The trouble with that is that you need a sufficient amount of skill in every step of the process. It certainly does lower the barrier to entry, and I will even concede that it might allow otherwise unexploited genius to flourish, but skill still needs to come from some place. Just because it's possible to acheive professional results with a lower investment of money, doesn't mean you can do it without knowing what you're doing.
I dare anyone to smoke "on the sly" without getting caught by someone after a while. The smell of tobacco hangs around you for so long that, unless you spend at least 2-6 hours away from your parents after smoking (I don't actually know how long the smell takes to go away, but it's at least 2 hours), they will know. Combine that with the fact that they'll probably find your cigs sooner or later, and it's not a good recipe for not getting caught.
I agree that the two-tiered system, for all the bad press it receives in Canada (mainly due to the NDP, may I add) is superior to the system we have in place. That being said, I believe the system we have in place is better than the American system.
In addition to this, consider that any time anyone tries to introduce a system with even the slightest hint of two-tieredness, they get flamed to a crisp in the press. Ralph Klein has tried to introduce a system where, if you want a more expensive procedure, you can pay for that instead of whatever you'd get otherwise. This still covers all necessary medical procedures free of charge, but the press is still attacking him left, right, and center. Another place (I think it's BC) introduced the idea of having small pay-for-care clinics to do procedures such as MRIs (if my memory serves me correctly; it could be something else). They have been lambasted in the press, called "boutique healthcare" and so on.
A public/private split in the healthcare system would certainly be a vast improvement compared to what we have now, but the option still must remain to get healthcare free-of-charge if you are unable to pay for it. Right now, wealthy Canadians are just using other countries (the US, commonly, but I've also heard of people going to India) as their "private healthcare provider".
And why do Americans travel to Costa Rica and India for medical care? Let me explain this to you: if you can't pay for medical care in Canada, you won't be in debt for the rest of your life. That's the difference. Sure, your health might be better in the US, but if you can't afford the cost of your treatment (especially if it's something big), you will have almost no standard of living at any point after that any way. I'd prefer to have a system where, if I hurt myself or get sick, I can go to the doctor without wondering how I'll pay for it. I'd prefer a system where people with relatively minor ailments receive treatment for them before they worsen, and create a bigger drag on the social safety net. Sure, waiting times for procedures such as MRIs is the natural byproduct, but you will get one in the end, and you'll be financially solvent thereafter. Therein lies the difference between Canadian and American style healthcare.
David Caruso and his character are both flaming wads of shit. Don't believe me? Watch one episode of CSI: Miami, and you will be treated to what is possibly the worst acting on primetime TV. I like the original CSI, but the spinoffs all suck. Showing a controversial issue like this is a last ditch attempt to get people to watch. CSI: Miami is dying, and I'm sure Netcraft will confirm it any day now.
I'm not sure the point of the GP's post was that the magazine should be made using XML, but that it should be distributed in the same manner as a podcast. This makes perfect sense because, in a podcast, the music isn't distributed as XML. It's an interesting idea, certainly. Perhaps there would be some kind of a market for a "syndicated torrent" type thing...
It sounds weird at first, but they haven't patented "the mouse" (the small furry creature), but they have patented a specific, lab-created, genetic variation thereof. This doesn't occur naturally, and it certainly required a lot of research. The knowledge of how to complete this procedure, or even a list of the exact genetic changes should be patentable. Relax; they can't patent a naturally-occuring animal or plant quite yet.
Print-on-demand is already available at lulu.com (hardcover included!) but you can only publish things you have copyright for. The technology does exist, though, and eventually authors will skip the middleman (I think) and use this technology almost exclusively.
Well, to be fair, this article *is* about politics in a way. You can hardly fault someone who brings it up. I think the trend you're seeing is a result of editor bias more than poster bias, or possibly it's because China chooses to do repressive things with technology, and this site is mainly about technology. That being said, you raise some very interesting points. Although I'm not sure I'd trade freedom for quality of living, it's true that I already have a fairly high quality of living compared to many people in China. It certainly is a question that can't be answered in a single post.
