Too bad that for a majority of users, Linux isn't an OS that they should be using to begin with...
Nonsense. The vast majority of users these days just need a working browser. My mom, dad, and sister all run Linux. Only my sister seems to even be aware that it's not Windows. Simple fact is they know to click on the Chrome logo (same one a Windows user uses) to bring up the browser and they're off. I don't have to worry about fixing any malware that does crop up, and in the event that they DO have a problem I can easily SSH into the machine and tunnel through to a VNC server to look at things remotely.
As a matter of fact its the mid-range skillset users who seem to have the most trouble with Linux. For basic users it covers all of their use cases. For the geeky power users they don't mind getting their hands dirty and getting creative to make things work. The mid-range users though want to do semi-complex things but get frustrated when it doesn't work exactly the same way in Linux.
I've been using a Nvidia card in Linux (with binary drivers) for years now with no issues whatsoever. Not sure how it would "suck". System boots, runs fine, and does what I need it to:S.
Most really don't need to anymore. I've been using Linux for a LONG time. Started when I was in high school circa 1997 or so. I'll admit that back then it was a pain in the ass to get a lot of stuff working.
Now - I install it and everything just works. I haven't had to mess around with text config files just to get the system running or the like for years (probably around 2009 or so).
The only time when things get a little hairy is when doing something a bit outside of the ordinary - IE, getting certain games running under Wine and the like. That's trying to work around a simple lack of native apps though. When running Linux software on a Linux system - piece of cake. As a matter of fact the only thing that keeps Windows from feeling completely foreign to me is that I have to use it at work.
Actually, when I said "half the stuff on your list" insurance was the only one I was allowing. The others really make no difference.
Also - this story is specifically about restricting a ride to the AIRPORT. Do you honestly think that such a ride deserves a different set of criteria than a ride to the bowling alley?
The local SHERIFF bought these. The Sheriff is a county level official - mayor is a local/city level official. More importantly though, the Sheriff virtually everywhere is an *elected* official. Generally elected officials can do whatever they want (within some level of reason) without any recourse until they next election day.
Basically you're talking about someone with their own budget who can't be "fired" like a normal person could. Though I must admit that this seems like it would be unpopular at the polls. Democrats hate anything weapon related and Republicans while pro-military tend to be very anti-militarization of the local police (plus just anti-government spending in general). Seems like both sides will not be happy with this.
When you are making a profit on every unit and your competitor is making a loss on every unit, why would you object very much when the competitor takes the lead on number of units?
It depends. You allude to the big picture but never step back and take a look at it. Sony and Microsoft typically have taken a loss on the consoles specifically because they DO make a lot of money on games sales.
So if when the numbers are tallied MS and/or Sony are coming in higher net positive, then their strategy is still working better.
Netflix, being a newer company, strikes me as aware of the fact that regardless of what they do, their shows are going to be on the torrent sites. DRM will never prevent that, and I think they know that.
No - I'm 32. Cheap has nothing to do with it. I have no problem with people thinking I'm cheap, or thrifty. There is an all too accurate negative stereotype of Walmart shoppers though that I simply wish to avoid.
I've never seen a successful argument involves "the right to *not* . ..". You have the right to something. The right to "not" is just used as a contrived way to deprive others of rights.
IE, "I have the right to not see gays kissing in the street.". "I have the right to not see a black man with a white woman.".
As soon as you have to frame your argument around "the right to not", you've already lost.
As an aside: what's with Americans and their guns? Sheesh, people, grow up. You don't need a plastic-or-metal penis to be a real man
Your mistake is that thinking guns have anything to do with a penis or being a "real man". Seriously how often do you think people sit around thinking about the size of their dick?
People like guns because they happen to like guns. Some people like golf, basketball, big trucks, or a whole host of other stuff without worrying about their mainhood.
I swear we need to define a new logical fallacy revolving around this.
If corporate found out, it would probably drill something like this into clerks' heads: "Samsung doesn't make the iPad; Apple does. Let me show you the Galaxy Tab."
