On most cell/mobile networks, your calls are just run over the data service. Meanwhile you're charged much higher prices for the phone-as-data than data-as-data.
GP also assumes you can convert one form of potential energy to another at or around 99+% efficiency. The rest of humanity would like to know how that works.
Also consider how the materials for the batteries are sourced (emissions/energy cost to mine), where they're sourced (emissions/energy cost to ship), how they're put together (emissions from factory, energy cost), and where the entire vehicle is put together (emissions/energy cost to ship batteries to car factory). Is continuing to use older vehicles less and more impactful to the environment?
People who are totally against innovation in this sector tend to think all of these are worse than continuing to rely on dead dinosaur-based fuels. I think we need to push forward and research all options, including reducing individual demand for vehicular use through public transit, better civic planning, automated vehicles (which increase efficiency in the system greatly) among other options.
I'm a car guy and I desperately do not want to see organic fuels disappear because of over use or damage to the environment. I think converting to more efficient travel methods and shrinking work-to-home distances are ultimately the way to go. Having access to fossil fuels in the future will then be reserved mostly for folks who just want to have fun, like owning horses is today. I don't want to see track days go away, or being able to take apart and put back together an almost entirely mechanical engine. There's a certain mechanical hackery to it.
Cars as appliances need to move on from fossil fuels, cars as projects/things to hack shouldn't. If we continue to treat fossil-fuels as infinite and undamaging we're going to lose cars as toys and projects and things to hack. That's sad.
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Just like the remote kill switch that was proposed in cars. This is a solution looking for a problem, and more over it's a solution that's ripe for abuse.
AdBlock is something I've started installing for friends and family more as a way to block malware, than as a way to block ads outright. Poisoned ads (malvertising) account for a lot of malware installs. Just Google for iTunes or Firefox and the top ad results are malware infected installers.
Besides the incredible annoyance of ads in the slow downs they cause, they're also a dangerous pathway to malware and viruses. Common methods like embedding an iframe into a page that loads a script that targets a browser exploit to install something nasty (drive-by downloads), oneclick exploits, baiting users to download things, etc.
Ad networks—at least the slimy ones—don't care because they're getting paid.
I've been using REAPER for about 5 years now, professionally. It's cheap, works great, and there's no DRM beyond a registration code. I'd argue it's much more than a Swiss Army Knife, it's easily about 85% of ProTools is for my uses, and I can fake the other 15% without a sweat.
Designers like myself have a hard time because so many people say it's, "photoshop for free!!11@omgwtfbbq," whenever a new release comes out. If people stopped making the absurd assertion that they're remotely comparable for most pro work, we wouldn't make a stink about it. But even the summary here is saying it's that good—it isn't. I would call it a decent tool, one worth spending time with, but it's not in the same league yet. It needs layer styles (which from the way most open source projects go, I can see them pulling off a far better version than Adobe currently does), better typography tools, nested files and other non-destructive techniques.
Just quit comparing them and we'll stop complaining.
Many companies buy check paper (complete with anti-fraud holographs, watermarks etc.), and then print on top of that using a regular laser printer. Being able to remove just the laser overprint.
That having been said, it wouldn't take long for the check paper companies to begin making check paper that will fail upon being introduced to the green laser field.
Actually, JPEG doesn't lack ICC, or EXIF. Every camera that makes JPEG files embeds EXIF. Any suitable photo editor can embed ICC profiles as well.
I'll agree that the lack of alpha channel sucks, and that JPEG's lossy compression can be improved, but it's simply untrue that neither EXIF nor ICC can't be embedded. I do it all the time.
Randian thought and Objectivism works on the basic question of, "Is this good for me?" At it's core is selfishness, and quite a few people—from christians to secular humanists—find this selfishness repugnant.
Before you claim I don't know what I'm talking about, I used to be a Randian drone. It's a sick, inhuman mindset that places self on a pedestal above all others.
What kind of twisted, self-righteous bullshit is this? I've known plenty of underhanded, socially-maladjusted, smarter-than-thou, back-stabbing engineers in my short time here. Explain that.
If you're going to start throwing out anecdotal crap as evidence to justify your blind hate for people with other talents than yourself you might as well give up. I'd expect a man of science such as yourself to at least try harder.
I don't want "everyone happy." I don't want the US happy when ICE wants to seize a few thousand domains. I don't want Gaddafi happy when he wants to cut down political revolutionaries.
I don't know what precisely this system should look like. I just know that a UN commission wouldn't work, just like the current system lets in the US government whenever it pleases.
