That might have worked for me, god knows I read enough HOWTO guides, forum posts and other breadcrumbs and didn't come up with a working solution.
My problem was that whatever I was using worked "out of the box" - a fresh install would boot up, connect over PPP or some such (18 years ago, sorry if the details have gone fuzzy), and I could browse the internet all day long. Then, when I would reboot, it would be gone and never work again. Very frustrating.
Today, you can get a 28" 4K monitor for ~$450, and I think that's been true for over a year.
The common setup at my company is a pair of 24" 1080p on a dual stand - the stand itself costs $100, so if the monitors are $175 each, you are at the same cost for the same number of pixels... I prefer the single 16:9 monitor to work on instead of a 32:9 aspect ratio.
The thing is, you don't need a 4K display to work on variable DPI support, you just need to make sure that the apps you have responsibility for DO IT!
I mention Unity as "working" because I've tried it and had virtually no problems at 4K, it seems that more stuff in Gnome is hardcoded, and KDE4 is hopeless. Too bad that you need to "make the leap" to KDE5 to get HiDPI, I'm guessing it will be 2-3 years before KDE5 is "ready" the way that KDE4 is "ready" on a 1080p screen today. I enjoyed using KDE4 on 1080p screens in 2013, but when the 4K hit my life, it really killed KDE4.
I hardly consider a $600 display to be mainstream. It's availible, and it's way more then the average person is going to spend. 1080 displays are the mainstream displays.
Define average? When I graduated college, my (small) company put a computer on my desk that cost 2 months of my salary to purchase (1991, 16MHz 386 with 15" VGA color monitor, $5K computer cost vs $30K starting salary). Kids these days can (commonly) start out anywhere from working for free up to $60K/year fresh out of school, and most of them start with a PC on their desk (not running Linux, but....) I doubt many people spend $10K on a college fresh-out's computer these days, but $2K wouldn't seem out of line, and that's plenty of room to afford a 4K monitor.
I'd say Unity and Windows are neck-and-neck with respect to 4K resolution usability - with maybe a slight edge to Unity for ease of use and completeness of scaling. I find both to be usable without magnifying glasses, unlike KDE4.
It became "mainstream" for me when my new job supplied me with a laptop with a 4K display. Not long after, I bought a $600 25" 4K desktop monitor - that's pretty mainstream if you ask me. Looking around, these displays have been available since ~early 2014, and anybody who didn't know they were coming would have had to be in deep ostrich denial mode.
Unless you count Ubuntu and Unity - it works better on my 4K displays than any other Linux DE, which is to say, it works as well as Unity works on any resolution.
I used UNIX and "The Internet" back in the 1980s, but Linux didn't come to my attention until the mid-1990s when I encountered a Slackware box-set of CDs that a colleague was playing with. I subscribed to the updates for a couple of years, but found that Linux "wasn't ready for prime-time" at that point, it was problematic getting a reliable modem connection to the Internet (yes, it could be solved, but after hours of using my Windows box to browse the internet for solutions for the Linux problem.....) So, I would install each new release, play with it for a few days, then wipe it. After a couple of years of being told that sound support is unimportant and "real" people have ethernet connection to the Internet, and nothing really useful in the distributions that wasn't readily available on other platforms I already had, I cancelled my subscription.
I didn't really start using Linux in earnest until 2005-ish when I got full AMD 64 bit support in a home system I built up with 4GB of RAM - using the only "true" 64 bit OS available at the time: Gentoo. I kept Gentoo around for about 5 years, but was migrating to Debian/Ubuntu as my distro of choice on work and eventually home systems.
We're already doing "test runs" on Antartica, with longer "closed transport windows" than the moon would have.
If you want an explicit Mars colony simulation, put it under a dome on some spare land in Space Center Houston and only access it through strict procedural simulation.
I see a moon base as not literally "on the way to Mars" but more developmentally.
Build the moon base, solve problems at closer distance / lower cost. Then take on the bigger journey. The problems will be different on Mars, but not so different that the moon base experience will be 100% useless.
I'd liken it to colonizing the Canary Islands, before trying to jump all the way to Mexico (from Spain).
In humans, an implantable optical "pulse generator" and fiber optic leads would be no problem at all to manufacture or implant (in a similar housing to modern pacemakers / neurostimulators.)
I want him to be a serious contender exactly because he doesn't _seem_ to be playing the polls and tweaking his message to get a point here and a point there... whether he is doing this behind the scenes or not, I'm tired of politicians who play like it's O.K. to campaign by the up-to-the-moment polling opinions - with a complete lack of visible self-determination. Then, when election season is over, they're equally flexible for whoever will bring them the most money to campaign with next election... sad.
