Indeed, autism is not a specific disorder. It is a catch all term for likely hundreds of different disorders that do not have more specific names. The symptoms lists for autism that I have seen often include exact opposite symptoms, and other inane nonsense, which is to be expected for a catch-all designation. I will grant that there are several clear groups within autism that are almost certainly the same disorder (even if through multiple causes).
For me with a broadband connection the images load really quickly, and I can easily quickly flip through 100 articles in a minute, opening all the interesting ones in new tabs to read. In that period of time, I could only load say 20 article pages the normal way to decide if they are worth reading.
This is much more useful when out of 30 articles a site posts, you might be interested in 2. In the traditional way, you would have to go to the new sites page, open up the pages for each of the sites sections, skim through the lis of headlines to catch the ones you are interested it, and read them.
With this, you can look at every single article page, and stop for the interesting ones, while taking less than a second for each of the pages you are not interested in. Like with a magzine, you flip through all the articles, and stop at the ones that caught you eye, such as by a headline keyword, or interesting image.
I looked at it and it looks interesting to me. The idea would be that If you had a favorite publication could could flip through all the latest articles, stopping if you notice something interesting. Or you can flip through major headline pages for the same thing. Or flip through the headlines in a specific field. You might notice an interesting image on an article, or an eye catching keyword in a headline. But for those that don't interest you, you can flip right past in a fraction of a second. Like in a magazine you might flip too fast to stop when something catches your eye, so you flip back a few pages.
The fast-flip name comes from the fact that the pages are pre-rendered by Google, and as soon as you arrive at the site it starts downloading as many of the images as it can, so you browser can display them without delay. Using the arrow keys on my keyboard, it is easily possible to flip past 10 pages in three seconds. (Image preloading will handle short bursts at that speed, but the maximum sustain flipping speed is somewhat less than that, or you start getting placeholders showing instead of article images.)
AFAICT the real results of the settlement is (AFAICT):
The creation a a new organization, the Book Rights Registry. Out-of-print books will now essentially have a compulsory license, with the BRR as the royalties collection agency. This is not quite a compulsory license system, because rights holder can opt out, but otherwise acts similarly.
Any organization can scan out-of-print books, and provide limited access to the books[1], and sell full copies of the book. The organizations will need to work with the BRR who sets the prices for out of print books, and also maintains the list of rightholders who have opted out, along with the works in question.
Right holders can collect royalties from the BRR, as well as set prices for book sales, or prohibit such sales, allowing only the limited preview access, allow only tiny fragment search results[2], or opt out entirely.
[1]Limited access being only a few pages as with Amazon's search inside this book feature, or Google's current book search for books where Google has a deal with the publishers.
[2] Allowing only tiny fragment results is like what Google currently does now for in-copyright works where the publisher has not partnered with Google to provide the preview features. ---------------
Now please note, I'm not sure this is the right way to go.
Even if it is, the way this was created is less than ideal, and nobody has ever explained this clearly to the media, which has led to far more confusion about this than should ever have come about.
A single large display is of course exactly what most users do not want. There will always be some gap between the monitors. Either that gap can be part of the logical resolution, in which case parts of the screen are not being shown, or one will have say inch sized jumps in the viewing surface. Neither is desirable in many cases.
The proper way to do multi-monitors has always been using window's built-in support for it. Maximizing a window fills up it's monitor, not all of them. But each monitor is treated separate. Games with proper multi-monitor support place a full screen window on each monitor. This allows special purposed monitors if the gamer so desires, such as having one monitor with the map always displayed.
The car (racing?) game shown in that article looks absolutely awful split over monitors like that.
Having each monitor show something separate, such as views of the car from all four sides (so one can see the cars behind and to the sides clearly), the the map, and a simulated dashboard, now that would be cool!
There is a slight difference between a cigarette tax, which is applied to a very specific product, and the license fee which does not apply to any specific product. One can purchase a TV without paying the tax, since if there is no Video reception equipment on premises, even the inspectors are forced to conclude no license fee is necessary.
