Bikes are more maneuverable and city traffic seldom averages faster than 15-20mph. Also depends what you mean by "win" - a kick to the door or a twisted mirror of some driver that's deliberately being an asshole (not just being inattentive, but actively trying to squeeze you onto the sidewalk while yelling rudeness) is always possible. For the careless drivers, a loud yell or a blast from a cycle air horn generally wakes them up pretty quickly.
I admire your bravery. I've had food thrown at me on my bike for daring to take up any of "their" road. I may need to get an air horn, since yelling doesn't seem to do the trick with windows rolled up, climate control blowing and stereo playing. I think the "win" referred to is a fatal or disabling injury. I don't fully trust people not to intentionally hit me. Sure they might get a hefty fine, but that would be cold consolation for my estate.
So in short, cellular describes the radio frequency mapping, not the geographic spread of "cell" towers.
I've read a lot of articles on the subject in IEEE Vehicular Technology (and others) dating to 20-30 years ago, and "cell" is frequently used in the geographic sense.
No, no, no. The article under discussion is about 'productivity' in the economic sense. This is the amount of output for a given amount of input. You could use the term for widgets polished by a machine vs. electricity consumed or soybeans per acre.
So in your scenario (paying a lawyer), the Manhattan (I assume you mean New York, not Kansas) lawyer might be less productive than the Grand Forks lawyer if he were to do the same job for a higher rate. I.e. same output, higher input
Of course the decision of which lawyer to hire might depend a lot more on geography -- where you need them to argue a case for you -- than on hourly rates.
And, by the way, who says that 'productivity' is a useful measure of anything?
I say that 'productivity' is a useful measure. It measures how much stuff you make or do with your time. If two people make toy blocks, the more 'productive' one ends up with a bigger pile of blocks at the end of the work day. If you want a way to measure that, 'productivity' is your guy.
It's useful, e.g., because you might employ block-makers. You need something to base performance reviews on. You might decide to pay the more 'productive' guy more per hour.
So 'productivity' is a vital measure of your 'worth' as a producer and how much wealth you create (for whoever you work for). If your pay doesn't reflect that, then 'productivity' is what you cite when you complain to the boss.
Many people have jobs where the measurement of productivity is far more difficult than counting blocks at 5pm. That doesn't mean the measurement is worthless, but that measuring it is hard.
Seriously... who cares? So some people built a museum... why is this news? If you got a distinct sense of pleasure in ridiculing these people and their museum maybe you should evaluate yourself and question why your world is so small.
Now wait just a second, here. Maybe I do get a sense of pleasure ridiculing these people. Maybe my world is small because other people keep telling me where I can't get my pleasure . . . wait another second . . . telling me my world is small, telling me what not to take pleasure in, telling me to evaluate myself . . . you're one of those Fundamentalists, aren't you?
Ok, so let me get this straight. A bunch of Bible-thumpers raises private money to build a museum to depict scenes out of the Flintstones, and everyone here is bitching about how these people should be shut up. The 1st Amendment separates church and state, but it also protects freedom of speech. These people aren't directly inciting violence or rebellion They're not spouting libelous falsehoods. Let them be.
I think there's plenty of ground between "send 'em money" and "shut 'em down". I'm personally sitting in the "make fun of 'em" camp. Letting these nuts have their point of view and freedom to express it doesn't mean you have to go along with them. Everyone's free to respond with their own opinions, too. Which is what's going on right now.
It is true that the Bible is not a science textbook, but it does present itself as a documentary account of many things. Not all of it is figurative, and not all of it is literal. To the best of my knowledge, scholars of the Hebrew language do not consider the text of Genesis chapter one to be poetry, but rather documentary. You can accuse it of being false, but it's unreasonable to say that it was not meant to be read literally.
Indeed, I consider the "it's not literal" excuse to be a lame cop-out where Genesis chapter one is concerned: it's tantamount to saying "I'll interpret the text any which way I please without even paying lip service to textual analysis".
I don't know if you intended to illustrate this, but above is essentially the argument that Christian Fundies make. "Here's yer Bible, Word O'God, either believe the whole thing as we say or yer not a Christian".
Maybe Paris is just trying to follow Hedy's lead. In addition to co-inventing FHSS, Hedy also appears in a racy film early in her career, Ecstasy (1933). Her future husband would try to destroy all the copies, but her little experiment with, uh, "method acting" survives today.
