Another reason is that a country can't have a comparative advantage in everything. Even if the workers receive subsistence wages, the opportunity costs in employing them to build aircraft instead of computers limits how much they can do both.
I have an older hard drive from a computer whose motherboard crashed. I might stick it a computer to check the files on it using a pre-4 version of firefox. I'm pretty sure I was doing this before FF4, as I only got it when I upgraded from Ubuntu 9.10 to SuSE 11.4. What declarations were you using?
As for liking SVG, yes. I was used to such markup, having done stuff in pstricks in TeX/LaTeX.
I'm pretty sure that I could use inline SVG with Firefox 3. Also, O'Reilly's SVG Essentials (2002) mentions using inline SVG. And even if the images were imported rather than inline, the markup would be the same and would be readable by screen readers.
A well programmed web app is both fast and responsive (even when data exchange is sometimes slow due to network latency) and is in many cases much better than having a native app.
How would having LaTeX as a web app be better than running LaTeX natively? And how will you eliminate network latency?
No need for complicated install and maintenance. No libraries (no need for special permissions from IT in your company etc.) and no need to check for updates or have a special application run on your system to notify you of updates. The application is automagically in it's newest state when you start it!
The ethos surrounding HTML5 is that well, lots of old sites didn't follow newer standards, so lets make those web sites standard by taking everything they did shit, and making that standard. So great, yes, let's make shit, the standard. No, that's not how standards work- standards define a high quality that allows maximum compatibility which developers should strive to adhere to, if some don't then don't cater to them- just point out they're shit because they're not standards compliant.
Even O'Reilly's HTML: Up and Running complains that XHTML's error handling was "draconian".
Another major advance in HTML5 is accessibility. The purpose of the new article, section, etc, tags is to provide context to screen readers for the blind. Charts and graphs rendered in Inline SVG are directly readable by screen readers, unlike the pixels generated by Canvas and Java AWT.
Except that inline SVG predates HTML5, and Canvas is part of HTML5.
The way I read it was that on a per passenger basis the carbon footprint of the off-peak bus was twice that of a sedan and driver.
But you have to know how many passengers are on that bus (they use 4). This would require an average of 8 passengers to be the same as that of a sedan and driver. The author just uses the 5/40 passengers for an average of 10.5.
OK, fair enough, but my experience has me believe that the number of riders on an off-peak bus is more than 4 (on average). Hence the off-peak buses alone are nearly pulling their carbon footprint. When you include peak buses, that easily covers it.
Without further information all we can do is guess that an off peak bus generally carries N/2 passengers which means every off peak bus that is run is equivalent to driving N sedans the same distance.
Wouldn't that be N/4 sedans? And for the values of N, that would still be good.
In other words running off peak buses is twice as bad as having people drive sedans. Which is more or less what I've been thinking every time a see a honking huge bus go by with 2 or 3 passengers on it. How many full load trips does it take to make up for one trip where the bus is more or less empty?
You say that running a bus is twice as bad as driving a sedan, so if a bus has two passengers, then that would be equal to two people each driving a sedan. If we account for longer trips (bus routes meander), we might need to have three passengers. Most of the off-peak buses I ride have more than that on average. Therefore, a single crowded bus makes up for one trip of an off-peak bus.
Slashdot Mirror
Let FTP die already. Clear text passwords suck.
How do clear text passwords suck for anonymous FTP?
Another reason is that a country can't have a comparative advantage in everything. Even if the workers receive subsistence wages, the opportunity costs in employing them to build aircraft instead of computers limits how much they can do both.
What about asking a question during the lecture?
Come on, at least give a link: http://www.zombo.com/
You should not reduce costs further only if that means that cost reduction will lead to profit reduction.
Isn't that what I said (replacing "benefits" with "revenue")?
n competing markets and with actual competition comes the market pressure to reduce costs,
Then why not go all the way and reduce costs by shutting down the business? You should only reduce costs if the costs exceed the benefits.
But who will be Apple's Buster Douglas?