Why would somebody buy a TV without intent to view television? A number of reasons. A modern television consists of several components: a monitor, an integrated speaker system, video/audio format converters, and finally a TV tuner. Such a system is perfectly suitable for things like DVD players, game consoles, and even for use as a computer monitor.
A tangent:
Indeed, I've seen some Tv-like systems, which include most of the normal hookups, except for the coaxial hookup. The reason? Such a system is all quite a few people need anymore. It makes a perfect Computer monitor, it works for game consoles, and DVD players, and for most people, it works for television, since they use a satellite receiver, cable box, PVR, or other external device to manage channels.
In such a case, having a TV tuner on the TV generally only gets in the way: somebody unfamiliar with the setup changes the channel on the TV, resulting in loss of image until the device is returned to the correct input, etc.
In other words, you like this change, as it uses the following in order: an explicit file specific default, an explicit file type default, or an implicit file type default.
The old way was in order: Explicit file-specific default, explicit file type default, the application that made the file, an implicit file-type default.
(Yes, according the the Apple documentation the creator code never overrode an explicitly set default application for a file type, but would override the implicitly chosen default application.)
The most logical explanation for the annotations being still intact is that the Kindle stores annotations in a separate file, which was not deleted when the book was deleted. If the book is restored, the annotations would still be there.
(I don't know if this is the case or not, but i strongly suspect it is.)
I'm well aware that government grants are funded through taxes. My point was that the BBC was funded though normal taxes at least a tiny amount, along with the licence fee.
To be clear, I do agree that it is effectively a tax. It is one that is possible to opt out-of, which is not common for a tax. It also has the unusual property that it is not pooled in with the rest of the government revenue, with the appropriate amount for the BBC potentially getting changed (often by cutting back) every time the budget is set. That also makes it more difficult for the government to meddle in the BBC's affairs through messing with the funding.
In general that makes it better (for the BBC) than a regular tax.
That does not mean that the display code must be changed, merely that changes should be minimized in order to retain best battery life. It may be desirable to change the UI's to account for that, but it is not an absolute necessity.
But can you fit an e-bike in a shoulder bag, and easily carry it to your office? Even the folding e-bikes are bigger than this, and generally weigh more. It also reminds me of the Eunicycle, although like the 3 wheel Segway clones, this bike is more practical. (The Eunicycle guy also has made real 2-wheel style Segway clones.)
Let us assume The parties are named Party A, and Party B, that the population is reasonably close to being split 50/50 for the two parties, and party A is in power. LEt us also say for the sake of argument that there are 12 seats.
Party A starts by drawing 6 districts with nearly 100% support for a particular party. Four of those are party B districts, and two are Party A districts.
So with half the districts drawn, Party A gets 2 seat, and Party B gets 4 seats. But of the remaining population 2/3 support party A and only 1 third supports party B.
So draw the rest of the districts so each has 2/3 support for A and 1/3 support for B.
The final result is: Four 100% Party A districts Two 100% Party B districts Six 66% Party A districts
I would not call a 2/3's supporting district a close district since 2/3 is considered a substantial supermajority. Party A is more than willing to give those 4 seats to party B, since they still end up with 2/3 of the total seats in this case, which is enough to get anything through.
A Diagram of the situation (each district is shown on one line, and each letter is 1/72 of the population):
More complicated systems can give similar results even when accounting for undecided voters (try to stick them in the near 100% districts to keep the influence they have to a minimum) and other considerations.
It should. He has it running X11, so you should be able to just use xpdf. To get a mouse working, one will need to configure X to allow keyboard control of the cursor. I'm sure that is possible, and you would probably want to map the directional pad to mouse movements.
