If you mean writing down the address and handing it to the other person, then I think you misunderstood my meaning - usually the purpose of giving/getting an address is to actually allow me to meet someone face to face rather than after I've already met them.
If you mean one person dictating the other over the phone for the other to write down, that's what I meant when I said it's difficult if you don't know the language - the pronunciation of my example for example is really hard to a non Czech speaker (such as myself). Of course, one person could always spell it to the other over the phone, but that's really quite slow compared to them typing it out themselves in a text message and just sending it, also with more chance for error (bearing in mind different languages also use different names for the letters, so for people who don't speak a language quite fluently, spelling a word out can often lead to errors (new example: to an English speaker, the name of the letter "i" in many European languages sounds like "e" and "e" sounds like "a"))
I'm originally from New Zealand, but have travelled a lot. I can deal with English language accents and even dialects of many different kinds, including a variety of US accents from "deep" Southern accents to the softened/rounded speech of New England. One accent I really can't get the hang of though is what I heard in New York City. I really felt like I was surrounded by a foreign language there, and had a LOT of trouble communicating simple things to anyone.
Also, since I do spend a lot of time listening to accents, I'd have to say that you really don't hear US accents on US TV shows very much. The industry has created a somewhat "flattened" US accent that most actors tend to aspire to, and this is what people outside of the US become familiar with, so when surrounded by "real" US accents, it can be quite daunting. Older US TV really didn't do so, so the difference can be quite noticeable just by watching old shows compared to new (I just re-watched all of the original Twilight Zone series for example, and there's some VERY heavy accents in there (and not just Rod Serling - his is pretty strong though)).
HFCS is very uncommon here in Europe - thankfully. I really can't stand the taste of drinks sweetened with it (I also can't stand artificial sweeteners like Aspartame, used in Coke Light (Diet Coke)). From Wikipedia:
In the European Union (EU), HFCS, known as isoglucose, is subject to a production quota. In 2005, this quota was set at 303,000 tons; in comparison, the EU produced an average of 18.6 million tons of sugar annually between 1999 and 2001. Therefore, wide scale replacement of sugar has not occurred in the EU.
I use text a lot for work. I live in Germany, but deal with people from all over Europe for work. Often, I may need to give or receive an address, and since I don't speak every European language, addresses are a complete pain if spoken to me on the phone or left in a voicemail. With text, I (or others) can just show the address to a taxi driver and there's no confusion. (example: The address of the Holiday Inn in Brno, Czech Republic is "Krízkovského 20" (carons over the r and z - can't show them on Slashdot) - if someone told me that by voice, I'd be lost - put it in a text, and it's dead easy)
I'll be editing that Wikipedia entry as soon as I find some good citations for information... HPPD is indeed a potential risk factor of LSD, but that article makes it sounds WAY more prevalent than it really is. I'd contest that you're about as likely to get HPPD from LSD use as you are to have an allergic reaction to an unknown food (yes, citation needed, and I'll get one as soon as I've got some time, but right now I'm late for work!) - some people do have allergic reactions, but in general, the vast majority of us do not worry when we try a new food for the first time, because the chance of it being dangerous is just so incredibly low. You're right that therefore LSD is not "100% safe", but it really is equally as safe as "eating food".
Using dots seems to be pretty standard here in Germany - "1.000.000,00€" for example (I just checked my latest payslip and bank statement, and they both follow this style). I'm also generally a fan of using a space (preferably a thin space, when possible) when writing a single number in a sentence (such as "there are 6 600 000 000 people in the world"), but I still avoid it for technical writing because it could lead to ambiguity or misinterpretation as a list or other such thing. Of course, for really big numbers, in technical writing, I'd never write 6600000000 anyway, I'd just write 6.6E9 (when constrained to ASCII, or 6.6x10 followed by a superscript 9 if not constrained by ASCII).
Hmmm... are you a lawyer, because you managed to answer my question perfectly accurately whilst telling me absolutely nothing!
