QT has merit, and if the merit is good enough, and I think it is, it will have a strong future... just probably not with Nokia. (and yes I am a GNU/OSS/FLOSS fan boy, just not a zealot about it).
The only chance I see for Qt is a fork and a very quick community driven development of Qt for android. Only chance for mobile devices that is. For desktops it will be fine the way it is for at least two years.
You also just removed the incentive for developers to create new apps for the Symbian platform.
I just cancelled all my Qt mobile apps. No more profit in it. Fortunately I don't need them. Would just have been some nice extra income. I think I might take a look into android.
I don't care what fancy words they put on this: Qt will be canceled,
Will never officially happen. Every 12 month there will be an unimportant formal update, else Qt becomes free under BSD license. This is the last thing M$ wishes.
If it is the same device I once read about, yes, they fixed the over-heating problem.... if you like to have a siren where you plugged in the thing. AFAIK the installed a very loud fan.
Neither confused, nor trolling. Punishment simply does not work. Nobody wakes up in the morning and decides 'Hey, nice day today, I think it might be fun to get drunk and drive a bit around'. Some people just seem to be incapable to handle alcohol and cars. Higher punishments won't make much difference.
Furthermore, higher punishments might be good to punish tax evasion, or theft. The victims can, at least in theory, compensated for their loss. But how do you compensate someone who was killed by a drunk driver?
Prevention certainly is not always better than punishment if the necessary measures are out of proportion compared the possible damage. But we talking here about totally needless losses of lifes and a relatively small price to pay.
This could make the crime of drunk driving almost impossible to commit,
This fact alone makes it very unlikely that such a system will ever become mandatory. The state would dearly miss the money it makes with drunk drivers.
I object to these things because I _do not want_ them on my car.
I could not care less what you want. This is a safety mechanism not for the one behind the wheel, but for the one in front of the hood. If you don't want safety belts, I'd say this should be your own decision.
DUI should carry a one-year mandatory jail sentence. Don't want to get busted? Don't fucking drink and drive.
I agree with you. But please, the punishment after the killed innocents are brought back to life.
Geez, when I read people like you I wonder whether you are aware why dunk driving is forbidden. Just to make money for the state? To fill jails? For fun? If this is the case in your country your proposal is perfectly fine. In mine a number of ppl. is killed every year because of drunks behind a wheel. I would prefer a solution, which prevents those deaths.
1. So what? Not use something because it can be illegally tempered with? Wonder what else we wouldn't be able to use anymore.
2. You are an American? Be happy and sue manufacturer of this device.
3. Your car has a steering lock? What happens when it locks while driving? Does not happen? Why not use the same technics those devices? If you are drunk, you cannot start the car. If the car is already running it simply won't shut down.
I just wonder why are they doing it? What they claim is not some tiny effect which needs serious statistical methods to be verified or disproved. A failure to reproduce it cannot just be explained away by someone stupidly kicking the table at the wrong time.
To make up something like that comes close the to claim to have invented the perpetuum mobile.
Ages ago I have seen 'The Elegant Universe'. There was a real nice explanation of several flavours of the string theory. One of the points was that gravity is so weak compared to the other forces because part of it wanders off into neighbouring universes. If this is true, why should only our gravity wander away from us? It would be expected, that at the same time gravity from other universes would come into ours. So dark matter is simply normal matter from a neighbouring universe from which we 'see' part of its gravity footprint. We cannot see anything else because it there is nothing there in our universe.
Disclaimer: 'The Elegant Universe' was a very entertaining science documentation. Easy to understand, fun to watch, but most likely got it totally wrong. Probably as wrong as my fun theory.
Maybe, maybe not. I am not an American and only read of the most outrageous cases in the news. So maybe there is some exaggeration, though when I see other comments here and the examples therein I really doubt it. Under those circumstances why take a risk? For me it seems to be better to defend myself for non-assistance of a person in danger than to be put on such a list.
Slashdot Mirror
What's their business plan?
A difficult one since they would be stuck with the LGPL.
QT has merit, and if the merit is good enough, and I think it is, it will have a strong future... just probably not with Nokia. (and yes I am a GNU/OSS/FLOSS fan boy, just not a zealot about it).
The only chance I see for Qt is a fork and a very quick community driven development of Qt for android. Only chance for mobile devices that is. For desktops it will be fine the way it is for at least two years.
You also just removed the incentive for developers to create new apps for the Symbian platform.