First I didn't affirm US control. I just said the UN is a bad option. In all honesty, I don't want the US to have control. Incidents such as ICE wiping out all those domains a few months back, just reenforced those opinions. With US's own human rights record—although not as bad as many nations—has blots throughout history, such as slavery, genocide and internment of native people, Gitmo, Japanese internment camps, etc.
The UNHRC exists in the same power structure that routinely puts dictatorships on the Security Council. Libya isn't some one-in-a-million mistake.
I imagine the Economic and Social Council would command the agency that controls domain names. Up until 2006, they also controlled the Human Rights Commission, until it was moved under the General Assembly. Many members states of the Human Rights Commission had terrible human rights records. That was why it was moved to the General Assembly. To further prove my point, when it moved not much changed.
With that in mind, I don't think they're unrelated at all. If they can't get things as important as the UNHRC right, how are we to expect they'll succeed in things like domain name registration.
The UN put Libya on the Human Rights Council. They only suspended their involvement when Gaddafi started fucking over the people who asked for better government. I don't want the UN involved. At all.
English is a stupid language full of exceptions. It took me years to get the apostrophe out of, "its," when used possessively. If we referred to it as, "Google's mobile operating system," it'd be correct. When we use the pronoun we remove the apostrophe while it's possessive, because, "it's," is already a contraction of, "it is."
We native speakers get it wrong because English—in spite of its advantages—is a language chock full of weird rules that always have exceptions. Not that it's an excuse for the editors though.
The legal and economic definitions of theft indicate the loss of a physical item. If I steal something from a store, that item needs to be replaced. If I infringe your copyright by downloading your music, you've at worst lost a sale. The economic impact is a lot less because you're not actually losing real goods that already have work invested into them.
Is it wrong? Yes. Does it suck? Yes. Is it a theft. No.
That's certainly a conclusion you can come to, but that also means it's difficult to create deep, lasting relationships with anyone but family. Sort of a quality vs. quantity thing.
Slashdot Mirror
This won't help with bone density loss, lowered heart strength, or a number of other issues.
This. I have one at home, and install them for clients who need to replace SonicWalls and the like. Very hackable, very stable, very fast.
On most cell/mobile networks, your calls are just run over the data service. Meanwhile you're charged much higher prices for the phone-as-data than data-as-data.
GP also assumes you can convert one form of potential energy to another at or around 99+% efficiency. The rest of humanity would like to know how that works.
Denny Crane.
I'm kookoo for Cocoa Puffs.
Also consider how the materials for the batteries are sourced (emissions/energy cost to mine), where they're sourced (emissions/energy cost to ship), how they're put together (emissions from factory, energy cost), and where the entire vehicle is put together (emissions/energy cost to ship batteries to car factory). Is continuing to use older vehicles less and more impactful to the environment?
People who are totally against innovation in this sector tend to think all of these are worse than continuing to rely on dead dinosaur-based fuels. I think we need to push forward and research all options, including reducing individual demand for vehicular use through public transit, better civic planning, automated vehicles (which increase efficiency in the system greatly) among other options.
I'm a car guy and I desperately do not want to see organic fuels disappear because of over use or damage to the environment. I think converting to more efficient travel methods and shrinking work-to-home distances are ultimately the way to go. Having access to fossil fuels in the future will then be reserved mostly for folks who just want to have fun, like owning horses is today. I don't want to see track days go away, or being able to take apart and put back together an almost entirely mechanical engine. There's a certain mechanical hackery to it.
Cars as appliances need to move on from fossil fuels, cars as projects/things to hack shouldn't. If we continue to treat fossil-fuels as infinite and undamaging we're going to lose cars as toys and projects and things to hack. That's sad.
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Just like the remote kill switch that was proposed in cars. This is a solution looking for a problem, and more over it's a solution that's ripe for abuse.
An artful negotiating technique, subtle in its cunning.
AdBlock is something I've started installing for friends and family more as a way to block malware, than as a way to block ads outright. Poisoned ads (malvertising) account for a lot of malware installs. Just Google for iTunes or Firefox and the top ad results are malware infected installers.
Besides the incredible annoyance of ads in the slow downs they cause, they're also a dangerous pathway to malware and viruses. Common methods like embedding an iframe into a page that loads a script that targets a browser exploit to install something nasty (drive-by downloads), oneclick exploits, baiting users to download things, etc.
Ad networks—at least the slimy ones—don't care because they're getting paid.
I've been using REAPER for about 5 years now, professionally. It's cheap, works great, and there's no DRM beyond a registration code. I'd argue it's much more than a Swiss Army Knife, it's easily about 85% of ProTools is for my uses, and I can fake the other 15% without a sweat.