Okay, so it meets the legal requirements... now, why do those legal requirements exist in this instance in that form? I understand the purpose of a deposit requirement, but I don't see why specifically "25 pages from the start and end of the source code" should be a part of it - it's just odd! (I don't actually care in that in I don't think it's "good" or "bad", just "odd" and therefore I'm interested in it - I assume it's a weird attempt at shoehorning one kind of thing in to a metaphor that's completely inappropriate for it, because that sort of thing happens a lot in law, and I always find it fascinating (in a "wow, what an idiotic world we live in" kind of way))
If it's in the contract, I wouldn't call it a "bonus"... maybe it is on paper, but it sort of defeats the spirit of the concept. I work for a company that doesn't give Christmas bonuses at all (actually, I've never worked for a company that gives Christmas bonuses), but I do get paid "13 months in a year" by getting an extra half month just before summer and another half month just before Christmas. I certainly don't view these as "bonuses" though, as it's a standard thing that everyone gets and is firmly written in the description of the job's pay (if I didn't get it, I could complain). A bonus would be if they gave me something extra that wasn't previously agreed upon.
If the work is an unpublished or published computer program, the deposit requirement is one visually perceptible copy in source code of the first 25 and last 25 pages of the program. For a program of fewer than 50 pages, the deposit is a copy of the entire program.
I find this quite interesting... does the source code have to be in the programming language that it was typed in, or is an intermediary form acceptable? How about a compilable form that it was never written in originally but is still "source code" (thinking: convert code to Whitespace before submission)? What about source code comments? Couldn't I make a program with 25 pages of comments at the top and bottom and submit that? How do you really determine the "start" and "end" of source code anyway? For a single.c file, that's pretty easy, but for a big project like an OS, it gets a little more confusing. And lastly, how big is a "page"? If I print my code in a 90 point font, not a lot fits on an A4/Letter sheet of paper.
It seems there's quite a few things about this wording that seem a little odd. I'm actually primarily wondering what the purpose of it really is. It's not really enough code to effectively determine if someone else's code is a direct copy even without obfuscation, but if someone did copy your code, it seems any of the above questions could be used as a way to get around direct comparison. So, it seems the only purpose I can think of for submitting the code itself is actually quite useless... can anyone give me another reason this requirement exists?
Your quote is from a man that most people (myself included) would consider to be a very very bad man who did very very bad things, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. I think he was probably quite right when he made this point, and his success in getting people behind his cause is almost a case in point that it works. Propaganda is generally bad, but there's nothing stopping people using similar methods to get good thoughts in to people's heads (I'd love to see "propaganda to end all propaganda" - target it specifically at getting people to think for themselves... that might be an interesting experiment!)
If you say that drug use leads to crime you are making an argument that I wonder about.
Drug use does lead to violations of laws: drug laws. It forces the user to turn to the black market, where there is no police protection or government enforcement of contracts. So drug users and dealers are more likely to own a gun for protection. Being that a non-trivial percentage of them are felons, possession of that gun puts them in violation of even more laws. And on, and on. Illegal drug use does lead to crime.
So, you're not saying that drug use leads to crime, you're saying that illegal drug use leads to crime, which is a bit of a tautology really (I'll grant the "extra crimes", but only in some cases - many casual drug users commit no additional crimes). The solution is therefore simple - make the drug use "not a crime", and then the problem is largely solved isn't it? Seemed to work for that rather more dangerous drug than many - alcohol...
Yep - you'd be right. LSD is a non addictive, non harmful* substance. It also leaves no trace anywhere in you once its over (it's possible it may have re-wired your brain a little, and that could be where flashbacks come from, but there hasn't been enough research to really say - as anecdotes, I can offer myself and many of my friends who have taken it hundreds of times and suffer no side effects, except perhaps a "different way of looking at the world" than we used to have - definitely never had a "flashback" (one time, when VERY tired after driving 12 hours non stop, I felt a little trippy for 30 seconds or so, but I get the feeling that many people might under those circumstances))
(* Non harmful in the doses that people take it at - if you take 12 milligrams or so you'll probably die, but that's about 30 times the amount that is considered a "heavy" dose, or 120 times a "normal" dose)
While I tend to agree with you, I would advocate perhaps more of a middle ground (perhaps you do take the middle ground, but from your posts I'm not so sure).
