> (I buy whole chickens and am learning to get more and more out of the carcase, with the aim of zero waste.)
Eat the good parts and chuck the rest into the trash. You're not wasting it. You're feeding the bacteria. Mother Nature's good about not letting food go to waste. *nods*
Yes, my mother called me a "precocious child" fairly often. That and, oddly, "Pumpkin." Though I'm not sure that last part is pertinent.
If you ever get up my way, I'll have to introduce you to moose and white tail venison. It's a bit like the mule but less gamy. Well, gamier in a different way - they're so very good when they've been feeding on apple drops. You can't (legally) bait them but hunting in an orchard with natural drops is perfectly legal.
I'm also guessing my meat consumption has far less impact on the environment than the grandparent-poster's vegetable consumption - but my veggies are *mostly* grown on my property too. I don't grow grains or the likes so that's not grown by me. Now I am hungry. I'm missing some of the best trout fishing days. I'm headed back home soon. Maybe this weekend. I keep putting it off but I don't think I'm going to get permission to go to Cuba.:/
Yes but that doesn't explain why you threaded it there. Usually there's some significance to where a comment is placed in a conversation - for a variety of reasons.;-)
It was (and that's an achievement in itself) the oddest remark in the entire thread - odd enough so that I scrolled *back up* to ask what was going on. In short, I was confused. In long, I was wondering if you actually had a point and if I was missing something as well as curious if maybe you'd threaded it there for a reason I didn't understand. Or, perhaps, if you'd threaded it there by mistake. I sometimes have hit the wrong reply button only to notice later, though I don't think I've done that in years.
Ah well... It's a very odd place for your comment thus my confusion. Shine on, you crazy diamond, shine on.
Wait, Apple's paying dividends now? Are you sure?:/ If so, I'm unaware of this and I own some shares. It should be noted that I don't manage my own portfolio and that it's defaulted to just have 'em plow it back into other companies that show steady growth. However, I'd have thought they'd have mentioned that to me. I suppose they might have and, depending, I somehow managed to not notice or not remember.
Try not to laugh but, and it pains me to admit this, I am really enjoying my time with a Windows phone. I haven't upgraded it to Windows Phone 10 yet but I guess I can and it's supposed to work just fine. I'm a pretty happy Linux user but I gotta be honest and say that this Windows phone isn't bad at all. It's actually good. The specs make one think it's slow or whatnot but it isn't. Contrary to popular opinion, there's a number of apps for it - there just aren't 803 versions of Candy Crush and 9254 versions of a flashlight. The apps are all fine and I'm not seeing any compelling reason to swap back to Android.
I did pre-order an Ubuntu tablet. I did not order the phone. If the tablet is any good and the reviews of the phone indicate that it is worth it then I'll order a phone. It's hard telling. Maybe... I really am pretty happy with my Windows-based phone. It's snappy and responsive. It does everything that I want it to do - I am, literally, not missing any features that I'd get with any other phone. I'm sure there might be a few apps that it doesn't have, for example, but I'm not missing them.
Get this... I'm not even being paid (or coerced) into making this post. It's all good that you pick what you pick but there are other options besides Google and Apple. They range from Ubuntu to Microsoft to a few custom things - and BlackBerry still has their own OS going on. So, there are options.
Yup. I've been saying this for a while. Apple can double their work-force and have every product be a complete flop where they only sell items to just their devoted fans (the ones who would buy shit and claim they loved it) and they will STILL have a huge nest egg of cash in the year 2216. They can have each employee do nothing but burn a $10 (American) bill on the hour, ever hour, and do nothing else and STILL have a huge nest egg in the year 2116.
I bet Microsoft is kicking themselves for not holding onto all that stock they had from when they bailed Apple out. Holy shit, that'd be worth a ton of money. Hell, it'd probably be worth more than a ton of gold.
Apple has more money than many, many countries have for a GDP - never mind how many more countries that would be counted if we used operating budget instead. I am not even sure what it would take for Apple to go bankrupt at this point. They probably ought to consider doing some of that whole "paying dividends" thing. I didn't realize a company could have that much cash on hand and not be required to give some back to the investors. No, really, I did not know that.