Not always the best strategy. You have to understand that many people in the buying public view such corrections as you being overly pedantic. If they want a "Samsung iPad" and you tell them Samsung only makes the Galaxy Tab, many will get offended and walk away.
What else can you really compete on when you're selling basics like toilet paper and laundry detergent.
The last one: image. Wal-mart has picked up such a negative image that a lot of people will pay extra just to make sure they don't have to shop there. Heck I personally buy a lot of store-brand generics for lots of products, but I won't buy those at Walmart because I don't want anyone who might come in my home to see a Wal-mart store brand product in my house.
One thing stores can compete in too is in non-imported goods. I try to buy "Made in the USA" goods when I can - particularly for things like tools. The local hardware store runs about 15-20% more than Walmart but a LOT of what they carry is domestically produced, and even for the stuff that isn't, they generally filter out the "junk" that Walmart sells. If something is of low/poor quality, that store generally won't stock it. They also have knowledgeable people working there, which helps. You're not going to find a person with actual plumbing or electrical experience working the hardware section at Wal-mart.
By "printing" I'm assuming they mean to duplicate the template person entirely - including memories. That tech might not exist today, and we might never be able to, but if we could, it would certainly work great for this.
Depending on the data size it might be feasible to store the templates of a few dozen individuals. Half male, half female. All the varying skillsets. Send out a few hundred probes that would systematically search star systems and if it finds an uninhabited one that could sustain human life, touch down and print/deploy/grow/whatever its digitally stored crew to colonize the planet.
The same individuals might get duplicated on quite a few planets - possibly during different time frames. IE, a probe lands, one crew builds a society, persists for thousands or hundreds of thousands of years, and then finally perishes, whilst the other ones continue to search and might touch down and redeploy further duplicates of those individuals millions of years later.
Ultimately, the question of "are we alone" in the universe becomes meaningless. Is there other life elsewhere? Quite likely, but even if its NOT, life in the universe has begun - as evidenced by ourselves. Even if we're the only examples, we can spread life everywhere else.
Dang. Why is it that none of these devices are ever available on Verizon? Its the 2nd most popular carrier in the US, and yet we never get these straight-pay phones for it. Their "full price" phones you actually buy from them are prices basically at a premium/penalized rate to get you to renew the contract, while the $200-300 phones from Google and this are unavailable:(.
Eh - still better. The northern hemisphere is far more populated and has much more land than the southern. All of North America, Europe, and Asia are in the Northern Hemisphere, as well as half of Africa, and a bit of South America. From a simple "number of lives" perspective it'd be better to hit the lower portion.
The only way I see the system working is one where there is no "driver override". I can just imagine how many crashes would occur becauase the driver as absolutely "sure" that the computer was about to crash while going 125 MPH (which computer drivers might be able to operate at just fine). They take control, are unable to pilot the vehicle at that speed, and then crash, blaming it on the computer.
Heck, ideally I wouldn't imagine that future automated cars would even have a steering wheel or direct controls (aside from temperature, entertainment, etc). I'd imagine it to more closely resemble a modernized version of a stagecoach - seats facing each other. Heck having the seats be reclineable for naps would be great too. Driving myself say, from New York to Austin is a 27 hour trip. Not really a good drive. However, if I could just punch in my destination to a Google Maps console in the car, kick back, take a nap, play on the computer, etc, it wouldn't be so bad.
Sometimes you have to give it a try before you determine if it delivers a good enough value.
Remember just because something isn't worth its price doesn't mean that the price is prohibitive.
Example: a local place might start serving a $30 hamburger (and I'm sure some places do have burgers higher than that). $30 is a lot for a hamburger, but in and of itself it's not really that much money. I might be willing to try one and see how it is. Afterwards I might decide that it really wasn't worth the price. That doesn't mean that I could have known that before the purchase, or that I "shouldn't" have bought it.
This doesn't really effect copyright. Remember, copyright governs rights to reproduce and distribute material.