Yes, it does, which is why it was easy enough to port ubuntu over. The real benefit here is that somebody could replace the (allegedly crappy) user interface with a new one, with proper pdf (with zoom) support, and some other features that should have been there in the first place. To code the UI for a new reader one could just use standard X11 programming techniques. That is to say, one could take xpdf, remove some of the crome of the application, and have a proper pdf reader, etc.
Annother benefit: It should be possible to ended the existing UI. For example, it should be possible to replace the crappy search with proper full text search. Doing some of that would require either breaking the DRM format, which would upset amazon, or replacing parts of the existing program. Doing the latter may be quite possible, since the code is java (IIRC), so one can just drop in replacement classes. If the java code is not obfuscated, then it may be downright easy (relatively speaking (It is always a pain to retrofit existing apps via reverse engineering)).
Even if your ISP really does have a connection to their upstream that is big enough that all users could use their rated bandwidth at once (an ISP with only a handful of customers might be able to pull that off), your ISP's upstream most definitely does not have a connection to their upstream or the backbone that is big enough for all it's customers.
If the backbones had to be big enough such that every customer in the world could max his/her connections at the same time, then under normal use they would almost certainly be using well less than 1% of the capability.
Indeed, I'm pretty sure that's the only way I want to go skiing down a hill. I'd be far more likely to be unharmed when I inevitably hit a tree if am am wearing stormtrooper armor than normal ski clothes.
And that is in addition to the shear coolness factor of stoomtrooper Skiing.
Untrue. The BBC is funded solely through the license fee, sales of it's programmes abroad, and sales of other materials.
It receives no government funds.
In 2008 the BBC's non-commercial (i.e. in Britain) operations revived 4 million GBP in government grants. Granted, that is well less than 1% of it's income, but it does invalidate the claim of receiving no government funds.
Further the BBC World Service is funded exclusively (or very nearly so) by government grants from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The BBC Monitoring service receives money from all sorts of source, including some funding by foreign governments.
That said, much of the rest of your message is valid.
Do take note that the PBS in the US receives only 15%-20% of its funding from the federal government, and 25-29% from the smaller government. That means only 40%-50% of its operations is government funded. Such small amounts greatly limit the influence the government can exert on the the system. For most intents and purposes, the PBS system is independent.
Further, even if there was a USBC, I can guarantee it would waste money like crazy, having only a small fraction of the efficiency of the BBC, likely having about 4 channels, and 2 radio stations.
A few notes on that. First of all we (U.S. citizens) do pay a yearly fee for ota television, it is just not named that, and is completely mandatory for all residents even if they don't have TV's. It is just one of the many components of income tax. The money is invested in public television, just like in the UK.
Now the differences are that we don't spend as much on public television, and as a result, the US has nothing that approaches the BBC in quality.
The UK could in theory switch to such a system, but they already have the infrastructure in place for the current, more fair system (If you have no TV, you don't pay the license). The system also makes it harder to neglect the funding of the public television system, when trying to balance the budget, since the money is not pooled in with other taxes, but instead goes directly to its intended purpose.
The idea behind private browsing is that if you want to visit some site and not have it show up in history, or be stored in the disk cache, or favicon cache, etc. It also converts all cookies to session cookies (stored in memory, not on disk, they are gone once the browser closes).
So if you use the private browsing mode whenever you visit porn sites, the porn sites would never be suggested in the (so-called) awesome bar, unless those sites are also saved as bookmarks. (Remember that awesome bar suggestions come from the classic url autocomplete list, as well as the history list, as well as bookmarks).
I believe that formula is actually the hexadecimal digit extraction formula for Pi. As I understand it, it can be used to determine the the value of the Nth hexadecimal digit of Pi without calculating all the previous digits.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, autism is not a specific disorder. It is a catch all term for likely hundreds of different disorders that do not have more specific names. The symptoms lists for autism that I have seen often include exact opposite symptoms, and other inane nonsense, which is to be expected for a catch-all designation. I will grant that there are several clear groups within autism that are almost certainly the same disorder (even if through multiple causes).