Full disclosure: I do own some shares but I have no idea how many. It's probably not a lot and any dividends they paid would either go right back into the market or would end up the property of Uncle Sam.
I don't think anyone doubts the existence of conspiracies. I think we doubt the existence of long-lasting, nefarious, complex conspiracies. There are people conspiring all the time and doing so for varied motivations. Snowden's leak confirms that someone will always tell someone else and will do so for any number of reasons. Secrets aren't kept for long.
It's an improvement. For the longest time, they were running about claiming that the FBI had made up the term and were quoting a Wikipedia article about it. The article (and the cited sources) did not say any such thing. They said what the AC is now saying - that the FBI popularized the term and that it was for that specific reason.
That, I can attest to. That is factual and confirmed in many sources - there's even a few (non-crazy) documentaries about it. The FBI did, indeed, popularize the expression. They weren't the first to use it or anything. See? Always a little truth to those sorts of things. I had the debate with, what I presume was, the same person a couple of times before they stopped repeating it. It was ruining their credibility!:D
As for the rest of what they say... Well, that's up to you to decide what to believe. I'm pretty damned certain we've got rovers on Mars and we went to the Moon - when we said we went. I saw the broadcast live. Special effects were better than that. Sheesh. It wasn't the Stone Age or anything. Kubrick could have done better. I've read a few things about the folks who tend to believe in conspiracy theories. Life's too short for all that.
I have not brought myself to the point of watching the new Cosmos - and I watch almost nothing but documentaries as a preference. I just don't want the series spoiled and I'm not a huge fan of Tyson. I think I'd have been more quick to watch it if it had had a different presenter - perhaps Cox or even Greene. Susskind or the black guy with the crazy hair (I always forget his name) might have been good choices. Tyson's always grated on me. Well, not always but since about the time when he was starting to get big on Nova.
This is more a reminder than a personal question but I'm going to phrase it as a question - albeit a rhetorical one.
When was the last time you returned some of those resources to the people you're relying on - such as donating to the various projects who write the source you use or maintain the distro that you use?
Err... Have you read the title? Unless they changed it - the title clearly states that such a pledge was made.
"Ubuntu Founder Pledges No Back Doors in Linux"
The summary contracts the title. Shuttleworth hasn't the authority to make any such claim about Linux. He can, of course, make such claims about Ubuntu. Linux is not Ubuntu. The title is really quite erroneous and it might even be intentionally so.
The headline is misleading and contradicts what the summary says. Mark has no such authority nor say. He's got no control over Linux. He uses the Linux kernel in Ubuntu and, rightfully, he spoke specifically about Ubuntu.
The Ubuntu founder did not say what the headline claims. I was really kind of curious as to why he'd say such a thing and then I realized the summary actually told the truth. That's disappointing Slashdot. Disappointing indeed. Then again, I haven't checked to see if the submitter was the one to insinuate that - they may also share culpability.
I was kind of annoyed until I read the summary (then I was annoyed for other reasons). I mean, hell, I'm a pretty happy Lubuntu user and even I know that Mark's authority and control ends with Ubuntu. I also know that Ubuntu hasn't the manpower nor the expertise to review every line of code. It seemed a rather bizarre claim for him to have made. Fortunately, he said no such thing. He's said some odd things before but nothing like that. The latest oddity was the mention of the name for the next version of Ubuntu. Yakity (x8) yak. Of course.
Inside the Triton section, root around. There's some partner showcases that have some color stuff. Some of them are kind of neat. There's some developer kit here: http://www.eink.com/developer_...
The first one is $70 and looks like it might be fun to play with. The second link looks like it's software and info. Obviously, I haven't looked at it very deeply. I'd just looked because I was curious - I opened the thread again to share what I'd found.
It only does something like 16 colors and 11 shades (something like that) so you get 4096 colors total to use.
I'm an automotive enthusiast so these piqued my interest as they're sort of in-line with a concept I've been mulling over for a while: http://www.eink.com/concept_sh...
Hmm... It looks like it's something that can be done but is likely still cost prohibitive for most people. I've fired off an email concerning the last product listed to see if they've share more information. It's not yet on the vendor's page so it's surely still in concept stage. If it's any good, I'd love to have one.