"NASA Boss Accused of Breaking Arms"
Das parts of NASA's loss of funds. You gots to break legs if youse wants to makes moneys.
Designers like myself have a hard time because so many people say it's, "photoshop for free!!11@omgwtfbbq," whenever a new release comes out. If people stopped making the absurd assertion that they're remotely comparable for most pro work, we wouldn't make a stink about it. But even the summary here is saying it's that good—it isn't. I would call it a decent tool, one worth spending time with, but it's not in the same league yet. It needs layer styles (which from the way most open source projects go, I can see them pulling off a far better version than Adobe currently does), better typography tools, nested files and other non-destructive techniques.
Just quit comparing them and we'll stop complaining.
Infinitely worse.
Many companies buy check paper (complete with anti-fraud holographs, watermarks etc.), and then print on top of that using a regular laser printer. Being able to remove just the laser overprint.
That having been said, it wouldn't take long for the check paper companies to begin making check paper that will fail upon being introduced to the green laser field.
Government investing in private industry isn't exactly Bolshevik, now is it? But you'd rather attack people than ideas any day.
Well then, we agree in more ways than one: english is stupid!
Actually, JPEG doesn't lack ICC, or EXIF. Every camera that makes JPEG files embeds EXIF. Any suitable photo editor can embed ICC profiles as well.
I'll agree that the lack of alpha channel sucks, and that JPEG's lossy compression can be improved, but it's simply untrue that neither EXIF nor ICC can't be embedded. I do it all the time.
Randian thought and Objectivism works on the basic question of, "Is this good for me?" At it's core is selfishness, and quite a few people—from christians to secular humanists—find this selfishness repugnant.
Before you claim I don't know what I'm talking about, I used to be a Randian drone. It's a sick, inhuman mindset that places self on a pedestal above all others.
What kind of twisted, self-righteous bullshit is this? I've known plenty of underhanded, socially-maladjusted, smarter-than-thou, back-stabbing engineers in my short time here. Explain that.
If you're going to start throwing out anecdotal crap as evidence to justify your blind hate for people with other talents than yourself you might as well give up. I'd expect a man of science such as yourself to at least try harder.
I hate the vast majority of pop, on principal, and even I know who the fuck she is. Good voice, actually.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adele_(singer)
I don't want "everyone happy." I don't want the US happy when ICE wants to seize a few thousand domains. I don't want Gaddafi happy when he wants to cut down political revolutionaries.
I don't know what precisely this system should look like. I just know that a UN commission wouldn't work, just like the current system lets in the US government whenever it pleases.
First I didn't affirm US control. I just said the UN is a bad option. In all honesty, I don't want the US to have control. Incidents such as ICE wiping out all those domains a few months back, just reenforced those opinions. With US's own human rights record—although not as bad as many nations—has blots throughout history, such as slavery, genocide and internment of native people, Gitmo, Japanese internment camps, etc.
The UNHRC exists in the same power structure that routinely puts dictatorships on the Security Council. Libya isn't some one-in-a-million mistake.
I imagine the Economic and Social Council would command the agency that controls domain names. Up until 2006, they also controlled the Human Rights Commission, until it was moved under the General Assembly. Many members states of the Human Rights Commission had terrible human rights records. That was why it was moved to the General Assembly. To further prove my point, when it moved not much changed.
With that in mind, I don't think they're unrelated at all. If they can't get things as important as the UNHRC right, how are we to expect they'll succeed in things like domain name registration.
The UN put Libya on the Human Rights Council. They only suspended their involvement when Gaddafi started fucking over the people who asked for better government. I don't want the UN involved. At all.
English is a stupid language full of exceptions. It took me years to get the apostrophe out of, "its," when used possessively. If we referred to it as, "Google's mobile operating system," it'd be correct. When we use the pronoun we remove the apostrophe while it's possessive, because, "it's," is already a contraction of, "it is."
We native speakers get it wrong because English—in spite of its advantages—is a language chock full of weird rules that always have exceptions. Not that it's an excuse for the editors though.
The legal and economic definitions of theft indicate the loss of a physical item. If I steal something from a store, that item needs to be replaced. If I infringe your copyright by downloading your music, you've at worst lost a sale. The economic impact is a lot less because you're not actually losing real goods that already have work invested into them.
Is it wrong? Yes.
Does it suck? Yes.
Is it a theft. No.
That's certainly a conclusion you can come to, but that also means it's difficult to create deep, lasting relationships with anyone but family. Sort of a quality vs. quantity thing.