hackbinary

Thanks for this. This is awesome! I have been wanting to monitor my car, and was wondering this in the last couple of months.

I'm pretty dissapointed with the news coverage of Nimoys death. He died of "chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)." This is what the media reported, but it means almost nothing to me, and probably to most people. It turns out this condition is generally, but not always, caused by smoking, or have been a smoker.

Not one of the stories I have seen so far gives even a brief description of COPD.

We spend many billions on fighting terrorism, and on fighting 'crime', but most of will die of cancer, lung, or heart deceases.

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/chronic-obstructive-pulmonary-d...

Is there a way I can help?

Anyone know if they fixed the broken dlna?

The point of having tapered rates is well established as being progressive and fair. Governments do this with income tax. The basic premise is that $1 means more to a person with an income of $10,000 per year, compared to a person with an income of $100,000, or a $1,000,000. It therefore follows that developers earning less money are not as able to pay as those earning higher incomes. A flat rate favours bigger developers.

If Apple wants to promote diversity, then they should have a progressive system, and lower the barrier to smaller developers.

This actually may prove to increase Apple revenues ultimately by helping smaller developers stay in the game over the long term because their business would not have been otherwise viable.

Adding income tiers is not that more complex.

I saw the title, and thought it was rather philosophical:

How 'big' is zero? Can zero be quantified? If it can, then how come zero divided by is zero, but anything divided by zero is undefined?

I think it is time for another trip out west, California, baby!

Most furnaces, perhaps all, in the Canada and the US use an 18V control circuit. Close the circuit, the furnace is on.

In the UK, the control circuit is on the mains; close the circuit, the furnace is on.

Is this not the modern version of a government monitoring library records, and people's reading history?

http://www.globalissues.org/article/409/us-librarians-see-bi...

http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/ifissues/fbiyourlibrary

I'm in favour of space and scientific exploration as the next guy, but it is incorrect to equate basic sanitation and education with a welfare state. It seems pretty obvious to me that providing everyone with clean water and sanitation will have far greater economic (and social) impact than giving a very small number people access to very advanced technology.

India has some of the worst sanitation conditions in the world. You and I take clean drinking water and sewage treatment for granted.

There is a pretty strong case that educating women, giving women control of their reproductive systems, and giving women good hygiene, sanitation, and toilet facilities is the best possible way to lift populations out of poverty.

http://www.iamin.in/en/mumbai-north/news/mumbai-ranks-second...

http://www.globalpartnership.org/education

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/half-the-sky/economic-emp...

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/01/09/3138901/rubio-ma...

http://www.globalpovertyproject.com/our-policy-focus/

http://www.unwater.org/worldtoiletday

http://www.wateraid.org/uk/what-we-do/the-crisis/women

Perhaps you could anonymize the data?

I suppose I could do this:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=l...

with bing:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=log+analyzer&qs=AS&sk=AS4&pq=lo...

or with duckduckgo:

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=log+analyzer

:D

Although it turns out he's not.

My central point, as a percentage of GDP, the French economy spends 11.9% on healthcare in aggregate. The French system is user pay, government refund, based on means. The US spends 17.9%. The better question is why does the American Healthcare industry occupy such a large fraction of the American economy? It is especially interesting 47% of that figure is private spending, and that 53% is government spend. Canada has nearly 30% private spend on its healthcare, France 22%, Britain 16%. Per capita, the States spends the 4th largest amount. In very broad terms it seems to me that Americans are getting bad value for money for their healthcare system.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jun/30/healthc...

Yes, exactly. Similarly old people get screwed by the public Education system. And publicly funded universities and colleges.

The US spends 17.9% of its GDP on Healthcare. The UK by contrast spends 9.6%. (Canada is 11.3%) I read another article that says the US has 2.2 administrative workers per office based physician, Canada is 1.1.

It just seems to me that the 'Private' system that many Americans insist is better than the 'Public' systems that the rest of the 1st world is simply not the case.

I think that if you either are fantastically rich, or work for a company like Microsoft, then the average person is better off with public healthcare system of a 1st world economy (or Cuba).