For me with a broadband connection the images load really quickly, and I can easily quickly flip through 100 articles in a minute, opening all the interesting ones in new tabs to read. In that period of time, I could only load say 20 article pages the normal way to decide if they are worth reading.
This is much more useful when out of 30 articles a site posts, you might be interested in 2. In the traditional way, you would have to go to the new sites page, open up the pages for each of the sites sections, skim through the lis of headlines to catch the ones you are interested it, and read them.
With this, you can look at every single article page, and stop for the interesting ones, while taking less than a second for each of the pages you are not interested in. Like with a magzine, you flip through all the articles, and stop at the ones that caught you eye, such as by a headline keyword, or interesting image.
I looked at it and it looks interesting to me. The idea would be that If you had a favorite publication could could flip through all the latest articles, stopping if you notice something interesting. Or you can flip through major headline pages for the same thing. Or flip through the headlines in a specific field. You might notice an interesting image on an article, or an eye catching keyword in a headline. But for those that don't interest you, you can flip right past in a fraction of a second. Like in a magazine you might flip too fast to stop when something catches your eye, so you flip back a few pages.
The fast-flip name comes from the fact that the pages are pre-rendered by Google, and as soon as you arrive at the site it starts downloading as many of the images as it can, so you browser can display them without delay. Using the arrow keys on my keyboard, it is easily possible to flip past 10 pages in three seconds. (Image preloading will handle short bursts at that speed, but the maximum sustain flipping speed is somewhat less than that, or you start getting placeholders showing instead of article images.)
AFAICT the real results of the settlement is (AFAICT):
The creation a a new organization, the Book Rights Registry. Out-of-print books will now essentially have a compulsory license, with the BRR as the royalties collection agency. This is not quite a compulsory license system, because rights holder can opt out, but otherwise acts similarly.
Any organization can scan out-of-print books, and provide limited access to the books[1], and sell full copies of the book. The organizations will need to work with the BRR who sets the prices for out of print books, and also maintains the list of rightholders who have opted out, along with the works in question.
Right holders can collect royalties from the BRR, as well as set prices for book sales, or prohibit such sales, allowing only the limited preview access, allow only tiny fragment search results[2], or opt out entirely.
[1]Limited access being only a few pages as with Amazon's search inside this book feature, or Google's current book search for books where Google has a deal with the publishers.
[2] Allowing only tiny fragment results is like what Google currently does now for in-copyright works where the publisher has not partnered with Google to provide the preview features.
---------------
Now please note, I'm not sure this is the right way to go.
Even if it is, the way this was created is less than ideal, and nobody has ever explained this clearly to the media, which has led to far more confusion about this than should ever have come about.
A single large display is of course exactly what most users do not want. There will always be some gap between the monitors. Either that gap can be part of the logical resolution, in which case parts of the screen are not being shown, or one will have say inch sized jumps in the viewing surface. Neither is desirable in many cases.
The proper way to do multi-monitors has always been using window's built-in support for it. Maximizing a window fills up it's monitor, not all of them. But each monitor is treated separate. Games with proper multi-monitor support place a full screen window on each monitor. This allows special purposed monitors if the gamer so desires, such as having one monitor with the map always displayed.
The car (racing?) game shown in that article looks absolutely awful split over monitors like that.
Having each monitor show something separate, such as views of the car from all four sides (so one can see the cars behind and to the sides clearly), the the map, and a simulated dashboard, now that would be cool!
There is a slight difference between a cigarette tax, which is applied to a very specific product, and the license fee which does not apply to any specific product. One can purchase a TV without paying the tax, since if there is no Video reception equipment on premises, even the inspectors are forced to conclude no license fee is necessary.
Why would somebody buy a TV without intent to view television? A number of reasons. A modern television consists of several components: a monitor, an integrated speaker system, video/audio format converters, and finally a TV tuner. Such a system is perfectly suitable for things like DVD players, game consoles, and even for use as a computer monitor.