I just cancelled all my Qt mobile apps. No more profit in it. Fortunately I don't need them. Would just have been some nice extra income. I think I might take a look into android.
I don't care what fancy words they put on this: Qt will be canceled,
Will never officially happen. Every 12 month there will be an unimportant formal update, else Qt becomes free under BSD license. This is the last thing M$ wishes.
Whenever I buy something online or offline, when I am asked for information, which is not relevant for die deal, I lie.
If it is the same device I once read about, yes, they fixed the over-heating problem.... if you like to have a siren where you plugged in the thing. AFAIK the installed a very loud fan.
...but I am eagerly waiting for the day when computers finally can feel real pain.
Hey, come on. Don't exaggerate. Thanks to Microsoft I have two more keys on my keyboard. So don't say Microsoft didn't improve anything.
Then, when the US Government reacts surprisingly similarly to how China reacted when one of its dissidents won, the world
Yes.
(and more importantly the US citizens)
No.
Does not make sense. If the universe really is infinite... How much bigger is infinite * 250?
Neither confused, nor trolling. Punishment simply does not work. Nobody wakes up in the morning and decides 'Hey, nice day today, I think it might be fun to get drunk and drive a bit around'. Some people just seem to be incapable to handle alcohol and cars. Higher punishments won't make much difference.
Furthermore, higher punishments might be good to punish tax evasion, or theft. The victims can, at least in theory, compensated for their loss. But how do you compensate someone who was killed by a drunk driver?
Prevention certainly is not always better than punishment if the necessary measures are out of proportion compared the possible damage. But we talking here about totally needless losses of lifes and a relatively small price to pay.
Did he actually write it? With his own hands? Or did he just will this book into existence?
/me leaning back and wait for the new religious war this highly philosophical question may start between the follower of each of this views.
:-)
This could make the crime of drunk driving almost impossible to commit,
This fact alone makes it very unlikely that such a system will ever become mandatory. The state would dearly miss the money it makes with drunk drivers.
I object to these things because I _do not want_ them on my car.
I could not care less what you want. This is a safety mechanism not for the one behind the wheel, but for the one in front of the hood. If you don't want safety belts, I'd say this should be your own decision.
I really doubt this is based on alcohol on your hands. I don't know you, but when I drink my beer, I rarely get some on my fingers.
Aren't we suppose to be the land of the free?
Interesting. A Russian /.er.
DUI should carry a one-year mandatory jail sentence. Don't want to get busted? Don't fucking drink and drive.
I agree with you. But please, the punishment after the killed innocents are brought back to life.
Geez, when I read people like you I wonder whether you are aware why dunk driving is forbidden. Just to make money for the state? To fill jails? For fun? If this is the case in your country your proposal is perfectly fine. In mine a number of ppl. is killed every year because of drunks behind a wheel. I would prefer a solution, which prevents those deaths.
1. So what? Not use something because it can be illegally tempered with? Wonder what else we wouldn't be able to use anymore.
2. You are an American? Be happy and sue manufacturer of this device.
3. Your car has a steering lock? What happens when it locks while driving? Does not happen? Why not use the same technics those devices? If you are drunk, you cannot start the car. If the car is already running it simply won't shut down.
Yeah, happens once every hundred years. People getting killed by drunk assholes happens slightly more often.
I just wonder why are they doing it? What they claim is not some tiny effect which needs serious statistical methods to be verified or disproved. A failure to reproduce it cannot just be explained away by someone stupidly kicking the table at the wrong time.
To make up something like that comes close the to claim to have invented the perpetuum mobile.
Or do they all suck these days
Ok, this is a matter of opinion, but if you ask me, I cannot think of a current series, which does not suck.
Disclaimer: 'The Elegant Universe' was a very entertaining science documentation. Easy to understand, fun to watch, but most likely got it totally wrong. Probably as wrong as my fun theory.
:-D
the vast majority of offenders fall into the "annoy/molest children" charge
No problem with 'molest' children, but what do you mean by 'annoy'? Hey you rotten kids, get off my lawn. Kid annoyed, me sex offender?
Maybe, maybe not. I am not an American and only read of the most outrageous cases in the news. So maybe there is some exaggeration, though when I see other comments here and the examples therein I really doubt it. Under those circumstances why take a risk? For me it seems to be better to defend myself for non-assistance of a person in danger than to be put on such a list.
I'll see a doctor about that the day Americans see a doctor for being extreme-paranoid about so called 'sex-offenders'.