I believe strongly in marijuana legalisation even though I don't smoke it (honestly, I hate the way it makes me feel - a combination of seasick, extraordinarily dry mouth, and very very tired, with no good feelings at all). I believe in the legalisation of it though because I know it does less harm than having it illegal. In fact, when used responsibly, it has no real and discernible harm at all (note that yes, it can be abused, but so can alcohol, and that's legal. The fact that there is NOT a serious marijuana problem in the Netherlands also helps this point). So, if it doesn't hurt, and some people want to do it, I am very much in favour of letting them do it, especially when doing so will also reduce the number of crimes related to it (both in the act itself, simply reducing the amount of crime by making it no longer a crime, and in associated crimes (when something is illegal, there are people who will fall in to the trap of "well, I'm already doing one illegal thing, why not another" - it's not common, and I'm not saying every (or even a significant portion of) pot smoker will do this, but such people do exist)).
The "middle ground" that I'm advocating is one of opportunistic campaigning. I don't waste my precious time going out and campaigning for marijuana legalisation, because as you've stated, there are better things to do with my life. But, every time the conversation comes up, I'll support it. Every time someone asks me to sign a petition, I'll sign. This may not be the most effective method, but it's the most effective that still fits in to my life without having to spend too much of my time on it.
I'll even take this stance for things I've not heard of before. If someone were to come to me and say "hey, xyz is very important to me", I'd ask them to explain it (if I have time, and the basic premise is something I might agree with) and if I agree, I'll do my part to spread the knowledge. The problem isn't so much that people all want something but don't speak up, the problem is that they either don't know or don't care. The more people around them talking about it, the better, even if it is just water cooler conversation. This will make them exposed to the idea, and push them towards forming opinions (especially if asked directly - "hey, what do you think about xyz?" (the usual answer is, "haven't thought about it, don't care", but if they get asked by enough people, they may start to take an interest or at least give it a bit more thought))
Something I'm perhaps MORE in favour of is LSD legalisation (with restrictions similar to alcohol and tobacco), and that's an even harder battle (primarily because of the lack of knowledge about it - pretty much everyone knows that "one joint won't kill you", but many still believe the propaganda about someone taking one trip and leaping out of a third story window or whatever). I do actively campaign for it from time to time and enjoy doing so, so it's not "taking my time" because it's something I enjoy doing. I also do the "opportunistic" campaigning also, as I do for other things, but perhaps to a slightly higher degree (for example, I spent a large part of my work christmas party this year discussing it with co-workers and received quite positive feedback overall - most had never tried it, and some were unaware that it was any different to things like cocaine, heroin, speed and so on, thinking it was a dangerous addictive drug, because that's all they'd ever been told. They appreciated and were interested in being informed otherwise (note that it does help that I have a very good reputation in my company for being "the brilliant programmer that everyone looks up to and asks for help" - if you're viewed as a "deadbeat" by your co-workers, it's probably not a good line to take!)). Perhaps you just haven't found anything yet that you would enjoy actively campaigning for (or perhaps you're just the kind of person who will never enjoy actively campaigning for anything at all - if so, that's also fine)
like the DRM in dots you find on some old copiers and laser printers.
A little off topic, but it's worth mentioning it's not just old ones... pretty much every major manufacturer of colour laser devices uses the "unique pattern of yellow dots" thing, has done so for a long time and will continue to do so for a long time.
And yes, I do work for a major manufacturer of colour laser devices...
I don't expect ANY electric car to be so bad it can't handle 4km with the heater on (that's halfway to work for me - I live 8km from my office). Remember that while it may not be suitable for you, or for many other people, there are still many people that it is suitable for...
All true, but irrelevant for what the comparisons were in aid of. I don't think anyone was pushing the green angle necessarily and directly, simply that if you can make it go as far as an equivalent petrol car, it's more likely to be saleable. The power plant could waste 99% of the energy, and it wouldn't change the comparison until you start looking at "total amount of energy used" which is mostly a green argument (which I am in favour of, but it's another topic).