A tangent:
Indeed, I've seen some Tv-like systems, which include most of the normal hookups, except for the coaxial hookup. The reason? Such a system is all quite a few people need anymore. It makes a perfect Computer monitor, it works for game consoles, and DVD players, and for most people, it works for television, since they use a satellite receiver, cable box, PVR, or other external device to manage channels.
In such a case, having a TV tuner on the TV generally only gets in the way: somebody unfamiliar with the setup changes the channel on the TV, resulting in loss of image until the device is returned to the correct input, etc.
In other words, you like this change, as it uses the following in order: an explicit file specific default, an explicit file type default, or an implicit file type default.
The old way was in order: Explicit file-specific default, explicit file type default, the application that made the file, an implicit file-type default.
(Yes, according the the Apple documentation the creator code never overrode an explicitly set default application for a file type, but would override the implicitly chosen default application.)
The most logical explanation for the annotations being still intact is that the Kindle stores annotations in a separate file, which was not deleted when the book was deleted. If the book is restored, the annotations would still be there.
(I don't know if this is the case or not, but i strongly suspect it is.)
I'm well aware that government grants are funded through taxes. My point was that the BBC was funded though normal taxes at least a tiny amount, along with the licence fee.
To be clear, I do agree that it is effectively a tax. It is one that is possible to opt out-of, which is not common for a tax. It also has the unusual property that it is not pooled in with the rest of the government revenue, with the appropriate amount for the BBC potentially getting changed (often by cutting back) every time the budget is set. That also makes it more difficult for the government to meddle in the BBC's affairs through messing with the funding.
In general that makes it better (for the BBC) than a regular tax.
That does not mean that the display code must be changed, merely that changes should be minimized in order to retain best battery life. It may be desirable to change the UI's to account for that, but it is not an absolute necessity.
But can you fit an e-bike in a shoulder bag, and easily carry it to your office? Even the folding e-bikes are bigger than this, and generally weigh more. It also reminds me of the Eunicycle, although like the 3 wheel Segway clones, this bike is more practical. (The Eunicycle guy also has made real 2-wheel style Segway clones.)
Except that the smart ones won't do that.
Let us assume The parties are named Party A, and Party B, that the population is reasonably close to being split 50/50 for the two parties, and party A is in power. LEt us also say for the sake of argument that there are 12 seats.
Party A starts by drawing 6 districts with nearly 100% support for a particular party. Four of those are party B districts, and two are Party A districts.
So with half the districts drawn, Party A gets 2 seat, and Party B gets 4 seats.
But of the remaining population 2/3 support party A and only 1 third supports party B.
So draw the rest of the districts so each has 2/3 support for A and 1/3 support for B.
The final result is:
Four 100% Party A districts
Two 100% Party B districts
Six 66% Party A districts
I would not call a 2/3's supporting district a close district since 2/3 is considered a substantial supermajority.
Party A is more than willing to give those 4 seats to party B, since they still end up with 2/3 of the total seats in this case, which is enough to get anything through.
A Diagram of the situation (each district is shown on one line, and each letter is 1/72 of the population):
BBBBBB
BBBBBB
BBBBBB
BBBBBB
AAAAAA
AAAAAA
BBAAAA
BBAAAA
BBAAAA
BBAAAA
BBAAAA
BBAAAA
More complicated systems can give similar results even when accounting for undecided voters (try to stick them in the near 100% districts to keep the influence they have to a minimum) and other considerations.
It should. He has it running X11, so you should be able to just use xpdf. To get a mouse working, one will need to configure X to allow keyboard control of the cursor. I'm sure that is possible, and you would probably want to map the directional pad to mouse movements.
