140 karma · joined May 16, 2010
In 2007, the fare for municipal busses was removes, and at the same time, more frequent trips were introduced (by 50% at day time).
The routes and schedule are managed by the City Council, the operated by the lowest bidding bus company.
So far, it has been successfull, but it had a bit of a bumpy start. The sudden increase in demand for busses, meant that there weren't enough busses to go around and some cheap, old ones were used. But the success has meant that there was a business case to upgrade the busses.
It's payed by tax payers via the Council. The Council is funded via income tax, currently at around 20%.
That was when I started writing this comment, they are back up now.
Is it just because no one has bothered to do it yet, or is there some other reason why this quite big, and frequently cited, site is not on Wikipedia?
The first time, I had one 'visited', the second time about half were 'visited'. I'm surprised not all of them were, though...
The effect this might have, if any, is to show who pretends to have/give freedom and who really has/gives it.
"Smaller companies that held patents worried that if Microsoft prevailed, it could lower the standard of proof for invalidating a patent, crippling small companies that depend on patent protection, legal experts say."
Other than patent trolls, which small (software) company benefits from (software) patents?
My friend has an iPhone. I have an Android. My friend wants to send a short message to me. Will she use iMessage? No. Email or SMS.
The difference is that it is not time base. You have to pay it all back with interest. Also, both the lender and the university are public.
Scary.
The point isn't that Linux isn't useful -- it's just that the claim that Linux is so important it should be included as a mandatory suffix any time anyone mentions "GNU" in a context that is not kernel exclusive is grating and silly.
On a more serious note, Android is a great example of a non-GNU Linux(or not-as-much-GNU Linux).
The FSF and SFLC would have the expsrtise of fighting the case, and would probably get the resources to do it too.
Every time I see a digital library service, where you can borrow a book or other media that then is deleted after certain lending period, I can't help but thinking that they are missing the point.
The time-limited lending period used by libraries is a bug. A bug that's solved by technology.
Libraries exist in order to spread knowledge and information. But they can't share their knowledge to everyone who wants it, they physically can't keep enough books or duplicate them in a timely manner. This bug has been fixed by digital technology, and we can duplicate them in a timely manner to anyone who wants it.
But some people insist on keeping the bug, and that they are doing society a favor.