $98,000.
Moreover, whilst it may seem expensive to implement, attaching an interlock to a car for a year after its operator is convicted of driving while intoxicated would reduce recidivism by an estimated 75% and alcohol-related fatalities by 7%. It would save almost $8,200 per vehicle equipped. Including equipment and case management costs, interlock costs would total approximately $990 per vehicle.
The above numbers can't be easily worked into a system where *every* car had an interlock installed, but it does show that installation costs can be retrieved.
I also thought that
www.vv.se/traf_sak/t2000/909.pdf
was interesting.
It says that whilst using Ignition Interlocks on *just* the cars of those with DUI, is effective, but not ideal because 50% of these people have access to non-interlock cars within their family.
Also, existing interlocks have security features to limit circumvention, e.g. by measuring CO2 concentrations to make sure it's expired human air.
At the end of the day though, you might find some way around the interlock. In that case you'd just prosecute more heavily in those who'd circumvented and had an accident.
On the other hand, 30 seconds to start your car is ridiculous. There's no reason this couldn't be reduced in the future. My diesel VW Golf takes about 10seconds to start.
It seems to me that if this device was properly implemented it could almost eliminate the 6700 annual injuries that occur because of drunk driving, and at almost no cost to the end-user.
Just my 0.02
The only good names that are left are 'placenta' and 'phlegm'.