Hope I don't appear defensive with this, but I don't think I ever came close to suggesting that 'the UK NHS and Health Canada are without problems' and that for you to suggest the issues they have are more significant than the issues facing American healthcare is totally disingenuous. Simply put, all users of the health care system from unemployed worker right up to the Royal family have access, and use the same system.

I have significant (anecdotal) experience with the American, French, Canadian (BC), and British (England and Scotland) systems with family and friends with geriatric, orthopaedic, and oncology care. I can tell you definitively that you are better off anywhere but the USA. The care that was/is given in the Canada, the UK, and France was excellent. It seemed to us that only thing that mattered in the States was who was going to pay the bills.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jun/30/healthc... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19317991

My point is that the US is spending extra-ordinarily amounts of money on healthcare system which is not universal, nor free at the point of delivery. Obama did want to put in a national healthcare system, but the opposition was just too much, so ACA was the best compromise that his administration could get through congress.

There was so much disinformation put out about nationalised healthcare systems. My favourite was the people in the States where being told that Canadians and Britons where not allowed to choose their doctors.

Overtime American healthcare costs should come down as people who where previously excluded from the American Healthcare system get treatment and advice for non-acute conditions. Before ACA, they would have had to wait until the conditions where serious enough for Emergancy treatment.

... the most expensive possible way to provide coverage is through emergency room visits, ...

By which time a generally very treatable condition has become acute, and then very expensive to treat no matter what.

Except the US spends $8,362 per person per year. The UK spends $3,480 per person per year. http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jun/30/healthc...

Young, healthy people will get screwed by any mandatory government healthcare system, but my view in general is that having strong government oversight of healthcare is just a good thing. With reference to this Guardian article, the US spends $8,362 (Private individuals, Government, and insurance combined) per person. Contrast that to the UK which spends $3480 per person. While I hate paying taxes just as much as the next person, I do think I get very good value for money for my National Health Service.

Universal healthcare is just a good thing.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jun/30/healthc...

Will the addition of this fresh water do anything to mitigate the acidification (because of dissolved CO2) in the oceans, or are we screwed here as well?

It seems to me that Google hired the Gnome Dev (team) that screwed up the Gnome 2.x GUI.

It was largely Matthew Boulton who fought Watt's patent battles. Edward Bull worked for Watt and then attempted to rip off Watt's steam engine designs. Watt's key insight was a separate condenser, which made the steam engine much more efficient. Watt and Boulton's license fee was 1/3 of the coal saved from using the Newcomen Engine.

Watt was not commercially successful until he met Boulton, and it is interesting to note that Watt also faced a patent problem. James Pickard had a patent for a crank to convert reciprocating motion to rotational power. Pickard wanted to simply cross license their respective patents, however with Watt's being significantly more valuable, Watt simply designed an alternate solution, sun and planet gear.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watt

W00t, llvm support!

Or the UK NIN / National Insurance Number.

No, not since 2009 apparently.

Some in the tech community enjoy watching sport. As well, for those who are in the tech community who do not follow sport, it is good for them to be tangentially aware of major sporting events, so they can engage with co-workers and colleagues at more social level.

For instance I enjoy building Ardiuno and Raspberry Pi gadgets on the weekends, but most of my co-workers would rather be watching rugby. Knowing the outcome of the tournament is a social norm at my office, and not knowing the outcome would, while not a taboo, would make me seem socially awkward.

Now, 14 years later, we have ugly black boxes.

This, a thousand, million times +1.

I try to use sites without ad-blockers, but invariably some site has some poorly written, or insecure (a la yahoo), that takes over your computer.

I don't mind ads so long as they are unobtrusive and don't waste my processor cycles with stupid animations.

This is what happens to libraries that are under the direct administration of governments. This is certainly a form of editorial control and censorship. Libraries, like the media, courts, and universities should be separated, independently run and administered from government.

Just to be clear, when I lived in Canada, I never thought Canadian milk or cheese expensive, nor did I feel that "luxury" dairy products, mostly imported cheeses, where out of reach. With the ongoing problems that Britain has with their 'unregulated' dairy industry, perhaps how the Canadians are managing their dairy industry is better. Even the lack of regulation is a form of regulation.