I don't know what my point is. Maybe Paris will make an engineering breakthrough someday. Maybe not.
The author of the song died in 1916, but the co-author lived until 1946. So at least in Europe, the copyright lasts until 2016 (1946 + 70 years).
In America, we were told that copyright had to be extended to "harmonize" with Europe. So you might double check on that date. One or both of us may have been lied to . . .
I always thought that the story of "Happy Birthday" being protected by copyright was an urban legend, up until 5 minutes ago, when I saw this article on Snopes. According to the article, the owner of the "Happy Birthday" copyright receives 2 million dollars annually in royalties. I'm definitely in the wrong business...
Something tells me that the owner of the copyright is not the creator of the song, either. 95 year copyright terms do not encourage the artist to create additional works. They only benefit corporate copyright owners. I expect that we'll see the 95 year term extended to 125 years or so sometime before 2020-ish, just so a certain mouse doesn't escape into the public domain he has plundered so often and so well.
We are at a total loss to understand how this policy has developed, who is behind it and why there is such haste in enacting it into law -- with little if any public debate.
I can probably help you out there. It's called corruption. Howard's Liberals are 2nd only to Dubya's Republicans at this game. The problem is that the Liberals are much better at covering their tracks. It's a very rare occasion, eg AWB ( Australian Weapons-For-Oil scandal ), that they get caught out.
Scare stories like this one just undermine the work being done by thoughtful people.
What work needs to be done? I assume that Australia already has adequate copyright protection, since the country is signatory to international treaties in this regard. What more do these "thoughtful people" need to do, Polyanna?
Following one's legislature's process and keeping tabs on them is a citizen's right and duty.
They note they don't have software for the precinct machines. The iVotronic software for the precinct machines would be a little harder to read for the general programmer, because it runs on a custom-built embedded device. But it is 386EX compilable, so it might be possible. It's certainly more hack-resistant from the outside due to the more proprietary nature of the system (greater obscurity). I don't believe the linux-based iVotronic was ever revived after the project was cancelled in June 2003.
The source code was reviewed by a thrid party in early 2003, but it wasn't the same code that was built into the device executable. Third-party auditors required that very specific code formatting and behavior rules be followed. These rules were not followed in the production version, and therefore the entire software suite for the iVotronic was patched to the auditors' standards. This code compiled, but I don't believe that it was put into production. It certainly wasn't tested for functionality before being audited.
One Achiles' heal of the iVotronic would be the fact that they're made overseas in the Philippines, which could be a potential weak point for inserting something malicious. Just a thought.
No piece of paper, silly declaration from congress, stamp, official gold star thingy, or anything is going to change that.
It may be a silly piece of paper to you, but it's the U.S. Constitution to the rest of us. We have declarations of war for good reasons, like how to know when it's over. But I guess that's the point of undeclared war -- perpetual sacrifice, continuous casualties, being told to "get over it" and just go along. In fact, being told to "get over it" is getting kind of old to me . . .
Rummy a sacrificial lamb? Why not, they're using the military as a tethered goat. Bush says as much when he declares we're in Iraq so we don't have to fight the 'terrusts' here.
Using Internet explorer (on windows...) go onto hotmail and read a few emails.
Then go into your internet cache and find the pages.
How do you know he uses Internet explorer?
How do you know he runs Windows?
How do you know he doesn't have a crazy diskless webstation of some kind?
How do you know he doesn't read hotmail at the library?
How do you know he doesn't read hotmail on your computer?
How do you know he didn't read the email on his mobile phone?
How do you know he owns a computer?
So you see, receiving web mail doesn't necessarilly mean caching (not storing, but caching) the message in the Internet explorer cache on a Windows PC. He could have printed that spam using an impact transfer ribbon-type printer. By your logic, the defendant could ask for all his old printer media. The demand that he produce his hard drive contents is, like you post, a red herring.
Since they were sold as a bundle, surely Dell's only actual obligation is to offer a full refund on the OS and laptop.
Since I'm not a lawyer in your jurisdiction or any other, I'll accept your argument that this is Dell's only legal obligation. However, as a business they might want to try to make reasonable accomodations to make the customer happy so can they compete for his and his friends and colleagues' future business. It's not really that tough to determine a fair market value for the bundled OS. Ya, ya, they don't have to. Ya, they can say "take it or leave it". I'm just saying that it's possbile that there is a better route.