In this case the material has already been reproduced and distributed by the copyright holder. Later they decided to change their minds.
I could see a restriction on being able to redistribute such material, but I don't see being required to delete it.
Besides - enforcement of this would be virtually impossible. Anybody who wanted to keep the pics would just make a secret copy. Are they going to make weekly inspections of his computer for life to make sure they don't find pics of his ex?
There's no logical argument that makes INCOME taxes specifically "theft" that wouldn't apply to other taxes.
The bottom line is that we live in a society in which we have determined that a certain level of services must be maintained for all citizens. Those services must be paid for. Such payments must have funds, and those funds come in the form of taxes. No matter if income, sales, or property tax, all taxes must be paid under penalty of law, and are not "theft". Heck the entire concept and punishment of theft is a concept enshrined and enforced by the legal system - a system that is paid for and maintained by - TAXES!
Because property taxes on rural land doesn't subsidize services for people that live in the city, amirite?
I work for a local government and am heavily involved in the property tax process. I'm sure like all things it varies by state, but here (South Carolina) I'd say that the urban subsidizes the rural even on property taxes.
For one, there's the plain and simple situation that large tracts of rural land are worth much less per acre than land in the cities. A 0.25 acre lot in town might be $30k whilst land out in the woods is less than $10k per acre.
Secondly, large tracts of agricultural land used for crops or timber are given an EXTREME tax break. Most of them pay taxes on less than 5% of the actual value of the land.
And last, serious tax breaks are given to "owner occupied" residential properties. Owner occupied properties are far more common in rural areas. Its not uncommon in the urban/suburban areas, but there are far more rental properties and such that end up paying nearly twice as much in property taxes.
I know in our specific locale its been an area of concern lately that a small urban area that is less than 10% of the size of the county generates more than 25% of the property tax revenue.
Re:Never used this keystroke
on
Goodbye, Ctrl-S
·
· Score: 1
I've been using computers for over 30 years and have never once used this keystroke.
Me neither, but I also don't use Ctrl+X and Ctrl-V for Cut and Paste either, though that's what most people know them as.
I learned Alt+F S for save, and Shift+Delete for Cut and Shift+Insert for paste many years ago and that has continued to work in almost any program.
The exception tends to be Unix text editors. Naturally in vi there's a different command set, as well as nano. Using nano for a while right before browsing the web can be particularly problematic, since the Ctrl+W used for find in nano happens to close the current tab in Chrome and Firefox.
That's always the problem with impression based results.
I've seen the same with vegetarians. They'll have a cookout and then claim "I served all veggie burgers and no one even noticed!!!!". More likely, you just don't have a room full of guests who are going to take a bite, throw the burger on the floor, and scream "WHAT THE FUCK IS IN THIS NASTY BASTARD!?!?!". No, people generally just nod and put on a smile.
Same with things like this. You can smell pretty darned bad before people are going to start coming up to you and complaining.
Besides, where the hell is the control group in this? They need anonymously submitted ratings of the BO. 4 groups at least. 1 who doesn't wash and the responders are told this. 1 who does but the responders are told otherwise, and vice versa.
It's the other way around for me. I break out if I don't wash my face at least daily.
Same here. I have seborrheic dermatitis. There are various things that can be done to control the condition, but the easiest way is to simply wash my face each morning with dandruff shampoo. If I skip a day though, I immediately start to get scaling skin (primarily on the cheeks right under the eyes, and on the upper lip). Once it starts it takes 4 or 5 days to get it back under control. If I go a day without showering my hair also becomes greasy enough that it starts to give me headaches.
Overall though the whole "back to nature" thing just doesn't make sense to me. Back when most of this stuff was common people typically didn't live more than 45-50 years. We're now increasing lifespans to lengths never before seen specifically through medical practices that are not "natural".
Slashdot Mirror
Too bad that for a majority of users, Linux isn't an OS that they should be using to begin with...