I live in Florida, the grass grows whether you want it to or not. Hell, I roto-tillered a 600sq ft garden, completely plowed in all green stuff and pulled the weeds for 3 months while I grew stuff in it. Stop maintenance and the weeds took over within a month. After 1 year of not pulling the weeds, it's hard to tell the garden from the lawn anymore.
If you've got a big simple area with nothing in it but grass/weeds, an automated lawnmower makes a lot of sense. Regular mowing tends to favor grasses over less hardy green stuff and will get you that "civilized" monoculture look that is so in style.
I used to bike to work in Houston, only 4 miles, but it required a shower and change of clothes upon arrival most of the year. If you've got those facilities, great.
I also used to bike/gym early in the mornings on Miami Beach, and the gym (and job) didn't have showers. There I would sit forward in my desk chair until the A/C dried the sweat (30-45 minutes) and then go change clothes. It worked well for me at that particular job, but not every office culture understands sweaty employees.
Both places got a little more interesting when caught in a thundershower - rain gear is kind of a joke when the rain is falling sideways as if tossed from buckets. There's also some issue of being delayed by lightning storms, regardless of your opinion of getting wet, going out during a heavy lightning storm is just irresponsible. Luckily most of those pass within 30 minutes or less.
I do like the walking bit, except in the summer in Miami when it can be 35C with 100% humidity in the morning, and thundershowers powerful enough to knock you over in the afternoon.
When they're grouped this tightly, the following busses should announce to their passengers that they're going to "do a spacing wait" and the passengers may want to jump off and get on the lead bus.
The London tube is an amusing starfish... if you need to go to/from the center, it's great.
If you're out on an arm, and you need to get to a similar spot on the next arm, it's the bus for you, or even walking would be faster.
I tried to ride the bus, waited almost an hour before one showed up, but it wasn't one bus, it was all seven buses that run that line, apparently they had stopped off at the pub or something and then all hit the road at the same time.
Slashdot Mirror
That might have worked for me, god knows I read enough HOWTO guides, forum posts and other breadcrumbs and didn't come up with a working solution.
My problem was that whatever I was using worked "out of the box" - a fresh install would boot up, connect over PPP or some such (18 years ago, sorry if the details have gone fuzzy), and I could browse the internet all day long. Then, when I would reboot, it would be gone and never work again. Very frustrating.
Today, you can get a 28" 4K monitor for ~$450, and I think that's been true for over a year.
The common setup at my company is a pair of 24" 1080p on a dual stand - the stand itself costs $100, so if the monitors are $175 each, you are at the same cost for the same number of pixels... I prefer the single 16:9 monitor to work on instead of a 32:9 aspect ratio.
The thing is, you don't need a 4K display to work on variable DPI support, you just need to make sure that the apps you have responsibility for DO IT!
I mention Unity as "working" because I've tried it and had virtually no problems at 4K, it seems that more stuff in Gnome is hardcoded, and KDE4 is hopeless. Too bad that you need to "make the leap" to KDE5 to get HiDPI, I'm guessing it will be 2-3 years before KDE5 is "ready" the way that KDE4 is "ready" on a 1080p screen today. I enjoyed using KDE4 on 1080p screens in 2013, but when the 4K hit my life, it really killed KDE4.
I hardly consider a $600 display to be mainstream. It's availible, and it's way more then the average person is going to spend. 1080 displays are the mainstream displays.
Define average? When I graduated college, my (small) company put a computer on my desk that cost 2 months of my salary to purchase (1991, 16MHz 386 with 15" VGA color monitor, $5K computer cost vs $30K starting salary). Kids these days can (commonly) start out anywhere from working for free up to $60K/year fresh out of school, and most of them start with a PC on their desk (not running Linux, but....) I doubt many people spend $10K on a college fresh-out's computer these days, but $2K wouldn't seem out of line, and that's plenty of room to afford a 4K monitor.
I'd say Unity and Windows are neck-and-neck with respect to 4K resolution usability - with maybe a slight edge to Unity for ease of use and completeness of scaling. I find both to be usable without magnifying glasses, unlike KDE4.
It became "mainstream" for me when my new job supplied me with a laptop with a 4K display. Not long after, I bought a $600 25" 4K desktop monitor - that's pretty mainstream if you ask me. Looking around, these displays have been available since ~early 2014, and anybody who didn't know they were coming would have had to be in deep ostrich denial mode.
Unless you count Ubuntu and Unity - it works better on my 4K displays than any other Linux DE, which is to say, it works as well as Unity works on any resolution.
KDE has a history of this - KDE4 was also let out of the bag long before it was ready.
I tried KDE4 on a 4K display, the results varied from disappointing to frustrating.
KDE5 may be "bleeding edge," but it's already a couple of years behind the times for mainstream hardware (high resolution displays).