The speed is very impressive for inkjet style technology (but doesn't hold a candle to laser). The quality, if comparable to a high quality inkjet (no way to tell by looking at a website, I'd need to see real output), then it definitely could do well in some markets (especially home "photo printers"), but it's definitely not revolutionary. Especially as the quality of colour laser improves, there is less and less need for this by "most people" (some people will always want the advantage that inkjet offers in quality, but considering that the "perfectly standard" office laser equipment I work with can do 65ppm in full colour with quality good enough to stick on my wall at home, it's definitely not "take over the printing industry" kind of tech)
It is not something that you can produce in bulk, store it, distribute it, and tap a burst when you need it.
Ummm... yes it is... that's exactly what it is... You simply have one or two of these in your garage at home, "trickling" their charge from the grid at whatever speed is reasonable for your supply/wiring, and when you want to recharge your car, you connect your car to these, not to the grid. It charges at "full speed" at then you drive off. That's assuming you actually cared about fast charge of course - at home, I'd just charge slow since once I park my car in the evening, it doesn't come out again until the next morning. I'd want "public charging stations" to give me a fast charge of course for those VERY occasional trips I take in the car that'll go beyond my "there and back" range, but they'd just have the same concept on a bigger/more distributed scale.
I agree completely, but I think you should reconsider your usage of "." and ","... when writing scientifically or mathematically, I NEVER put punctuation in the number except to indicate the decimal place. The main reason for this is that people from different countries use different symbols (1000 = 1,000 in UK/US = 1.000 in many European countries / "exactly 1 to three places" = 1.00 in UK/US = 1,00 in many European countries). So, to avoid confusion, I prefer to just write 1000 rather than 1,000 or 1.000. (as a note, I prefer to use a "." for the decimal place when writing English, because it matches the style used by the native English speaking countries, just as I use "," if writing German)
The current standard speed limit in built-up areas here is 30mph, I hope it will be reduced to 20mph soon
For the kinds of roads you're talking about, that'd also bring you in line with the rest of Europe a bit more, and maybe we wouldn't get crazy Brits zooming around our quiet little streets (that's not a dig against British people so much, just that if you're not used to doing mph/kph conversions, you'll probably just drive "what you're used to"). Our standard speed limit here in Germany for town roads is 50kph (around 30mph) and on "quiet residential" or "inner city" (urban residential mostly) streets it's 30kph (around 20mph). That's common in most European countries that I know of.
Yep - those variable speed limits still exist in NZ (although they're in kph, not mph!), or at least did on my last visit back home (2 years ago). They are pretty uncommon though, to the point that people who don't drive around a LOT might never have seen them.
We've also got them here in Germany, although the "difference" in speed can be much greater, as there are parts of the autobahns that have no speed limit under "normal" conditions, but with a speed limit sign accompanies by another sign saying "bei nässe" (when wet) (example)
It can be a little disconcerting though when I've slowed down to the posted limit (generally around 80kph or so) and someone rockets past me at 200kph or higher (I drive around 180 in good conditions, but ALWAYS obey those "bei nässe" signs, even if it seems a lot of other people don't)
I think all yellow phases are three seconds here, for the whole country
It'd be interesting to know where you live. It's something I paid attention to a little while back, but not so much recently. I did notice though that in almost every country I've been to, the "yellow time" seems to be dependent on the speed limit on that street. The only exceptions I noticed were the US, where it seems to be quite random (if there is a scheme, I couldn't figure it out) and Japan, where it seems to be a uniform amount of time regardless (I might be wrong on that, but it's what it seemed like).
Suffice to say, in Germany, Netherlands, UK, Australia and New Zealand it appears to be that roads with higher speed limits have longer "yellow times" than roads with lower speed limits. The problems come when there's a road which is legally one speed but it's "common practice" for people to drive much faster (there's a road near me here in Germany where the speed limit is 50, but pretty much EVERYONE does between 70 and 80 along it since it's a fairly major arterial road - red lights on that road can be pretty tough since the "yellow time" is only really sufficient for people driving at 50)
Slashdot Mirror
If you mean writing down the address and handing it to the other person, then I think you misunderstood my meaning - usually the purpose of giving/getting an address is to actually allow me to meet someone face to face rather than after I've already met them.
