It’s sort of a flawed opinion. If you’re never charging at home and doing a lot of driving, a hybrid won’t make much difference and might cost more. If you’re conscientious about charging when you can and mostly drive within range of your battery’s capacity, it can be almost as effective as full electric. Stats indicate most PHEV owners use the the same way you would use an ICE, car, which is more expensive and a bit of a waste.

I’m not sure this is the big gotcha you think it is. To serve a large population in a big relatively small area, you can easily achieve your goals with fewer, larger locations. This will allow a greater selection per location, which reduces the odds you will have to wait for the desired product to be shipped in. Moreover, land isn’t cheap in New York, whereas it may well be in smaller locales in England. Either way, a reasonable metric is cost per capita to provide services for a region, and England is only about 2/3 as expensive as New York. I suspect the cost of living is higher in New York than England, and it will certainly have an impact of the relative budgets of the two organizations. And we haven’t talked about the climate control requirements in England vs. New York because, frankly, I’m not too clear about the relative climate differences to say whether that’s a significant issue in the first place.

I think you mean the 2010 G20 summit. The 2011 summit was in Cannes.

Even the RPi, which has major Linux support has a blob for its graphics driver (at least the last time I checked). And I wouldn’t exactly say Broadcom is falling over themselves to support Linux. Qualcomm, less so.

Related to that, and a line that just stuck with me: A boat is a hole in the water that you pour money into.

I’ll remember this whenever someone says you’ll run out of things to do when you retire.

There is nothing stopping a GPL project using MIT-licensed code except for lack of desire to do the work. They are one-way compatible.

It really depends. If the contract gives ownership of the work created to the purchaser, he has no rights to it whatsoever. Moreover, trying to do a clean room implementation of your own code is almost impossible without help. A permissive license would give the purchaser unlimited use of the product, including resale while still allowing the producer unlimited use, as well. If the contract is written correctly, the producer might even retain ownership, with the right to use different licenses, while the purchaser would have few or no restrictions.

I’ll throw my opinions in here.

If you’re publishing a standard or a reference application, a permissive license makes sense. What better way to guarantee compatibility than being able to use the reference code in your product. This is what happened with the TCP/IP stack, and it was used in its original form in Windows for years.

If you’re making something that you want to build a community around, something more akin to the GPL may be more aligned with your goals. The nice part is, you can include MIT licensed projects as part of your GPL project. This means there is nothing stopping you from building your standard with a MIT license while building your community-driven application using GPL, maximizing the reach of your standard while reducing the risk to your community.

Note that either option opens you to EEE (Embrace, Extend, Extinguish), the GPL option just takes an extra step (clean room implementation of a published standard).

That’s not what “at the root” means. The guy selling himself and his country is the final part, the branch as it were. The root is the source of the money.

As for your reasoning, being able to further track intermediaries and see what else they have their fingers in is good security policy, as is sending back disinformation until such time as it becomes known the subject is compromised. Throwing these guys under the bus is usually the last step in the process.

Ideas aren’t real, either, and they’ve hurt a lot of people.

I’m perfectly aware of how it works. My whole comment was a proposed way to manage it that doesn’t assume that everyone who uses outlook wants to use MS’s cloud service just because they also happen to use Outlook. I’m not sure how you missed that.

As for emphasis, “Press fucking backspace!” has a whole lot of it. I certainly would consider that, and not your hypothetical, as actively aggressive.

My qualifier for the 200 years or more is because we have some crops that we’ve only grown extensively for a couple hundred years, and the almost is because I don’t know the details for some new world crops such as quinoa and amaranth.

Philip K. Dick would either be proud or try to kill you for reading his mind.

There are a number of antiviral medicines, some of which work against influenza A and B. I’m pretty sure these are prescription medications in Canada.

If by “a lot” you mean “nearly all commonly grown crops in the last 200 years or more”, then yes. There are very few crops we haven’t altered in our quest to feed more people with less work, and even things such as heirloom produce are just varieties that breed true (and may have been around longer than the other varieties).

I have some concerns about GMOs, mostly because we aren’t very good at it yet. When we start producing things with the behavior of cucumbers producing cucurbitacin (not a desirable trait, but highly targeted), or if we’re adding benign genes that make something produce beta carotene, I’m all for it.

If you wish to talk about critical thinking, look at your own statements with respect to mine. Not once did I say cancel thenlink attachment, but this thing I didn’t say sure got you upset. Moreover, I wasn’t writing a formal specification. I’m sorry your assuming the worst and least likely meaning of what I thought was a pretty simple statement triggered you so badly.

Then, instead of two problems, we have seven more specific problems.

Yeah, it sure does sound like it would be hard to have a notification if the attachment is going to fail due to size policies, and then have an option to use the link or cancel the attachment (and have you choose another way). It would also be unheard of for there to be a setting in that dialog to say to always do whatever action you take so it only inconveniences those who go with the default once.

User-hostile software is never a “you” problem. This applies to a number of FOSS products, as well.

Esperanto isn’t the only constructed language, and I think it is more Western-oriented, for good or ill. It does do a lot of things right within that framework, though, with certain rules that make everything explicit while removing other rules for structure that are no longer needed due to the explicit nature of the language.