50% mortality figure is skewed
on
A Flu Pandemic?
·
· Score: 1
The fifty percent mortality rate that everyone is citing with regards to the H5N1 strain is skewed, because, to my knowledge, there hasn't been a case of the H5N1 strain in a place with a modern medical system. I don't mean to disparage Southeast Asia, but we have to look at the facts: the cases of this disease tend to occur in rural areas, far away from developed hospitals. I would like to see the mortality rate of this strain of bird flu compared to the mortality rate from a normal flu in the same area. Just like SARS, I think that this disease, although dangerous, will produce far less than 50% mortality if allowed to spread in the developed world.
Even if the darknets are detectable, it still won't be possible to monitor traffic on them. There is still the matter of encryption that will provide relative security to the users.
Which part of this was flamebait? From where I'm standing (a high school student) this appears to be fairly accurate. I've been threatened with suspension or expulsion for minor offenses, only to be told "it was a misunderstanding" when my parents ask about it. The abuse of power is a huge problem in the public education system, and putting your head in the sand doesn't help anyone.
And yes, I do know that many educators do value their jobs for the right reasons, but that still doesn't make this sort of thing okay when it happens.
The tobacco in my cigar is Cuban; I bought it in Cuba. Furthermore, I live in Canada where I know of three cigar stores in my area that sell guaranteed authentic Habanos cigars. Also, cheap cigars smell like shit, but an expensive, fine cigar is nice smelling (although it is an acquired taste). Also note that a $20 cigar (i.e. a large Cohiba), if you smoke it maybe once a week, is still far less expensive that smoking a half-pack of cigs per day. In the end, it is the person's own choice to make. I support non-smoking areas, as I'm not always in the mood either.
Well, it does depend on the situation certainly, but if you can conquer the first week, the nicotine will be out of your system. This is, perhaps, the reason why many smokers first try to slow down before they quit outright -- less nicotine to deal with. It also explains why nicotine patches don't always work: there's still the psychological component, even though the need for nicotine is supplied.
They have more nicotine, but I have no chemical urge to smoke them. I have about one a month, and never plan on having more than one a week... I will quit before that point. Also, they do not use the same tobacco in a good cigar that they do in cigarettes, unless, unknown to me and everyone else, Big Tobacco has started investing in Cuban-grown tobacco.
I had a similar problem recently, with the exception that I do this strictly as a hobby. To be MPEG-4 compliant (and thus able to play on all MPEG-4 players), you must have a compliant codec (the easy part: XviD or DivX will do fine) in the MPEG-4 container format. This is the major sticking point I found using mplayer, as the support for the mp4 container is problematic currently (playback works, as does encoding with -oac copy -ovc copy, but it cannot do it while encoding). FFMpeg might work, but I've had problems with it in the past. There are also some other MPEG-4 related OSS programs like MPEG4IP that I haven't tried. Commercial solutions such as Quicktime Pro should handle it with no problems.
In terms of codecs, something like XviD or DivX will probably be your best bet, along with either AAC or MP3 audio. The reason for this is that the MPEG-4 standard has many different parts, and not all players are required to support all parts. Most players will support, at the very least, Advanced Simple Profile video, which is what XviD and DivX are compliant to (MPEG-4 part 2, if you're interested). AAC is the "official" audio codec of the MPEG-4 standard, although most, if not all players will support MP3. I'm not sure how WMP (Windows Media Player) supports AAC (or any part of MPEG-4) by default. H.264 video (MPEG-4 part 10) is also part of the standard, but is less supported and more CPU intensive. OSS support leaves a bit to be desired, although mplayer currently supports it fairly well if you aren't afraid of compiling from CVS. As far as playing the resulting videos, I know mplayer can do this with no trouble, even as far back as the last stable version, although I'm not sure if WMP can handle it. Quicktime Player, obviously, supports H.264 playback with AAC, and Quicktime Pro will encode it with no trouble. I'm not sure about WMP support, but H.264 definitely has higher playback requirements in terms of CPU power.