That seems odd. I have a friend out in Nevada who was talking about getting a run of something like 100,000 ebooks made to his design and specs. I seem to recall he said he was going to send me one and he might have actually done so. I did see pics of his prototypes and they were probably 7-8" if I had to guess. I didn't ask the specs.
I can assure you, he is not a billionaire. He's probably a millionaire on paper but he's cash-poor. He's got some assets but not ones that are easily liquidated and that's the majority of his net worth. He's got a few patents, a small prototype/quasi-fab shop.
Hmm... I don't know, I don't think that sentence looks good on me.
On a more serious note, graphene is actually really easy to make. It's just not easy to make in large quantities or in formats that are then easily worked. One of the easiest ways to make graphene can be done right there at your desk. Take a pencil and a piece of tape.Write on the sticky side, go ahead and get a few thick lines on there. Now, over and over again press the tape together so that a non-covered section gets stuck with the covered section and then peel them apart. Do that over and over again. You've got graphene in short order. Really, you'll have graphene in just a few minutes.
Now, there are much better processes but I'm told that none of them are great for making it in quantity or in an easily worked form. I guess, we could hire a bunch of Chinese people and give them all a roll of Scotch Tape and some pencils but that's not going to get us very far. I'm not sure what improvements have been made in the past 18 months or so. Hmm... Maybe two years? I've not read of anything popping up on the production side - but I do read about a lot of theoretical uses that are right around the corner.
There are some things you just learn to ignore. One of those things is the horrible misuses the word "exponentially" suffers. It's along the same line as "literally" which has, somehow, come to mean the same as "figuratively."
Hmm...
I have seen an exponential increase in the misuse of the expression! Just smile and nod, literally.
> remember in the 50's when they used to deliver everything to your home?
Umm... No? Just milk and diapers. We had grocery stores then. We went shopping then. I confess, I wasn't born until 1957 but I did live all across the country (my father was a career Marine) and I even lived in a couple of other countries. So, assuming some overlap and some lag - I don't ever recall them delivering everything to the house.
Err... Hmm... Where you actually alive back then or did you read this in a book or something? Some cities had grocery delivery but that wasn't the norm in the US or any other country I lived in. 'Cause, no... No, I seriously do not recollect that. The supermarket that you're familiar with today had already been invented by then but it wasn't universal - even then, you went to the store and they went and got the stuff for you and didn't deliver it. If you were an old woman then they might deliver it for you - maybe if you had a bunch of kids and no husband and were stuck at home all day. I'm guessing you were not an old woman in the 1950s though. (That would be different if you were.)
I even lived in some fairly rural areas for a spell but that was mid-60s by then. Yeah, all I can really think of that was common was the milk and diaper delivery services.
What he didn't tell you is that is usually diesel. It's also not how the gas stations get their gas - which was what you pointed out. I have to (legal) in-ground diesel tanks at home and they come top them off once a year and put in some treatment. I think the most I've gone through is 220 gallons one year. They'd come more often if I needed them. If they get down to below a 1/4 tank they'll beep until I acknowledge the beep. I think they can fire off an alert but I've never configured that. I don't even know how half that stuff works any more.:/ Well, I know the principle and can probably figure it out but I don't bother. My head's full of other stuff. It hasn't run out yet so I'm all good.
Actually, I think it's K-1, or untaxed diesel. I'm pretty sure it is dyed where taxed diesel isn't. Vehicles get the taxed and home heating, generators, and whatnot don't get taxed on it. Yeah, that's it. Meh, I gotta sleep one of these days.
17 to 21 cents per gallon is pennies? Well, I guess... It's 17.1 to 21.7 pennies. They just had record profit margins last year.
Those figures are from OPIS crunching the numbers from some 16,000 stations in the US. My own numbers indicate that it's closer 23 cents per gallon. That's profit - not revenue.
Slashdot Mirror
> (I buy whole chickens and am learning to get more and more out of the carcase, with the aim of zero waste.)
Eat the good parts and chuck the rest into the trash. You're not wasting it. You're feeding the bacteria. Mother Nature's good about not letting food go to waste. *nods*
Yes, my mother called me a "precocious child" fairly often. That and, oddly, "Pumpkin." Though I'm not sure that last part is pertinent.