Nonsense. The vast majority of users these days just need a working browser. My mom, dad, and sister all run Linux. Only my sister seems to even be aware that it's not Windows. Simple fact is they know to click on the Chrome logo (same one a Windows user uses) to bring up the browser and they're off. I don't have to worry about fixing any malware that does crop up, and in the event that they DO have a problem I can easily SSH into the machine and tunnel through to a VNC server to look at things remotely.
As a matter of fact its the mid-range skillset users who seem to have the most trouble with Linux. For basic users it covers all of their use cases. For the geeky power users they don't mind getting their hands dirty and getting creative to make things work. The mid-range users though want to do semi-complex things but get frustrated when it doesn't work exactly the same way in Linux.
I've been using a Nvidia card in Linux (with binary drivers) for years now with no issues whatsoever. Not sure how it would "suck". System boots, runs fine, and does what I need it to :S.
Most really don't need to anymore. I've been using Linux for a LONG time. Started when I was in high school circa 1997 or so. I'll admit that back then it was a pain in the ass to get a lot of stuff working.
Now - I install it and everything just works. I haven't had to mess around with text config files just to get the system running or the like for years (probably around 2009 or so).
The only time when things get a little hairy is when doing something a bit outside of the ordinary - IE, getting certain games running under Wine and the like. That's trying to work around a simple lack of native apps though. When running Linux software on a Linux system - piece of cake. As a matter of fact the only thing that keeps Windows from feeling completely foreign to me is that I have to use it at work.
Actually, when I said "half the stuff on your list" insurance was the only one I was allowing. The others really make no difference.
Also - this story is specifically about restricting a ride to the AIRPORT. Do you honestly think that such a ride deserves a different set of criteria than a ride to the bowling alley?
Given that I don't really give a darn about half the stuff on your list, how about let the consumer make those choices for themselves?
And nobody like his local mayor called him on it
The local SHERIFF bought these. The Sheriff is a county level official - mayor is a local/city level official. More importantly though, the Sheriff virtually everywhere is an *elected* official. Generally elected officials can do whatever they want (within some level of reason) without any recourse until they next election day.
Basically you're talking about someone with their own budget who can't be "fired" like a normal person could. Though I must admit that this seems like it would be unpopular at the polls. Democrats hate anything weapon related and Republicans while pro-military tend to be very anti-militarization of the local police (plus just anti-government spending in general). Seems like both sides will not be happy with this.
When you are making a profit on every unit and your competitor is making a loss on every unit, why would you object very much when the competitor takes the lead on number of units?
It depends. You allude to the big picture but never step back and take a look at it. Sony and Microsoft typically have taken a loss on the consoles specifically because they DO make a lot of money on games sales.
So if when the numbers are tallied MS and/or Sony are coming in higher net positive, then their strategy is still working better.
Netflix, being a newer company, strikes me as aware of the fact that regardless of what they do, their shows are going to be on the torrent sites. DRM will never prevent that, and I think they know that.
No - I'm 32. Cheap has nothing to do with it. I have no problem with people thinking I'm cheap, or thrifty. There is an all too accurate negative stereotype of Walmart shoppers though that I simply wish to avoid.
I've never seen a successful argument involves "the right to *not* . . .". You have the right to something. The right to "not" is just used as a contrived way to deprive others of rights.
IE, "I have the right to not see gays kissing in the street.". "I have the right to not see a black man with a white woman.".
As soon as you have to frame your argument around "the right to not", you've already lost.
As an aside: what's with Americans and their guns? Sheesh, people, grow up. You don't need a plastic-or-metal penis to be a real man
Your mistake is that thinking guns have anything to do with a penis or being a "real man". Seriously how often do you think people sit around thinking about the size of their dick?
People like guns because they happen to like guns. Some people like golf, basketball, big trucks, or a whole host of other stuff without worrying about their mainhood.
I swear we need to define a new logical fallacy revolving around this.