No, it's not nicotine, it's the psychological effects of smoking. The act of smoking itself is what makes cigarettes so powerfully addictive; the nicotine itself will have left your body a week after you stop smoking, but the habit will still be there. I smoke the very occasional cigar (once a month or so), and do so because I like the flavour and the act itself, instead of any sort of chemical compulsion to do so.
I've not had a cigarette, and never plan to (expensive, addictive, and not very good-smelling), but I will certainly admit to liking cigars. There is more that can be smoked than cigarettes, you know. I want to try smoking a water pipe at some point as well.
Your post is interesting, but it's a right bitch to read. The points raised are valid, and it echoes my own sentiment in that I don't think Linux will truly enter its "golden age" until people realize the need to create native ports.
I knew XviD was compliant, but I thought DivX was as well... shows what I know. Here I was, thinking it was likely to be the other way around. Either way, it's good; I've also been hearing good things about H.264, regarding size vs. quality, even though the resolution can't be as high.
I prefer programming on Linux because I find it easier. There is more *free* documentation, the standards are more open, and better programming tools are available for free. I have no doubt it evens out when you buy Visual C++ or something of that nature, but it isn't really an option for me. Linux, as I see it, is far more developer friendly; almost every system has a compiler, so you have a reasonable guarantee, as a developer, that a user will be able to compile your software without any extra packaging. Also, consider that code written for POSIX compliant, UNIX-like systems will run on any such system, whereas an application written for Windows will only run on Windows (except through WINE or emulators). Cross-platform code, either through something like Java (yes, I know it has its disadvantages) or through cross-platform libraries, like QT or wxWindows, is certainly the holy grail. That being said, I don't think it's hard to see why single-platform OSS applications tend to stick to a POSIX environment rather than Windows.
I have to congratulate Bill for this. I made a decision recently that I was going to stop hating Bill Gates; let's face it, he does nothing more than make software we don't like. Sure, you could say he's monopolistic, but somewhere along the line, people have forgot that he's just a business trying to maximize profits. A donation like this to fight malaria will no doubt have huge positive effects for Africa, and if it buys him some good will, I see no problem with it. I still hate Windows, and Microsoft in general, but I could hardly think of a better thing to be done with the profits.
Slashdot Mirror
The trouble with that is that you need a sufficient amount of skill in every step of the process. It certainly does lower the barrier to entry, and I will even concede that it might allow otherwise unexploited genius to flourish, but skill still needs to come from some place. Just because it's possible to acheive professional results with a lower investment of money, doesn't mean you can do it without knowing what you're doing.
I dare anyone to smoke "on the sly" without getting caught by someone after a while. The smell of tobacco hangs around you for so long that, unless you spend at least 2-6 hours away from your parents after smoking (I don't actually know how long the smell takes to go away, but it's at least 2 hours), they will know. Combine that with the fact that they'll probably find your cigs sooner or later, and it's not a good recipe for not getting caught.
In addition to this, consider that any time anyone tries to introduce a system with even the slightest hint of two-tieredness, they get flamed to a crisp in the press. Ralph Klein has tried to introduce a system where, if you want a more expensive procedure, you can pay for that instead of whatever you'd get otherwise. This still covers all necessary medical procedures free of charge, but the press is still attacking him left, right, and center. Another place (I think it's BC) introduced the idea of having small pay-for-care clinics to do procedures such as MRIs (if my memory serves me correctly; it could be something else). They have been lambasted in the press, called "boutique healthcare" and so on.
A public/private split in the healthcare system would certainly be a vast improvement compared to what we have now, but the option still must remain to get healthcare free-of-charge if you are unable to pay for it. Right now, wealthy Canadians are just using other countries (the US, commonly, but I've also heard of people going to India) as their "private healthcare provider".