If you ever get up my way, I'll have to introduce you to moose and white tail venison. It's a bit like the mule but less gamy. Well, gamier in a different way - they're so very good when they've been feeding on apple drops. You can't (legally) bait them but hunting in an orchard with natural drops is perfectly legal.
I'm also guessing my meat consumption has far less impact on the environment than the grandparent-poster's vegetable consumption - but my veggies are *mostly* grown on my property too. I don't grow grains or the likes so that's not grown by me. Now I am hungry. I'm missing some of the best trout fishing days. I'm headed back home soon. Maybe this weekend. I keep putting it off but I don't think I'm going to get permission to go to Cuba. :/
Yes but that doesn't explain why you threaded it there. Usually there's some significance to where a comment is placed in a conversation - for a variety of reasons. ;-)
It was (and that's an achievement in itself) the oddest remark in the entire thread - odd enough so that I scrolled *back up* to ask what was going on. In short, I was confused. In long, I was wondering if you actually had a point and if I was missing something as well as curious if maybe you'd threaded it there for a reason I didn't understand. Or, perhaps, if you'd threaded it there by mistake. I sometimes have hit the wrong reply button only to notice later, though I don't think I've done that in years.
Ah well... It's a very odd place for your comment thus my confusion. Shine on, you crazy diamond, shine on.
I am told iTunes works very well on a Mac.
Wait, Apple's paying dividends now? Are you sure? :/ If so, I'm unaware of this and I own some shares. It should be noted that I don't manage my own portfolio and that it's defaulted to just have 'em plow it back into other companies that show steady growth. However, I'd have thought they'd have mentioned that to me. I suppose they might have and, depending, I somehow managed to not notice or not remember.
Do you ever get any of them asking for Plan9, MINIX, or some other oddball OS like that?
Try not to laugh but, and it pains me to admit this, I am really enjoying my time with a Windows phone. I haven't upgraded it to Windows Phone 10 yet but I guess I can and it's supposed to work just fine. I'm a pretty happy Linux user but I gotta be honest and say that this Windows phone isn't bad at all. It's actually good. The specs make one think it's slow or whatnot but it isn't. Contrary to popular opinion, there's a number of apps for it - there just aren't 803 versions of Candy Crush and 9254 versions of a flashlight. The apps are all fine and I'm not seeing any compelling reason to swap back to Android.
I did pre-order an Ubuntu tablet. I did not order the phone. If the tablet is any good and the reviews of the phone indicate that it is worth it then I'll order a phone. It's hard telling. Maybe... I really am pretty happy with my Windows-based phone. It's snappy and responsive. It does everything that I want it to do - I am, literally, not missing any features that I'd get with any other phone. I'm sure there might be a few apps that it doesn't have, for example, but I'm not missing them.
Get this... I'm not even being paid (or coerced) into making this post. It's all good that you pick what you pick but there are other options besides Google and Apple. They range from Ubuntu to Microsoft to a few custom things - and BlackBerry still has their own OS going on. So, there are options.
Yup. I've been saying this for a while. Apple can double their work-force and have every product be a complete flop where they only sell items to just their devoted fans (the ones who would buy shit and claim they loved it) and they will STILL have a huge nest egg of cash in the year 2216. They can have each employee do nothing but burn a $10 (American) bill on the hour, ever hour, and do nothing else and STILL have a huge nest egg in the year 2116.
I bet Microsoft is kicking themselves for not holding onto all that stock they had from when they bailed Apple out. Holy shit, that'd be worth a ton of money. Hell, it'd probably be worth more than a ton of gold.
Apple has more money than many, many countries have for a GDP - never mind how many more countries that would be counted if we used operating budget instead. I am not even sure what it would take for Apple to go bankrupt at this point. They probably ought to consider doing some of that whole "paying dividends" thing. I didn't realize a company could have that much cash on hand and not be required to give some back to the investors. No, really, I did not know that.
Full disclosure: I do own some shares but I have no idea how many. It's probably not a lot and any dividends they paid would either go right back into the market or would end up the property of Uncle Sam.
The person that you responded to said nothing about either of those two things?