If you mean one person dictating the other over the phone for the other to write down, that's what I meant when I said it's difficult if you don't know the language - the pronunciation of my example for example is really hard to a non Czech speaker (such as myself). Of course, one person could always spell it to the other over the phone, but that's really quite slow compared to them typing it out themselves in a text message and just sending it, also with more chance for error (bearing in mind different languages also use different names for the letters, so for people who don't speak a language quite fluently, spelling a word out can often lead to errors (new example: to an English speaker, the name of the letter "i" in many European languages sounds like "e" and "e" sounds like "a"))
I'm originally from New Zealand, but have travelled a lot. I can deal with English language accents and even dialects of many different kinds, including a variety of US accents from "deep" Southern accents to the softened/rounded speech of New England. One accent I really can't get the hang of though is what I heard in New York City. I really felt like I was surrounded by a foreign language there, and had a LOT of trouble communicating simple things to anyone.
Also, since I do spend a lot of time listening to accents, I'd have to say that you really don't hear US accents on US TV shows very much. The industry has created a somewhat "flattened" US accent that most actors tend to aspire to, and this is what people outside of the US become familiar with, so when surrounded by "real" US accents, it can be quite daunting. Older US TV really didn't do so, so the difference can be quite noticeable just by watching old shows compared to new (I just re-watched all of the original Twilight Zone series for example, and there's some VERY heavy accents in there (and not just Rod Serling - his is pretty strong though)).
HFCS is very uncommon here in Europe - thankfully. I really can't stand the taste of drinks sweetened with it (I also can't stand artificial sweeteners like Aspartame, used in Coke Light (Diet Coke)). From Wikipedia:
In the European Union (EU), HFCS, known as isoglucose, is subject to a production quota. In 2005, this quota was set at 303,000 tons; in comparison, the EU produced an average of 18.6 million tons of sugar annually between 1999 and 2001. Therefore, wide scale replacement of sugar has not occurred in the EU.
I use text a lot for work. I live in Germany, but deal with people from all over Europe for work. Often, I may need to give or receive an address, and since I don't speak every European language, addresses are a complete pain if spoken to me on the phone or left in a voicemail. With text, I (or others) can just show the address to a taxi driver and there's no confusion. (example: The address of the Holiday Inn in Brno, Czech Republic is "Krízkovského 20" (carons over the r and z - can't show them on Slashdot) - if someone told me that by voice, I'd be lost - put it in a text, and it's dead easy)
I'll be editing that Wikipedia entry as soon as I find some good citations for information... HPPD is indeed a potential risk factor of LSD, but that article makes it sounds WAY more prevalent than it really is. I'd contest that you're about as likely to get HPPD from LSD use as you are to have an allergic reaction to an unknown food (yes, citation needed, and I'll get one as soon as I've got some time, but right now I'm late for work!) - some people do have allergic reactions, but in general, the vast majority of us do not worry when we try a new food for the first time, because the chance of it being dangerous is just so incredibly low. You're right that therefore LSD is not "100% safe", but it really is equally as safe as "eating food".
Using dots seems to be pretty standard here in Germany - "1.000.000,00€" for example (I just checked my latest payslip and bank statement, and they both follow this style). I'm also generally a fan of using a space (preferably a thin space, when possible) when writing a single number in a sentence (such as "there are 6 600 000 000 people in the world"), but I still avoid it for technical writing because it could lead to ambiguity or misinterpretation as a list or other such thing. Of course, for really big numbers, in technical writing, I'd never write 6600000000 anyway, I'd just write 6.6E9 (when constrained to ASCII, or 6.6x10 followed by a superscript 9 if not constrained by ASCII).
Hmmm... are you a lawyer, because you managed to answer my question perfectly accurately whilst telling me absolutely nothing!