And why do Americans travel to Costa Rica and India for medical care? Let me explain this to you: if you can't pay for medical care in Canada, you won't be in debt for the rest of your life. That's the difference. Sure, your health might be better in the US, but if you can't afford the cost of your treatment (especially if it's something big), you will have almost no standard of living at any point after that any way. I'd prefer to have a system where, if I hurt myself or get sick, I can go to the doctor without wondering how I'll pay for it. I'd prefer a system where people with relatively minor ailments receive treatment for them before they worsen, and create a bigger drag on the social safety net. Sure, waiting times for procedures such as MRIs is the natural byproduct, but you will get one in the end, and you'll be financially solvent thereafter. Therein lies the difference between Canadian and American style healthcare.
David Caruso and his character are both flaming wads of shit. Don't believe me? Watch one episode of CSI: Miami, and you will be treated to what is possibly the worst acting on primetime TV. I like the original CSI, but the spinoffs all suck. Showing a controversial issue like this is a last ditch attempt to get people to watch. CSI: Miami is dying, and I'm sure Netcraft will confirm it any day now.
I'm not sure the point of the GP's post was that the magazine should be made using XML, but that it should be distributed in the same manner as a podcast. This makes perfect sense because, in a podcast, the music isn't distributed as XML. It's an interesting idea, certainly. Perhaps there would be some kind of a market for a "syndicated torrent" type thing...
It sounds weird at first, but they haven't patented "the mouse" (the small furry creature), but they have patented a specific, lab-created, genetic variation thereof. This doesn't occur naturally, and it certainly required a lot of research. The knowledge of how to complete this procedure, or even a list of the exact genetic changes should be patentable. Relax; they can't patent a naturally-occuring animal or plant quite yet.
Print-on-demand is already available at lulu.com (hardcover included!) but you can only publish things you have copyright for. The technology does exist, though, and eventually authors will skip the middleman (I think) and use this technology almost exclusively.
More like the Juan Gomez root, AM I RITE GUYS???
Well, to be fair, this article *is* about politics in a way. You can hardly fault someone who brings it up. I think the trend you're seeing is a result of editor bias more than poster bias, or possibly it's because China chooses to do repressive things with technology, and this site is mainly about technology. That being said, you raise some very interesting points. Although I'm not sure I'd trade freedom for quality of living, it's true that I already have a fairly high quality of living compared to many people in China. It certainly is a question that can't be answered in a single post.
The fifty percent mortality rate that everyone is citing with regards to the H5N1 strain is skewed, because, to my knowledge, there hasn't been a case of the H5N1 strain in a place with a modern medical system. I don't mean to disparage Southeast Asia, but we have to look at the facts: the cases of this disease tend to occur in rural areas, far away from developed hospitals. I would like to see the mortality rate of this strain of bird flu compared to the mortality rate from a normal flu in the same area. Just like SARS, I think that this disease, although dangerous, will produce far less than 50% mortality if allowed to spread in the developed world.
Even if the darknets are detectable, it still won't be possible to monitor traffic on them. There is still the matter of encryption that will provide relative security to the users.
And yes, I do know that many educators do value their jobs for the right reasons, but that still doesn't make this sort of thing okay when it happens.
The tobacco in my cigar is Cuban; I bought it in Cuba. Furthermore, I live in Canada where I know of three cigar stores in my area that sell guaranteed authentic Habanos cigars. Also, cheap cigars smell like shit, but an expensive, fine cigar is nice smelling (although it is an acquired taste). Also note that a $20 cigar (i.e. a large Cohiba), if you smoke it maybe once a week, is still far less expensive that smoking a half-pack of cigs per day. In the end, it is the person's own choice to make. I support non-smoking areas, as I'm not always in the mood either.
Well, it does depend on the situation certainly, but if you can conquer the first week, the nicotine will be out of your system. This is, perhaps, the reason why many smokers first try to slow down before they quit outright -- less nicotine to deal with. It also explains why nicotine patches don't always work: there's still the psychological component, even though the need for nicotine is supplied.