I used UNIX and "The Internet" back in the 1980s, but Linux didn't come to my attention until the mid-1990s when I encountered a Slackware box-set of CDs that a colleague was playing with. I subscribed to the updates for a couple of years, but found that Linux "wasn't ready for prime-time" at that point, it was problematic getting a reliable modem connection to the Internet (yes, it could be solved, but after hours of using my Windows box to browse the internet for solutions for the Linux problem.....) So, I would install each new release, play with it for a few days, then wipe it. After a couple of years of being told that sound support is unimportant and "real" people have ethernet connection to the Internet, and nothing really useful in the distributions that wasn't readily available on other platforms I already had, I cancelled my subscription.
I didn't really start using Linux in earnest until 2005-ish when I got full AMD 64 bit support in a home system I built up with 4GB of RAM - using the only "true" 64 bit OS available at the time: Gentoo. I kept Gentoo around for about 5 years, but was migrating to Debian/Ubuntu as my distro of choice on work and eventually home systems.
Why is our vision for the future limited to "another billion a year"?
If we can get all fired up about imaginary weapons of mass destruction and spend $800 Billion over 8 years, why not fusion?
We're already doing "test runs" on Antartica, with longer "closed transport windows" than the moon would have.
If you want an explicit Mars colony simulation, put it under a dome on some spare land in Space Center Houston and only access it through strict procedural simulation.
I see a moon base as not literally "on the way to Mars" but more developmentally.
Build the moon base, solve problems at closer distance / lower cost. Then take on the bigger journey. The problems will be different on Mars, but not so different that the moon base experience will be 100% useless.
I'd liken it to colonizing the Canary Islands, before trying to jump all the way to Mexico (from Spain).
>If some plants or organisms grow too fast, you can just kill them or cut them down.
Doesn't seem to be working too well for invasive species on Earth, where we have relatively abundant human labor, machines and chemicals to help us.
In humans, an implantable optical "pulse generator" and fiber optic leads would be no problem at all to manufacture or implant (in a similar housing to modern pacemakers / neurostimulators.)
If Gotti and Putin ever came toe to toe, Gotti would have been buried with the wave of a hand, small time punk.
I want him to be a serious contender exactly because he doesn't _seem_ to be playing the polls and tweaking his message to get a point here and a point there... whether he is doing this behind the scenes or not, I'm tired of politicians who play like it's O.K. to campaign by the up-to-the-moment polling opinions - with a complete lack of visible self-determination. Then, when election season is over, they're equally flexible for whoever will bring them the most money to campaign with next election... sad.
squatting on land on the other side. Once enough of them did, they were retroactively legalized, what you might call "amnesty".
Sounds like the West Bank settlement strategy today...
>Why is this particular robotic lawnmower super dangerous compared to all other robotic lawnmowers that are already out there?
Because it's made by a company that is primarily a military products supplier? ;-)
I live in Florida, the grass grows whether you want it to or not. Hell, I roto-tillered a 600sq ft garden, completely plowed in all green stuff and pulled the weeds for 3 months while I grew stuff in it. Stop maintenance and the weeds took over within a month. After 1 year of not pulling the weeds, it's hard to tell the garden from the lawn anymore.
If you've got a big simple area with nothing in it but grass/weeds, an automated lawnmower makes a lot of sense. Regular mowing tends to favor grasses over less hardy green stuff and will get you that "civilized" monoculture look that is so in style.
I used to bike to work in Houston, only 4 miles, but it required a shower and change of clothes upon arrival most of the year. If you've got those facilities, great.
I also used to bike/gym early in the mornings on Miami Beach, and the gym (and job) didn't have showers. There I would sit forward in my desk chair until the A/C dried the sweat (30-45 minutes) and then go change clothes. It worked well for me at that particular job, but not every office culture understands sweaty employees.
Both places got a little more interesting when caught in a thundershower - rain gear is kind of a joke when the rain is falling sideways as if tossed from buckets. There's also some issue of being delayed by lightning storms, regardless of your opinion of getting wet, going out during a heavy lightning storm is just irresponsible. Luckily most of those pass within 30 minutes or less.
I do like the walking bit, except in the summer in Miami when it can be 35C with 100% humidity in the morning, and thundershowers powerful enough to knock you over in the afternoon.
When they're grouped this tightly, the following busses should announce to their passengers that they're going to "do a spacing wait" and the passengers may want to jump off and get on the lead bus.
The London tube is an amusing starfish... if you need to go to/from the center, it's great.
If you're out on an arm, and you need to get to a similar spot on the next arm, it's the bus for you, or even walking would be faster.
I tried to ride the bus, waited almost an hour before one showed up, but it wasn't one bus, it was all seven buses that run that line, apparently they had stopped off at the pub or something and then all hit the road at the same time.
Plus, I don't really want to live where I can hear trains running all hours of the day and night, so I choose not to...