Okay, so it meets the legal requirements... now, why do those legal requirements exist in this instance in that form? I understand the purpose of a deposit requirement, but I don't see why specifically "25 pages from the start and end of the source code" should be a part of it - it's just odd! (I don't actually care in that in I don't think it's "good" or "bad", just "odd" and therefore I'm interested in it - I assume it's a weird attempt at shoehorning one kind of thing in to a metaphor that's completely inappropriate for it, because that sort of thing happens a lot in law, and I always find it fascinating (in a "wow, what an idiotic world we live in" kind of way))
If it's in the contract, I wouldn't call it a "bonus"... maybe it is on paper, but it sort of defeats the spirit of the concept. I work for a company that doesn't give Christmas bonuses at all (actually, I've never worked for a company that gives Christmas bonuses), but I do get paid "13 months in a year" by getting an extra half month just before summer and another half month just before Christmas. I certainly don't view these as "bonuses" though, as it's a standard thing that everyone gets and is firmly written in the description of the job's pay (if I didn't get it, I could complain). A bonus would be if they gave me something extra that wasn't previously agreed upon.
If the work is an unpublished or published computer program, the deposit requirement is one visually perceptible copy in source code of the first 25 and last 25 pages of the program. For a program of fewer than 50 pages, the deposit is a copy of the entire program.
I find this quite interesting... does the source code have to be in the programming language that it was typed in, or is an intermediary form acceptable? .c file, that's pretty easy, but for a big project like an OS, it gets a little more confusing.
How about a compilable form that it was never written in originally but is still "source code" (thinking: convert code to Whitespace before submission)?
What about source code comments? Couldn't I make a program with 25 pages of comments at the top and bottom and submit that?
How do you really determine the "start" and "end" of source code anyway? For a single
And lastly, how big is a "page"? If I print my code in a 90 point font, not a lot fits on an A4/Letter sheet of paper.
It seems there's quite a few things about this wording that seem a little odd. I'm actually primarily wondering what the purpose of it really is. It's not really enough code to effectively determine if someone else's code is a direct copy even without obfuscation, but if someone did copy your code, it seems any of the above questions could be used as a way to get around direct comparison. So, it seems the only purpose I can think of for submitting the code itself is actually quite useless... can anyone give me another reason this requirement exists?
Your quote is from a man that most people (myself included) would consider to be a very very bad man who did very very bad things, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. I think he was probably quite right when he made this point, and his success in getting people behind his cause is almost a case in point that it works. Propaganda is generally bad, but there's nothing stopping people using similar methods to get good thoughts in to people's heads (I'd love to see "propaganda to end all propaganda" - target it specifically at getting people to think for themselves... that might be an interesting experiment!)
If you say that drug use leads to crime you are making an argument that I wonder about.
Drug use does lead to violations of laws: drug laws. It forces the user to turn to the black market, where there is no police protection or government enforcement of contracts. So drug users and dealers are more likely to own a gun for protection. Being that a non-trivial percentage of them are felons, possession of that gun puts them in violation of even more laws. And on, and on. Illegal drug use does lead to crime.
So, you're not saying that drug use leads to crime, you're saying that illegal drug use leads to crime, which is a bit of a tautology really (I'll grant the "extra crimes", but only in some cases - many casual drug users commit no additional crimes). The solution is therefore simple - make the drug use "not a crime", and then the problem is largely solved isn't it? Seemed to work for that rather more dangerous drug than many - alcohol...
Yep - you'd be right. LSD is a non addictive, non harmful* substance. It also leaves no trace anywhere in you once its over (it's possible it may have re-wired your brain a little, and that could be where flashbacks come from, but there hasn't been enough research to really say - as anecdotes, I can offer myself and many of my friends who have taken it hundreds of times and suffer no side effects, except perhaps a "different way of looking at the world" than we used to have - definitely never had a "flashback" (one time, when VERY tired after driving 12 hours non stop, I felt a little trippy for 30 seconds or so, but I get the feeling that many people might under those circumstances))
(* Non harmful in the doses that people take it at - if you take 12 milligrams or so you'll probably die, but that's about 30 times the amount that is considered a "heavy" dose, or 120 times a "normal" dose)
While I tend to agree with you, I would advocate perhaps more of a middle ground (perhaps you do take the middle ground, but from your posts I'm not so sure).