I tried getting a Windows refund out of Dell a few months ago for my then-new laptop. I never succeeded really, but they did give me a $30 refund basically just to go away, and told me to keep the Windows software. Not sure what I'm supposed to do with it.
If by "it", you mean the $30, just send it to me and I'll take care of it.
``For me, if I did run *nix, the 3-4 hours it would cost me to get a $100 refund would exceed the refund's return''
All that says to me is that the refund procedure is too much of a hassle. Obviously, companies can use this to make it unattractive for you to get your refund, which means they get to keep the money. If we accept that you are entitled to your refund, the refund procedure should be less involved, or you should be compensated for the effort it takes; otherwise, the refund is a lose-lose preposition.
Sounds to me like at $100 they found the "sweet spot".
I'm never shocked when a geek complains about the Microsoft licensing scheme, even though I agree that more choice is better. When I break down the cost of a workstation for an average business client for a year, the US$210 or whatever Microsoft "tax" is barely 1% versus the costs of the applications and maintenance they need to run that workstation for a year. That's right, 1% -- many of my business clients spend upwards of US$10,000+ a year per user on software licenses, maintenance, and hardware.
I'm shocked that owning and operating each workstations costs your clients at least $20000 a year. Cause that what it would have to cost for your $210 to be barely 1% of the yearly TCO of the workstation. I'm not doubting your numbers, but it sounds like your clients must be doing some pretty specialized work on these workstations to justify that expense before even putting the idiot between the keyboard and chair, roof over it, heat and cooling, etc. Assuming that they're not idiots and they're really getting a return that justifies that cost implies that their work is not really typical of the average office PC.
Sounds to me like people are getting really impatient these days
I think it's experience, not impatience that leads to this behavior. If you get nothing for 4 seconds after trying to open a site, aren't the odds of it working right today going down with each additional second? If nothing has happened after 4 seconds, will 5 help, or 500? At that point, you start to assume the tubes are clogged at the other end.
If a person is shopping or reading the news, long waits between each action can be very irritating. Like turning newspaper or catalog pages with tweezers while wearing gloves.
Slashdot Mirror
I admire your bravery. I've had food thrown at me on my bike for daring to take up any of "their" road. I may need to get an air horn, since yelling doesn't seem to do the trick with windows rolled up, climate control blowing and stereo playing. I think the "win" referred to is a fatal or disabling injury. I don't fully trust people not to intentionally hit me. Sure they might get a hefty fine, but that would be cold consolation for my estate.
It's called "hyperbole." I'm sure you've seen it a million times.
I've read a lot of articles on the subject in IEEE Vehicular Technology (and others) dating to 20-30 years ago, and "cell" is frequently used in the geographic sense.
No, no, no. The article under discussion is about 'productivity' in the economic sense. This is the amount of output for a given amount of input. You could use the term for widgets polished by a machine vs. electricity consumed or soybeans per acre.
So in your scenario (paying a lawyer), the Manhattan (I assume you mean New York, not Kansas) lawyer might be less productive than the Grand Forks lawyer if he were to do the same job for a higher rate. I.e. same output, higher input
Of course the decision of which lawyer to hire might depend a lot more on geography -- where you need them to argue a case for you -- than on hourly rates.
I say that 'productivity' is a useful measure. It measures how much stuff you make or do with your time. If two people make toy blocks, the more 'productive' one ends up with a bigger pile of blocks at the end of the work day. If you want a way to measure that, 'productivity' is your guy.
It's useful, e.g., because you might employ block-makers. You need something to base performance reviews on. You might decide to pay the more 'productive' guy more per hour.
So 'productivity' is a vital measure of your 'worth' as a producer and how much wealth you create (for whoever you work for). If your pay doesn't reflect that, then 'productivity' is what you cite when you complain to the boss.
Many people have jobs where the measurement of productivity is far more difficult than counting blocks at 5pm. That doesn't mean the measurement is worthless, but that measuring it is hard.
Now wait just a second, here. Maybe I do get a sense of pleasure ridiculing these people. Maybe my world is small because other people keep telling me where I can't get my pleasure . . . wait another second . . . telling me my world is small, telling me what not to take pleasure in, telling me to evaluate myself . . . you're one of those Fundamentalists, aren't you?
I think there's plenty of ground between "send 'em money" and "shut 'em down". I'm personally sitting in the "make fun of 'em" camp. Letting these nuts have their point of view and freedom to express it doesn't mean you have to go along with them. Everyone's free to respond with their own opinions, too. Which is what's going on right now.
