This is really funny, since this is just the transcription of their daily business practice, so your experience shold have told you earlier. But only now do people see it, after years of Apple behaving this way, people still cramming to get into the apple-bottom, who are you to blame apple for actually write it down?
always looking up would be extremely bad for ergonomics that's true.
Buying a small laptop is great, because I think laptops are there for mobility, so small = easier to carry = better. But the resolution height decreases with physical height. Thinkpads achieve 900 pixels in height. But i want to code in there!
What I've noticed is, that it bothers me writing on my laptop keyboard while staring at my external screen. I find it more comfortable having the keyboard right beneath of what Im typing.
I guess I should have mentioned that I have a Bluetooth mouse(the magic mouse, I love the scrolling on this so much that I can live without two separate buttons.) and a ps/2 to USB adapter for my Microsoft keyboard. It's like I am on a desktop but I can take it to go. I would love to have 3 monitors but I might go with a 30" in the future to mitigate that desire.
I don't even know why this site is promoted here? HN, this is how you lose your readers.
You see, the truth is that the U.S. government now owes more dollars than actually exist. If the U.S. government went out today and took every single penny from every single American bank, business and taxpayer, they still would not be able to pay off the national debt. And if they did that, obviously American society would stop functioning because nobody would have any money to buy or sell anything.
The last sentence makes me laugh and stopped me from reading any further. The only thing thats obvious here is that the author hasn't any clue about economics.
It's not good to have debt above 100% of GDP, sure. It means that working that debt off takes more than 100% of GDP. So it takes more time or/and more effort to get rid of it.
That article is bs. The purpose of this article should be clear by looking at the pages it links to: Emergency Food, Home Security, Alternative 'more secure' investments... come on HN! #2 on the front page? really???
Actually I think a big dentist-center would be a cool thing. Less money wasted on competition, easier ways for patients to get a specialists opinion if needed, cheaper access to supply, more efficient use of dental technicians / staff in general.
I guess the scale of centralization is the real question.
After reading the posts on HN a while, I've came across a lot of articles, that where about the ineffectiveness of interactions between people (e.g. 'the 10 startup-mistakes to avoid'). Just because more people working on something or investing more money on an issue, doesn't make their aim more intelligent. Neither their way of approaching it.
Considering a society, we allready have an entity that has to be maneuvered in the least stupid way possible. Adding new entities to that process doen't help if it creates new layers of hierachy. It's a matter o preferences I think: Is it for the 'greater good' (thing at the top of hierarchy) or is the greater good to serve the smallest entity (i.e. a human being).
Equating corporations with humans could deprive humans of their liberties, since corporations can speak, cry and lie louder. If the law is there to protect our liberties, I don't see how this aim is archieved more effectively by putting additional entities/hierarchies (i.e. corporations) in between.
I think it is kind of rediculous. Who's going to jail, if a corporation as a "person" robs, steals, beats or even kills? A Personhood is not only constituted by its acts, but also by it's intentions, the way it's intentions are created and least but not last: The way it suffers / can be punished.
I think it’s a useful concept. Let me try to convince you of that: nearly everything we do requires corporations. A human alone cannot possibly get his opinions heard without help from other humans. In the end we really need corporations. We might to often have that wrong picture in our minds when thinking of freedom of speech, of the noble thinker, alone in his room, writing down his opinion and the government anxious to shut him down. That’s probably not how it ever worked.
You need a publisher, you need an ISP. The government might very well grant you freedom of speech. If they can limit the rights of corporations however they damn well please that freedom of speech is not worth very much.
Corporations are how humans do stuff. Corporations are important. Corporations have to be protected from the government.
You're right. I have to agree with you on that. And I may haven't been clear enough, about what my problem is with awarding personhood to corporations.
I think that you can't judge corporations the way you can judge humans. You have to apply a different "personhood" to a company, since corporations are not natural. They don't consist of what a human being consists, but of what human beings contributed to that consistence.
Yes, I think they are different. Personhood is a useful concept but – I guess I’ll have to agree with you – only to a point. I would argue that corporations should have rights, yet not necessarily always the same ones persons have. It’s quite obviously complicated :)
After filling out their form all I got was an SQL Error. This must be some secret-ops-CIA-type of Company...
But if this thing works, it is exactly what I'v been looking for over the last years.
IdeaPaint got me hoping. Their idea: Paint your wall with whiteboard color. The Problem is: You can't enter the room with the painted wall for a couple of days until its dry. Some students foundet the company, because during their time on campus they felt whiteboards were rediculous expensive. So they dropped this product on the market, for the exact same amount of money per whiteboard-m²... but its so easy! Ah I forgot, you have to paint your wall...
hmm.. I'm not so sure if the author is right. If you're building one-time projects, I think he's right. But if you are building large apps that are constantly improved, you can't forecast what features must be added and what features you must get rid off. So it's all about designing your code, in a way that makes sure, that it's easy to change afterwards.
I don't think there's really such a thing as a "one-time project". It is very rare that you would create a piece of software in its entirety with no variation from your original design or conception of the software, and then never revisit or change it. As soon as you start modifying or maintaining software, you are in a position where your up-front design decisions may hinder your efforts to improve or add features.
With one-time projects I've meant products like a micro-page that a customer wants for some ad-campaign an then after some weeks have passed nobody will ever visit again.
But I agree, anything more than that is destined to be modified one day.
I think there are two things about the internet, that are pissing off newspapers.
1. Power-Loss
Newspapers do not dominate public discussions any more. This is nothing new and the melting adrevenues are just proving the pint to all those few that didn't already knew it.
2. Being forced to be engaged
Newspapers still have a chance, because quality still matters. The question is how to organize a profitable quality-producing workflow. There's no ultimate answer yet, but for the publishers it is already humiliating enough to be forced to do anything (see point 1).
Reading the article raises an old question: When will we be able to retrieve the power from a hurricane? Let the thunderstorm occur and using the [YET-TO-INVENT]-technique, to power our civilization for... let's say a year.
The problem, as always, is energy storage. It's the real bottleneck. Batteries don't have a high energy density, they wear out quickly, they're heavy, and they cost a lot of energy and material to build.
If we could package up the energy coming out of some hurricane-powered turbines, store it up for a year, and ship it around the country cheaply... yeah, our energy worries would be a lot fewer. Especially if the same technology could be applied to solar grids in Arizona.
The problem with a hurricane, of course, is that you get a lot of energy but you get it all at once. You can store a lot of energy in a tree, but you can't turn a tree's worth of energy into a tree in five minutes. You'd rather that the energy trickle in over time, so that you have time to capture it.
Does anyone know - or know how to figure out - how much power is 'stored' at any given time in the globe's power transmission lines?
Intuitively, this must be a pretty huge amount - basically 1x the global power consumption at any given instant?
Anyone know if there's any/much spare capacity, that could actually be used as a massive distributed battery?