Yeah, but without being able to land the Space Shuttle anymore, what can you do with it?
That's the problem. He should have called it number one plus plus.
I would include the HP 48GX as being worth a hoot. It was $199 back in the 90s.
Interesting, Wikipedia says that the Moselle is navigable as far as Neuves-Maisons, south of Nancy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moselle_(river)#Navigation
Don't know about synaptic. I don't write apps for iOS, so I don't care about that.
Can they navigate the Rhine and Moselle to actually reach Luxembourg?
By "declarations", I meant inclusion of DTDs and other such files.
I have an older hard drive from a computer whose motherboard crashed. I might stick it a computer to check the files on it using a pre-4 version of firefox. I'm pretty sure I was doing this before FF4, as I only got it when I upgraded from Ubuntu 9.10 to SuSE 11.4. What declarations were you using?
As for liking SVG, yes. I was used to such markup, having done stuff in pstricks in TeX/LaTeX.
I'm pretty sure that I could use inline SVG with Firefox 3. Also, O'Reilly's SVG Essentials (2002) mentions using inline SVG. And even if the images were imported rather than inline, the markup would be the same and would be readable by screen readers.
See also http://www.w3.org/TR/XHTMLplusMathMLplusSVG/
A well programmed web app is both fast and responsive (even when data exchange is sometimes slow due to network latency) and is in many cases much better than having a native app.
How would having LaTeX as a web app be better than running LaTeX natively? And how will you eliminate network latency?
No need for complicated install and maintenance. No libraries (no need for special permissions from IT in your company etc.) and no need to check for updates or have a special application run on your system to notify you of updates. The application is automagically in it's newest state when you start it!
So can Yast and synaptic.
The ethos surrounding HTML5 is that well, lots of old sites didn't follow newer standards, so lets make those web sites standard by taking everything they did shit, and making that standard. So great, yes, let's make shit, the standard. No, that's not how standards work- standards define a high quality that allows maximum compatibility which developers should strive to adhere to, if some don't then don't cater to them- just point out they're shit because they're not standards compliant.
Even O'Reilly's HTML: Up and Running complains that XHTML's error handling was "draconian".
Another major advance in HTML5 is accessibility. The purpose of the new article, section, etc, tags is to provide context to screen readers for the blind. Charts and graphs rendered in Inline SVG are directly readable by screen readers, unlike the pixels generated by Canvas and Java AWT.
Except that inline SVG predates HTML5, and Canvas is part of HTML5.
The way I read it was that on a per passenger basis the carbon footprint of the off-peak bus was twice that of a sedan and driver.
But you have to know how many passengers are on that bus (they use 4). This would require an average of 8 passengers to be the same as that of a sedan and driver. The author just uses the 5/40 passengers for an average of 10.5.
OK, fair enough, but my experience has me believe that the number of riders on an off-peak bus is more than 4 (on average). Hence the off-peak buses alone are nearly pulling their carbon footprint. When you include peak buses, that easily covers it.
Without further information all we can do is guess that an off peak bus generally carries N/2 passengers which means every off peak bus that is run is equivalent to driving N sedans the same distance.
Wouldn't that be N/4 sedans? And for the values of N, that would still be good.
In other words running off peak buses is twice as bad as having people drive sedans. Which is more or less what I've been thinking every time a see a honking huge bus go by with 2 or 3 passengers on it. How many full load trips does it take to make up for one trip where the bus is more or less empty?
You say that running a bus is twice as bad as driving a sedan, so if a bus has two passengers, then that would be equal to two people each driving a sedan. If we account for longer trips (bus routes meander), we might need to have three passengers. Most of the off-peak buses I ride have more than that on average. Therefore, a single crowded bus makes up for one trip of an off-peak bus.
It also requires energy to transport and refine petroleum.
But the liquid water would absorb rather than reflect sunlight as ice/snow would..
Yeah, but I'd hate to be Alexandre Julliard. The poor guy would drown in the money that people threw at him.