It might still be cheaper than some kind of elaborate ad with a lot of actors, scenes and stuff, and even have lesser environmental impact (one laptop is much less waste than, say, flight to some distant place to take the shots for an ad). So, yes, it can actually make sense.
But still, I just don't like the culture which shows that it's perfectly ok to smash and destroy stuff just for pleasure and marketing. Imagine that they would blend people in the show. Can't we have some respect for our machines as well?
The only time when I had a bad feeling about such an email was when I felt that I got positive feedback during the interview, got no "warning" signs during it and so on, yet on the other day, I was told almost exactly this.
Otherwise, it's quite ok. Make it short, who wants to read ton of shit just to hear no? If you can list one (or more) serious reason (lack of experience, education, whatever, once, I was told that I was simply too pesimistic, but that was on phone), fine, but still, keep it short. And well, don't expect much feedback.
There is almost nothing to get off the ground yet… Running meego on some cheap netbook is meaningless, I can put anything there and I'm going to use it in the same way, I want some tablet or smartphone form device.
No, it doesn't work this way, bidders compete on criteria that are part of the bid announcement, like price, local jobs and offsets, technical parameters and so on (oh, sure, corruption too, sometimes, but that's another story). This sound overly paranoid and pessimistic.
Aim of a transit authority isn't to get most of the metal back, but to dispose the vehicles as cheaply as possible. To conform with environmental regulations, labor safety, etc., is quite expensive. That's why you can find so many old German trams across the eastern Europe. German authorities eagerly "sold" their old trams for pretty much any cost (like 1 euro and pick-up), rather than scrap them, which would cost money and not bring that enough in scrap.
Indeed. It's mostly an article about Warsaw getting some new subway cars[1], which isn't particularly interesting vehicle (well, it is, but they are so much same for anyone outside the engineering/railfan world), so they had to come up with some catchy headline… Most subway cars in the world are "recyclable" in the same manner (and perhaps even efficiency). I don't see anything very special here, it seems to be just a modern lightweight subway car, made mostly from aluminium.
[1] Not interesting enough to make it to HN, IMHO.
Anything coming from people significantly older than me, who are still talking about how they wanted to live their lives 20 or 30 (even 40) years ago, in a world completely different from the current one.
Sure, but it can at least timeout, reutrn EIO, seamlessly reconnect when the connection is reestablished and few other remedies (you can't really do anything else, if this happens), something that I've never managed to make sshfs do properly.
I have never managed to make sshfs properly handle network problems (at least as well as NFS), especially after suspend & resume, I'd quite too often end with unusable machine where half of all desktop apps are hanging on some blocking syscall via that sshfs, that will _never_ timeout. Also, sshfs is quite inefficient. It's main advantage is being almost setupless, both client- and serverside. But you don't need that if you want to permanently mount your servers somewhere. I think that properly setting up NFS is worth it, in your case.
Nope, but it'd be simply very useful to have at least some option to show file selector when I can put file path in my filesystem, because quite often I have that much more readily available than some option to drag and drop the file.
Is there any other way to drop a picture? Even though drag & drop seems to be the easiest and most comfortable way, for me, it is not :-) I'd have to run some kind of file manager, find the directory, image, carefully position both file manager window and the browser, do the job and then put everything back. Surprisingly hard, but that's a real setup that I have (and many people I know too).
What I actually want is my own apartment in a decent building (like, hm, the one where the architect paid some attention even to "details" like accoustic isolation) somewhere in a decent part of some decent city, not some detached bunker in a wilderness, or (even worse) house in some infinitely stretched suburbia. Sometimes, I do want to meet people, and it's great if it can be done with ten minute walk or 15 minutes of subway ride or something. I even kind of enjoy crowds at city squares, busy walking street and so on. I don't want to live alone, without a human being within tens of kilometers. That's not even practical and makes little sense.