I believe strongly in marijuana legalisation even though I don't smoke it (honestly, I hate the way it makes me feel - a combination of seasick, extraordinarily dry mouth, and very very tired, with no good feelings at all). I believe in the legalisation of it though because I know it does less harm than having it illegal. In fact, when used responsibly, it has no real and discernible harm at all (note that yes, it can be abused, but so can alcohol, and that's legal. The fact that there is NOT a serious marijuana problem in the Netherlands also helps this point). So, if it doesn't hurt, and some people want to do it, I am very much in favour of letting them do it, especially when doing so will also reduce the number of crimes related to it (both in the act itself, simply reducing the amount of crime by making it no longer a crime, and in associated crimes (when something is illegal, there are people who will fall in to the trap of "well, I'm already doing one illegal thing, why not another" - it's not common, and I'm not saying every (or even a significant portion of) pot smoker will do this, but such people do exist)).
The "middle ground" that I'm advocating is one of opportunistic campaigning. I don't waste my precious time going out and campaigning for marijuana legalisation, because as you've stated, there are better things to do with my life. But, every time the conversation comes up, I'll support it. Every time someone asks me to sign a petition, I'll sign. This may not be the most effective method, but it's the most effective that still fits in to my life without having to spend too much of my time on it.
I'll even take this stance for things I've not heard of before. If someone were to come to me and say "hey, xyz is very important to me", I'd ask them to explain it (if I have time, and the basic premise is something I might agree with) and if I agree, I'll do my part to spread the knowledge. The problem isn't so much that people all want something but don't speak up, the problem is that they either don't know or don't care. The more people around them talking about it, the better, even if it is just water cooler conversation. This will make them exposed to the idea, and push them towards forming opinions (especially if asked directly - "hey, what do you think about xyz?" (the usual answer is, "haven't thought about it, don't care", but if they get asked by enough people, they may start to take an interest or at least give it a bit more thought))
Something I'm perhaps MORE in favour of is LSD legalisation (with restrictions similar to alcohol and tobacco), and that's an even harder battle (primarily because of the lack of knowledge about it - pretty much everyone knows that "one joint won't kill you", but many still believe the propaganda about someone taking one trip and leaping out of a third story window or whatever). I do actively campaign for it from time to time and enjoy doing so, so it's not "taking my time" because it's something I enjoy doing. I also do the "opportunistic" campaigning also, as I do for other things, but perhaps to a slightly higher degree (for example, I spent a large part of my work christmas party this year discussing it with co-workers and received quite positive feedback overall - most had never tried it, and some were unaware that it was any different to things like cocaine, heroin, speed and so on, thinking it was a dangerous addictive drug, because that's all they'd ever been told. They appreciated and were interested in being informed otherwise (note that it does help that I have a very good reputation in my company for being "the brilliant programmer that everyone looks up to and asks for help" - if you're viewed as a "deadbeat" by your co-workers, it's probably not a good line to take!)). Perhaps you just haven't found anything yet that you would enjoy actively campaigning for (or perhaps you're just the kind of person who will never enjoy actively campaigning for anything at all - if so, that's also fine)
and a pile of kiwis.
The birds, the fruit or the people? Or all three?
(for some reason, when I first read your post, I pictured the birds... it was quite disconcerting really)
like the DRM in dots you find on some old copiers and laser printers.
A little off topic, but it's worth mentioning it's not just old ones... pretty much every major manufacturer of colour laser devices uses the "unique pattern of yellow dots" thing, has done so for a long time and will continue to do so for a long time.
And yes, I do work for a major manufacturer of colour laser devices...
I was wondering more about the "it'd be great accept...." bit. Is he trying to say, "it'll be great, so accept it!"?
I don't expect ANY electric car to be so bad it can't handle 4km with the heater on (that's halfway to work for me - I live 8km from my office). Remember that while it may not be suitable for you, or for many other people, there are still many people that it is suitable for...
All true, but irrelevant for what the comparisons were in aid of. I don't think anyone was pushing the green angle necessarily and directly, simply that if you can make it go as far as an equivalent petrol car, it's more likely to be saleable. The power plant could waste 99% of the energy, and it wouldn't change the comparison until you start looking at "total amount of energy used" which is mostly a green argument (which I am in favour of, but it's another topic).