If corporate found out, it would probably drill something like this into clerks' heads: "Samsung doesn't make the iPad; Apple does. Let me show you the Galaxy Tab."
Not always the best strategy. You have to understand that many people in the buying public view such corrections as you being overly pedantic. If they want a "Samsung iPad" and you tell them Samsung only makes the Galaxy Tab, many will get offended and walk away.
What else can you really compete on when you're selling basics like toilet paper and laundry detergent.
The last one: image. Wal-mart has picked up such a negative image that a lot of people will pay extra just to make sure they don't have to shop there. Heck I personally buy a lot of store-brand generics for lots of products, but I won't buy those at Walmart because I don't want anyone who might come in my home to see a Wal-mart store brand product in my house.
One thing stores can compete in too is in non-imported goods. I try to buy "Made in the USA" goods when I can - particularly for things like tools. The local hardware store runs about 15-20% more than Walmart but a LOT of what they carry is domestically produced, and even for the stuff that isn't, they generally filter out the "junk" that Walmart sells. If something is of low/poor quality, that store generally won't stock it. They also have knowledgeable people working there, which helps. You're not going to find a person with actual plumbing or electrical experience working the hardware section at Wal-mart.
By "printing" I'm assuming they mean to duplicate the template person entirely - including memories. That tech might not exist today, and we might never be able to, but if we could, it would certainly work great for this.
Depending on the data size it might be feasible to store the templates of a few dozen individuals. Half male, half female. All the varying skillsets. Send out a few hundred probes that would systematically search star systems and if it finds an uninhabited one that could sustain human life, touch down and print/deploy/grow/whatever its digitally stored crew to colonize the planet.
The same individuals might get duplicated on quite a few planets - possibly during different time frames. IE, a probe lands, one crew builds a society, persists for thousands or hundreds of thousands of years, and then finally perishes, whilst the other ones continue to search and might touch down and redeploy further duplicates of those individuals millions of years later.
Ultimately, the question of "are we alone" in the universe becomes meaningless. Is there other life elsewhere? Quite likely, but even if its NOT, life in the universe has begun - as evidenced by ourselves. Even if we're the only examples, we can spread life everywhere else.
That's because Verizon doesn't do SIM cards, like AT&T, T-Mobile, and the rest of the world.
Up until recently that was true, but all 4G LTE Verizon phones have SIM cards too.
Dang. Why is it that none of these devices are ever available on Verizon? Its the 2nd most popular carrier in the US, and yet we never get these straight-pay phones for it. Their "full price" phones you actually buy from them are prices basically at a premium/penalized rate to get you to renew the contract, while the $200-300 phones from Google and this are unavailable :(.
Eh - still better. The northern hemisphere is far more populated and has much more land than the southern. All of North America, Europe, and Asia are in the Northern Hemisphere, as well as half of Africa, and a bit of South America. From a simple "number of lives" perspective it'd be better to hit the lower portion.
The only way I see the system working is one where there is no "driver override". I can just imagine how many crashes would occur becauase the driver as absolutely "sure" that the computer was about to crash while going 125 MPH (which computer drivers might be able to operate at just fine). They take control, are unable to pilot the vehicle at that speed, and then crash, blaming it on the computer.
Heck, ideally I wouldn't imagine that future automated cars would even have a steering wheel or direct controls (aside from temperature, entertainment, etc). I'd imagine it to more closely resemble a modernized version of a stagecoach - seats facing each other. Heck having the seats be reclineable for naps would be great too. Driving myself say, from New York to Austin is a 27 hour trip. Not really a good drive. However, if I could just punch in my destination to a Google Maps console in the car, kick back, take a nap, play on the computer, etc, it wouldn't be so bad.
Sometimes you have to give it a try before you determine if it delivers a good enough value.
Remember just because something isn't worth its price doesn't mean that the price is prohibitive.