I don't think anyone doubts the existence of conspiracies. I think we doubt the existence of long-lasting, nefarious, complex conspiracies. There are people conspiring all the time and doing so for varied motivations. Snowden's leak confirms that someone will always tell someone else and will do so for any number of reasons. Secrets aren't kept for long.
It's an improvement. For the longest time, they were running about claiming that the FBI had made up the term and were quoting a Wikipedia article about it. The article (and the cited sources) did not say any such thing. They said what the AC is now saying - that the FBI popularized the term and that it was for that specific reason.
That, I can attest to. That is factual and confirmed in many sources - there's even a few (non-crazy) documentaries about it. The FBI did, indeed, popularize the expression. They weren't the first to use it or anything. See? Always a little truth to those sorts of things. I had the debate with, what I presume was, the same person a couple of times before they stopped repeating it. It was ruining their credibility! :D
As for the rest of what they say... Well, that's up to you to decide what to believe. I'm pretty damned certain we've got rovers on Mars and we went to the Moon - when we said we went. I saw the broadcast live. Special effects were better than that. Sheesh. It wasn't the Stone Age or anything. Kubrick could have done better. I've read a few things about the folks who tend to believe in conspiracy theories. Life's too short for all that.
Alright, that made me curious. Why are you face palming?
I have not brought myself to the point of watching the new Cosmos - and I watch almost nothing but documentaries as a preference. I just don't want the series spoiled and I'm not a huge fan of Tyson. I think I'd have been more quick to watch it if it had had a different presenter - perhaps Cox or even Greene. Susskind or the black guy with the crazy hair (I always forget his name) might have been good choices. Tyson's always grated on me. Well, not always but since about the time when he was starting to get big on Nova.
This is more a reminder than a personal question but I'm going to phrase it as a question - albeit a rhetorical one.
When was the last time you returned some of those resources to the people you're relying on - such as donating to the various projects who write the source you use or maintain the distro that you use?
Err... Have you read the title? Unless they changed it - the title clearly states that such a pledge was made.
"Ubuntu Founder Pledges No Back Doors in Linux"
The summary contracts the title. Shuttleworth hasn't the authority to make any such claim about Linux. He can, of course, make such claims about Ubuntu. Linux is not Ubuntu. The title is really quite erroneous and it might even be intentionally so.
The headline is misleading and contradicts what the summary says. Mark has no such authority nor say. He's got no control over Linux. He uses the Linux kernel in Ubuntu and, rightfully, he spoke specifically about Ubuntu.
The Ubuntu founder did not say what the headline claims. I was really kind of curious as to why he'd say such a thing and then I realized the summary actually told the truth. That's disappointing Slashdot. Disappointing indeed. Then again, I haven't checked to see if the submitter was the one to insinuate that - they may also share culpability.
I was kind of annoyed until I read the summary (then I was annoyed for other reasons). I mean, hell, I'm a pretty happy Lubuntu user and even I know that Mark's authority and control ends with Ubuntu. I also know that Ubuntu hasn't the manpower nor the expertise to review every line of code. It seemed a rather bizarre claim for him to have made. Fortunately, he said no such thing. He's said some odd things before but nothing like that. The latest oddity was the mention of the name for the next version of Ubuntu. Yakity (x8) yak. Of course.
I was curious so I went searching earlier. I figured I'd open the thread back up and link this:
http://www.eink.com/display_pr...
Inside the Triton section, root around. There's some partner showcases that have some color stuff. Some of them are kind of neat. There's some developer kit here:
http://www.eink.com/developer_...
The first one is $70 and looks like it might be fun to play with. The second link looks like it's software and info. Obviously, I haven't looked at it very deeply. I'd just looked because I was curious - I opened the thread again to share what I'd found.
Here are some concepts but it appears that they work.
http://www.eink.com/concept_sh...
It only does something like 16 colors and 11 shades (something like that) so you get 4096 colors total to use.
I'm an automotive enthusiast so these piqued my interest as they're sort of in-line with a concept I've been mulling over for a while:
http://www.eink.com/concept_sh...
Here's an e-reader that's a rugged model, note the colored icons on the right:
http://www.eink.com/concept_sh...
Hmm... It looks like it's something that can be done but is likely still cost prohibitive for most people. I've fired off an email concerning the last product listed to see if they've share more information. It's not yet on the vendor's page so it's surely still in concept stage. If it's any good, I'd love to have one.