The speed is very impressive for inkjet style technology (but doesn't hold a candle to laser). The quality, if comparable to a high quality inkjet (no way to tell by looking at a website, I'd need to see real output), then it definitely could do well in some markets (especially home "photo printers"), but it's definitely not revolutionary. Especially as the quality of colour laser improves, there is less and less need for this by "most people" (some people will always want the advantage that inkjet offers in quality, but considering that the "perfectly standard" office laser equipment I work with can do 65ppm in full colour with quality good enough to stick on my wall at home, it's definitely not "take over the printing industry" kind of tech)
It is not something that you can produce in bulk, store it, distribute it, and tap a burst when you need it.
Ummm... yes it is... that's exactly what it is... You simply have one or two of these in your garage at home, "trickling" their charge from the grid at whatever speed is reasonable for your supply/wiring, and when you want to recharge your car, you connect your car to these, not to the grid. It charges at "full speed" at then you drive off. That's assuming you actually cared about fast charge of course - at home, I'd just charge slow since once I park my car in the evening, it doesn't come out again until the next morning. I'd want "public charging stations" to give me a fast charge of course for those VERY occasional trips I take in the car that'll go beyond my "there and back" range, but they'd just have the same concept on a bigger/more distributed scale.
I agree completely, but I think you should reconsider your usage of "." and ","... when writing scientifically or mathematically, I NEVER put punctuation in the number except to indicate the decimal place. The main reason for this is that people from different countries use different symbols (1000 = 1,000 in UK/US = 1.000 in many European countries / "exactly 1 to three places" = 1.00 in UK/US = 1,00 in many European countries). So, to avoid confusion, I prefer to just write 1000 rather than 1,000 or 1.000. (as a note, I prefer to use a "." for the decimal place when writing English, because it matches the style used by the native English speaking countries, just as I use "," if writing German)
The current standard speed limit in built-up areas here is 30mph, I hope it will be reduced to 20mph soon
For the kinds of roads you're talking about, that'd also bring you in line with the rest of Europe a bit more, and maybe we wouldn't get crazy Brits zooming around our quiet little streets (that's not a dig against British people so much, just that if you're not used to doing mph/kph conversions, you'll probably just drive "what you're used to"). Our standard speed limit here in Germany for town roads is 50kph (around 30mph) and on "quiet residential" or "inner city" (urban residential mostly) streets it's 30kph (around 20mph). That's common in most European countries that I know of.
Yep - those variable speed limits still exist in NZ (although they're in kph, not mph!), or at least did on my last visit back home (2 years ago). They are pretty uncommon though, to the point that people who don't drive around a LOT might never have seen them.
We've also got them here in Germany, although the "difference" in speed can be much greater, as there are parts of the autobahns that have no speed limit under "normal" conditions, but with a speed limit sign accompanies by another sign saying "bei nässe" (when wet) (example)
It can be a little disconcerting though when I've slowed down to the posted limit (generally around 80kph or so) and someone rockets past me at 200kph or higher (I drive around 180 in good conditions, but ALWAYS obey those "bei nässe" signs, even if it seems a lot of other people don't)
Yep, but the word "pizza" is Germanic in origin (related to German "bissen" or English "bite" as in, a snack)
I think all yellow phases are three seconds here, for the whole country
It'd be interesting to know where you live. It's something I paid attention to a little while back, but not so much recently. I did notice though that in almost every country I've been to, the "yellow time" seems to be dependent on the speed limit on that street. The only exceptions I noticed were the US, where it seems to be quite random (if there is a scheme, I couldn't figure it out) and Japan, where it seems to be a uniform amount of time regardless (I might be wrong on that, but it's what it seemed like).
Suffice to say, in Germany, Netherlands, UK, Australia and New Zealand it appears to be that roads with higher speed limits have longer "yellow times" than roads with lower speed limits. The problems come when there's a road which is legally one speed but it's "common practice" for people to drive much faster (there's a road near me here in Germany where the speed limit is 50, but pretty much EVERYONE does between 70 and 80 along it since it's a fairly major arterial road - red lights on that road can be pretty tough since the "yellow time" is only really sufficient for people driving at 50)