They have more nicotine, but I have no chemical urge to smoke them. I have about one a month, and never plan on having more than one a week... I will quit before that point. Also, they do not use the same tobacco in a good cigar that they do in cigarettes, unless, unknown to me and everyone else, Big Tobacco has started investing in Cuban-grown tobacco.
In terms of codecs, something like XviD or DivX will probably be your best bet, along with either AAC or MP3 audio. The reason for this is that the MPEG-4 standard has many different parts, and not all players are required to support all parts. Most players will support, at the very least, Advanced Simple Profile video, which is what XviD and DivX are compliant to (MPEG-4 part 2, if you're interested). AAC is the "official" audio codec of the MPEG-4 standard, although most, if not all players will support MP3. I'm not sure how WMP (Windows Media Player) supports AAC (or any part of MPEG-4) by default. H.264 video (MPEG-4 part 10) is also part of the standard, but is less supported and more CPU intensive. OSS support leaves a bit to be desired, although mplayer currently supports it fairly well if you aren't afraid of compiling from CVS. As far as playing the resulting videos, I know mplayer can do this with no trouble, even as far back as the last stable version, although I'm not sure if WMP can handle it. Quicktime Player, obviously, supports H.264 playback with AAC, and Quicktime Pro will encode it with no trouble. I'm not sure about WMP support, but H.264 definitely has higher playback requirements in terms of CPU power.
No, it's not nicotine, it's the psychological effects of smoking. The act of smoking itself is what makes cigarettes so powerfully addictive; the nicotine itself will have left your body a week after you stop smoking, but the habit will still be there. I smoke the very occasional cigar (once a month or so), and do so because I like the flavour and the act itself, instead of any sort of chemical compulsion to do so.
I've not had a cigarette, and never plan to (expensive, addictive, and not very good-smelling), but I will certainly admit to liking cigars. There is more that can be smoked than cigarettes, you know. I want to try smoking a water pipe at some point as well.
This is exactly why I made the decision that I will only smoke certified Habanos tobaccos from now on. I just don't trust anyone else.
Your post is interesting, but it's a right bitch to read. The points raised are valid, and it echoes my own sentiment in that I don't think Linux will truly enter its "golden age" until people realize the need to create native ports.
I knew XviD was compliant, but I thought DivX was as well... shows what I know. Here I was, thinking it was likely to be the other way around. Either way, it's good; I've also been hearing good things about H.264, regarding size vs. quality, even though the resolution can't be as high.
I prefer programming on Linux because I find it easier. There is more *free* documentation, the standards are more open, and better programming tools are available for free. I have no doubt it evens out when you buy Visual C++ or something of that nature, but it isn't really an option for me. Linux, as I see it, is far more developer friendly; almost every system has a compiler, so you have a reasonable guarantee, as a developer, that a user will be able to compile your software without any extra packaging. Also, consider that code written for POSIX compliant, UNIX-like systems will run on any such system, whereas an application written for Windows will only run on Windows (except through WINE or emulators). Cross-platform code, either through something like Java (yes, I know it has its disadvantages) or through cross-platform libraries, like QT or wxWindows, is certainly the holy grail. That being said, I don't think it's hard to see why single-platform OSS applications tend to stick to a POSIX environment rather than Windows.
I know... isn't it great? Coming to /. too often, with its paranoid culture, is enough to make anyone act a bit crazy.
I have to congratulate Bill for this. I made a decision recently that I was going to stop hating Bill Gates; let's face it, he does nothing more than make software we don't like. Sure, you could say he's monopolistic, but somewhere along the line, people have forgot that he's just a business trying to maximize profits. A donation like this to fight malaria will no doubt have huge positive effects for Africa, and if it buys him some good will, I see no problem with it. I still hate Windows, and Microsoft in general, but I could hardly think of a better thing to be done with the profits.