That seems odd. I have a friend out in Nevada who was talking about getting a run of something like 100,000 ebooks made to his design and specs. I seem to recall he said he was going to send me one and he might have actually done so. I did see pics of his prototypes and they were probably 7-8" if I had to guess. I didn't ask the specs.
I can assure you, he is not a billionaire. He's probably a millionaire on paper but he's cash-poor. He's got some assets but not ones that are easily liquidated and that's the majority of his net worth. He's got a few patents, a small prototype/quasi-fab shop.
You can bet Trump will put a stop to this!
Hmm... I don't know, I don't think that sentence looks good on me.
On a more serious note, graphene is actually really easy to make. It's just not easy to make in large quantities or in formats that are then easily worked. One of the easiest ways to make graphene can be done right there at your desk. Take a pencil and a piece of tape.Write on the sticky side, go ahead and get a few thick lines on there. Now, over and over again press the tape together so that a non-covered section gets stuck with the covered section and then peel them apart. Do that over and over again. You've got graphene in short order. Really, you'll have graphene in just a few minutes.
Now, there are much better processes but I'm told that none of them are great for making it in quantity or in an easily worked form. I guess, we could hire a bunch of Chinese people and give them all a roll of Scotch Tape and some pencils but that's not going to get us very far. I'm not sure what improvements have been made in the past 18 months or so. Hmm... Maybe two years? I've not read of anything popping up on the production side - but I do read about a lot of theoretical uses that are right around the corner.
There are some things you just learn to ignore. One of those things is the horrible misuses the word "exponentially" suffers. It's along the same line as "literally" which has, somehow, come to mean the same as "figuratively."
Hmm...
I have seen an exponential increase in the misuse of the expression! Just smile and nod, literally.
I'm going to hell, if there is one. ;-)
It's incorrect for me to say that Google is your friend but I will point out that they're likely to be quite handy at this point.
Do you mean matte? If your maths are equal to your literacy, this should be interesting. ;-)
> remember in the 50's when they used to deliver everything to your home?
Umm... No? Just milk and diapers. We had grocery stores then. We went shopping then. I confess, I wasn't born until 1957 but I did live all across the country (my father was a career Marine) and I even lived in a couple of other countries. So, assuming some overlap and some lag - I don't ever recall them delivering everything to the house.
Err... Hmm... Where you actually alive back then or did you read this in a book or something? Some cities had grocery delivery but that wasn't the norm in the US or any other country I lived in. 'Cause, no... No, I seriously do not recollect that. The supermarket that you're familiar with today had already been invented by then but it wasn't universal - even then, you went to the store and they went and got the stuff for you and didn't deliver it. If you were an old woman then they might deliver it for you - maybe if you had a bunch of kids and no husband and were stuck at home all day. I'm guessing you were not an old woman in the 1950s though. (That would be different if you were.)
I even lived in some fairly rural areas for a spell but that was mid-60s by then. Yeah, all I can really think of that was common was the milk and diaper delivery services.
What he didn't tell you is that is usually diesel. It's also not how the gas stations get their gas - which was what you pointed out. I have to (legal) in-ground diesel tanks at home and they come top them off once a year and put in some treatment. I think the most I've gone through is 220 gallons one year. They'd come more often if I needed them. If they get down to below a 1/4 tank they'll beep until I acknowledge the beep. I think they can fire off an alert but I've never configured that. I don't even know how half that stuff works any more. :/ Well, I know the principle and can probably figure it out but I don't bother. My head's full of other stuff. It hasn't run out yet so I'm all good.
Actually, I think it's K-1, or untaxed diesel. I'm pretty sure it is dyed where taxed diesel isn't. Vehicles get the taxed and home heating, generators, and whatnot don't get taxed on it. Yeah, that's it. Meh, I gotta sleep one of these days.
17 to 21 cents per gallon is pennies? Well, I guess... It's 17.1 to 21.7 pennies. They just had record profit margins last year.
Those figures are from OPIS crunching the numbers from some 16,000 stations in the US. My own numbers indicate that it's closer 23 cents per gallon. That's profit - not revenue.