I don't know if you intended to illustrate this, but above is essentially the argument that Christian Fundies make. "Here's yer Bible, Word O'God, either believe the whole thing as we say or yer not a Christian".
Maybe Paris is just trying to follow Hedy's lead. In addition to co-inventing FHSS, Hedy also appears in a racy film early in her career, Ecstasy (1933). Her future husband would try to destroy all the copies, but her little experiment with, uh, "method acting" survives today.
I don't know what my point is. Maybe Paris will make an engineering breakthrough someday. Maybe not.
In America, we were told that copyright had to be extended to "harmonize" with Europe. So you might double check on that date. One or both of us may have been lied to . . .
Something tells me that the owner of the copyright is not the creator of the song, either. 95 year copyright terms do not encourage the artist to create additional works. They only benefit corporate copyright owners. I expect that we'll see the 95 year term extended to 125 years or so sometime before 2020-ish, just so a certain mouse doesn't escape into the public domain he has plundered so often and so well.
Follow the money.
What work needs to be done? I assume that Australia already has adequate copyright protection, since the country is signatory to international treaties in this regard. What more do these "thoughtful people" need to do, Polyanna?
Following one's legislature's process and keeping tabs on them is a citizen's right and duty.
Area man? Is that you?
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28694?
The source code was reviewed by a thrid party in early 2003, but it wasn't the same code that was built into the device executable. Third-party auditors required that very specific code formatting and behavior rules be followed. These rules were not followed in the production version, and therefore the entire software suite for the iVotronic was patched to the auditors' standards. This code compiled, but I don't believe that it was put into production. It certainly wasn't tested for functionality before being audited.
One Achiles' heal of the iVotronic would be the fact that they're made overseas in the Philippines, which could be a potential weak point for inserting something malicious. Just a thought.
There's a faster kind?
It may be a silly piece of paper to you, but it's the U.S. Constitution to the rest of us. We have declarations of war for good reasons, like how to know when it's over. But I guess that's the point of undeclared war -- perpetual sacrifice, continuous casualties, being told to "get over it" and just go along. In fact, being told to "get over it" is getting kind of old to me . . .
Rummy a sacrificial lamb? Why not, they're using the military as a tethered goat. Bush says as much when he declares we're in Iraq so we don't have to fight the 'terrusts' here.
How do you know he uses Internet explorer?
How do you know he runs Windows?
How do you know he doesn't have a crazy diskless webstation of some kind?
How do you know he doesn't read hotmail at the library?
How do you know he doesn't read hotmail on your computer?
How do you know he didn't read the email on his mobile phone?
How do you know he owns a computer?
So you see, receiving web mail doesn't necessarilly mean caching (not storing, but caching) the message in the Internet explorer cache on a Windows PC. He could have printed that spam using an impact transfer ribbon-type printer. By your logic, the defendant could ask for all his old printer media. The demand that he produce his hard drive contents is, like you post, a red herring.
Since I'm not a lawyer in your jurisdiction or any other, I'll accept your argument that this is Dell's only legal obligation. However, as a business they might want to try to make reasonable accomodations to make the customer happy so can they compete for his and his friends and colleagues' future business. It's not really that tough to determine a fair market value for the bundled OS. Ya, ya, they don't have to. Ya, they can say "take it or leave it". I'm just saying that it's possbile that there is a better route.
If by "it", you mean the $30, just send it to me and I'll take care of it.
Sounds to me like at $100 they found the "sweet spot".
I'm shocked that owning and operating each workstations costs your clients at least $20000 a year. Cause that what it would have to cost for your $210 to be barely 1% of the yearly TCO of the workstation. I'm not doubting your numbers, but it sounds like your clients must be doing some pretty specialized work on these workstations to justify that expense before even putting the idiot between the keyboard and chair, roof over it, heat and cooling, etc. Assuming that they're not idiots and they're really getting a return that justifies that cost implies that their work is not really typical of the average office PC.
I think it's experience, not impatience that leads to this behavior. If you get nothing for 4 seconds after trying to open a site, aren't the odds of it working right today going down with each additional second? If nothing has happened after 4 seconds, will 5 help, or 500? At that point, you start to assume the tubes are clogged at the other end.
If a person is shopping or reading the news, long waits between each action can be very irritating. Like turning newspaper or catalog pages with tweezers while wearing gloves.