Example: a local place might start serving a $30 hamburger (and I'm sure some places do have burgers higher than that). $30 is a lot for a hamburger, but in and of itself it's not really that much money. I might be willing to try one and see how it is. Afterwards I might decide that it really wasn't worth the price. That doesn't mean that I could have known that before the purchase, or that I "shouldn't" have bought it.
This doesn't really effect copyright. Remember, copyright governs rights to reproduce and distribute material.
In this case the material has already been reproduced and distributed by the copyright holder. Later they decided to change their minds.
I could see a restriction on being able to redistribute such material, but I don't see being required to delete it.
Besides - enforcement of this would be virtually impossible. Anybody who wanted to keep the pics would just make a secret copy. Are they going to make weekly inspections of his computer for life to make sure they don't find pics of his ex?
There's no logical argument that makes INCOME taxes specifically "theft" that wouldn't apply to other taxes.
The bottom line is that we live in a society in which we have determined that a certain level of services must be maintained for all citizens. Those services must be paid for. Such payments must have funds, and those funds come in the form of taxes. No matter if income, sales, or property tax, all taxes must be paid under penalty of law, and are not "theft". Heck the entire concept and punishment of theft is a concept enshrined and enforced by the legal system - a system that is paid for and maintained by - TAXES!
Because property taxes on rural land doesn't subsidize services for people that live in the city, amirite?
I work for a local government and am heavily involved in the property tax process. I'm sure like all things it varies by state, but here (South Carolina) I'd say that the urban subsidizes the rural even on property taxes.
For one, there's the plain and simple situation that large tracts of rural land are worth much less per acre than land in the cities. A 0.25 acre lot in town might be $30k whilst land out in the woods is less than $10k per acre.
Secondly, large tracts of agricultural land used for crops or timber are given an EXTREME tax break. Most of them pay taxes on less than 5% of the actual value of the land.
And last, serious tax breaks are given to "owner occupied" residential properties. Owner occupied properties are far more common in rural areas. Its not uncommon in the urban/suburban areas, but there are far more rental properties and such that end up paying nearly twice as much in property taxes.
I know in our specific locale its been an area of concern lately that a small urban area that is less than 10% of the size of the county generates more than 25% of the property tax revenue.
I've been using computers for over 30 years and have never once used this keystroke.
Me neither, but I also don't use Ctrl+X and Ctrl-V for Cut and Paste either, though that's what most people know them as.
I learned Alt+F S for save, and Shift+Delete for Cut and Shift+Insert for paste many years ago and that has continued to work in almost any program.
The exception tends to be Unix text editors. Naturally in vi there's a different command set, as well as nano. Using nano for a while right before browsing the web can be particularly problematic, since the Ctrl+W used for find in nano happens to close the current tab in Chrome and Firefox.
That's always the problem with impression based results.
I've seen the same with vegetarians. They'll have a cookout and then claim "I served all veggie burgers and no one even noticed!!!!". More likely, you just don't have a room full of guests who are going to take a bite, throw the burger on the floor, and scream "WHAT THE FUCK IS IN THIS NASTY BASTARD!?!?!". No, people generally just nod and put on a smile.
Same with things like this. You can smell pretty darned bad before people are going to start coming up to you and complaining.
Besides, where the hell is the control group in this? They need anonymously submitted ratings of the BO. 4 groups at least. 1 who doesn't wash and the responders are told this. 1 who does but the responders are told otherwise, and vice versa.
It's the other way around for me. I break out if I don't wash my face at least daily.
Same here. I have seborrheic dermatitis. There are various things that can be done to control the condition, but the easiest way is to simply wash my face each morning with dandruff shampoo. If I skip a day though, I immediately start to get scaling skin (primarily on the cheeks right under the eyes, and on the upper lip). Once it starts it takes 4 or 5 days to get it back under control. If I go a day without showering my hair also becomes greasy enough that it starts to give me headaches.
Overall though the whole "back to nature" thing just doesn't make sense to me. Back when most of this stuff was common people typically didn't live more than 45-50 years. We're now increasing lifespans to lengths never before seen specifically through medical practices that are not "natural".