Yes, it does, which is why it was easy enough to port ubuntu over. The real benefit here is that somebody could replace the (allegedly crappy) user interface with a new one, with proper pdf (with zoom) support, and some other features that should have been there in the first place. To code the UI for a new reader one could just use standard X11 programming techniques. That is to say, one could take xpdf, remove some of the crome of the application, and have a proper pdf reader, etc.
Annother benefit: It should be possible to ended the existing UI. For example, it should be possible to replace the crappy search with proper full text search. Doing some of that would require either breaking the DRM format, which would upset amazon, or replacing parts of the existing program. Doing the latter may be quite possible, since the code is java (IIRC), so one can just drop in replacement classes. If the java code is not obfuscated, then it may be downright easy (relatively speaking (It is always a pain to retrofit existing apps via reverse engineering)).
I've said that many times, but nobody listens.
Even if your ISP really does have a connection to their upstream that is big enough that all users could use their rated bandwidth at once (an ISP with only a handful of customers might be able to pull that off), your ISP's upstream most definitely does not have a connection to their upstream or the backbone that is big enough for all it's customers.
If the backbones had to be big enough such that every customer in the world could max his/her connections at the same time, then under normal use they would almost certainly be using well less than 1% of the capability.
Indeed, I'm pretty sure that's the only way I want to go skiing down a hill. I'd be far more likely to be unharmed when I inevitably hit a tree if am am wearing stormtrooper armor than normal ski clothes.
And that is in addition to the shear coolness factor of stoomtrooper Skiing.
Licence is a valid spelling of the word. That is one of the UK-US spelling differences.
Untrue. The BBC is funded solely through the license fee, sales of it's programmes abroad, and sales of other materials.
It receives no government funds.
In 2008 the BBC's non-commercial (i.e. in Britain) operations revived 4 million GBP in government grants. Granted, that is well less than 1% of it's income, but it does invalidate the claim of receiving no government funds.
Further the BBC World Service is funded exclusively (or very nearly so) by government grants from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The BBC Monitoring service receives money from all sorts of source, including some funding by foreign governments.
That said, much of the rest of your message is valid.
Do take note that the PBS in the US receives only 15%-20% of its funding from the federal government, and 25-29% from the smaller government. That means only 40%-50% of its operations is government funded.
Such small amounts greatly limit the influence the government can exert on the the system. For most intents and purposes, the PBS system is independent.
Further, even if there was a USBC, I can guarantee it would waste money like crazy, having only a small fraction of the efficiency of the BBC, likely having about 4 channels, and 2 radio stations.
make an internet for the more competent among us.
We have one of those. It is called the IPv6 Internet.
A few notes on that. First of all we (U.S. citizens) do pay a yearly fee for ota television, it is just not named that, and is completely mandatory for all residents even if they don't have TV's. It is just one of the many components of income tax. The money is invested in public television, just like in the UK.
Now the differences are that we don't spend as much on public television, and as a result, the US has nothing that approaches the BBC in quality.
The UK could in theory switch to such a system, but they already have the infrastructure in place for the current, more fair system (If you have no TV, you don't pay the license). The system also makes it harder to neglect the funding of the public television system, when trying to balance the budget, since the money is not pooled in with other taxes, but instead goes directly to its intended purpose.
The idea behind private browsing is that if you want to visit some site and not have it show up in history, or be stored in the disk cache, or favicon cache, etc. It also converts all cookies to session cookies (stored in memory, not on disk, they are gone once the browser closes).
So if you use the private browsing mode whenever you visit porn sites, the porn sites would never be suggested in the (so-called) awesome bar, unless those sites are also saved as bookmarks. (Remember that awesome bar suggestions come from the classic url autocomplete list, as well as the history list, as well as bookmarks).
Which is why he called it "the apocryphal story".
I believe that formula is actually the hexadecimal digit extraction formula for Pi. As I understand it, it can be used to determine the the value of the Nth hexadecimal digit of Pi without calculating all the previous digits.
Actually, why would you not just use the utility provided for that very purpose, rather than using netsh? Just run "ipv6 install".