And I don't like the idea of this thread below this at all. I even think it's very much a part of the problem, not its solution. Of course, it's happening, all the time, people moving from "ugly" and crowded city, somewhere to a "countryside" (yet near the city). And that's why I can't go anywhere outside the city, because there ceased to be any outside, just ring after ring of satelite villages, and roads between them. It had also turned the city into just a little more than a large parking place...
I do that quite often, but never alone (I'd creep out while while staying in a tent at night alone with idea, that there might be bears nearby, even if it sounds funny). And it cannot be done frequently enough, over months... four or five days are already enough.
I wish this was a problem. What is completely missing (at least in my life) is offline "downtime" and solitude. People in large openspace in the office, crowded tram, crowded shop, people everywhere in the park, people around my favourite walking trail, and of course, roommates, everywhere. There's no escape, no opt-out, no nothing. It actually drives me mad.
What about performance? Despite all the criticism of X server, Linux framebuffer (out of the box) usually tends to be at least ten times worse than anything X server can offer on the same machine.
The video doesn't answer the crucial question -- will it still offer some protection from the rain? If not, what's the point, you can just fold it down :-)
There is only one thing on the list that is not completely obvious -- dmoz still matters. Is it possible? Sure, it's a valuable list of sites touched by a lot of care and bureaucracy, but does anybody who wasn't online 10 years ago know about it?
Xmonad core doesn't provide any kind of X11 encapsulation and convenience interface, every single xmonad extension, any piece of configuration, can (and does) directly use X11, both API and behavior. After all, it's an X11 window manager. You have to rewrite everything.
There is nothing preventing any application to connect to another X display and push all its windows there, even if the original display session terminates. Emacs can sort of do that, for example, and there are some traces that something like that was intended even for GTK. But no application actually work in such conditions.
Well, it's an X server, in fact :-) It uses the parts of X server that were moved to the kernel in the last year or two (KMS, large part of graphic drivers). Wayland itself is very small, you can look into the source code to find anything you want to know, it's all there, easy to find.
That's the good thing, perhaps, breaking that large and ugly X thing into small parts that we can easily understand, check, improve. I'm very glad of this and it's a great improvement. But it's still just a part, this whole idea that Ubuntu is ditching X server is so frightening. It's not happening, instead, they are breaking X into small parts, improving them, not having to deal with the insanely large X stack at once. Finally cleaning that large outdated codebase and so on.
But. If you see it as 'we're getting rid of X11 completely, not coming back again', you are going to repeat every mistake made in the last 20 years. I'm afraid that's exactly what Shuttleworth and his minions are going to do :(
Not really, it's a fraction of the basic functionality of bash, which is not to be learned from a mosaic of random blogposts, but from something more complete. If you want something "more special", try, for example, Unix Power Tools book.
Cities sprinter should be lighter ("just" 100 tons), it's directly derived from the Siemens Eurosprinter line, which are 4-axle locomotives, and in Europe, locomotive heavier than 22.5 or so tons per axle would be almost useless. Even that is very heavy (ES engines weight about 85 tons), and a typical European EMU (locomotives are fading out of the favor in Europe, for anything else than freight, and rightly so) are even lighter (50 to 60 tons per carriage). Anyway, cities sprinter is heavier because of an additional armor required by the US regulations and it needs a lot of power (it has output of 6.4 megawatts, imagine that). Perhaps you could make a battery car to (very slowly and so-so) finish the trip from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh. But you really can't expect that it'd be viable to equip a main line electric locomotive with batteries. And making it even heavier is a bad choice too, as that would (especially at higher speeds, above 160 km/h, and this engine is perfectly capable of 200 km/h trips, common in Europe) put an immense wear on the infrastructure (everywhere the locomotive is used), making it, in the long run, cheaper to just electrify the line (which is what should be done).
I hope that chart and visualization makers will get the memo. It's insane to try to distinguish some nearly identical (to me) colors in a legend of some silly line chart. And that's simply way too common.