I actually agree with you, though it's apparently due to Twitter's objection to Twitpic's trademark *application*.

You'd think Twitter would just use the system the way it was designed to, and object to Twitpic's trademark application (it actually seems like they have), and even possibly fight AFTERWARDS (if it is granted) for it to be revoked, due to the confusion it is actually causing.

Twitter seems to be doing a "we don't like what you're doing, so making you unable to continue".

That's why I specifically said "for people who want that functionality".

I can see wanting your sprinkler system online -- to change it from your couch.. or heck, even from somewhere else (not everyone has automatic rain sensors).

The common "fridge keeps track of what you have in it" idea would be great if it ALSO coordinated with the local grocery store ads that week..

Umm, the "Internet of things" doesn't NEED "modern Internet speeds". Does your fridge or your sprinkler system or whatever need high speed? No, it just "needs" (for people who want that functionality), some kind of comparatively dirt slow communication path.

That's not an argument FOR IPv4 directly, just that your "modern Internet speeds" argument directly doesn't necessarily justify throwing away decades' worth of hardware that is providing people functionality.

As long as you're replacing the "DNA" of the Internet, wouldn't replacing SMTP be a better thing to start with? (To prevent spam, or at least untraceable spam?)

Your humor will be a Bonanza.

I know, that's why I made that analogy.

But that doesn't really make sense.

Lets say someone wants Netflix access, but doesn't use it that much (a couple shows a week).

They need the bandwidth, but don't need all that much total data. They can't choose a lower bandwidth, since then that would mean not getting HD quality, or not even being able to get it at all.

But isn't this technically not "spillage at the bottling plant", but "packaging removed by the delivery men"? So it's almost spillage on your front door...

That is, you're paying for the full weight of the package, including the container.. But when they deliver it, they remove the container and take it away.. So you did pay for delivery of the container, you just don't have it anymore..?

Alpine actually is pretty overgrown.

1) email
2) usenet
3) editor (I believe much of the code is shared with pico, but I don't think it launches a separate pico, e.g. for editing headers)
probably does more that I can't even think about.. But because it has the built in friendly behaviors AND ability to use various supplemental things (e.g. external editor), it does seem to me to sort of be outside of the "do one very specific thing well".

and again, I like it, partially BECAUSE of it being "a better UNIX app citizen", IMHO.

OK, I guess I am sort of answering my own question.. Checking the wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

it's the init process. That page also describes that a bunch of other stuff was merged into it.

I have no idea who this is, but on the 2nd page of the quoted article, there is this quoted:

Mike Gancarz sums up the Unix philosophy:

1) Small is beautiful.
2) Make each program do one thing well. ..and a bunch more...

The funny thing is, I agree with those in theory... but in actual practice (yes, I'm alluding to the cliche), pine/alpine is one of the best UNIX programs around.. it's "friendly" (unlike most UNIX programs), but ALSO configurable as heck for those of us who can't stand to use its defaults (e.g. its built in editor)... and you can just move the binaries around, unlike most UNIX programs.. So it's basically a big huge program, comparatively.

(trn's another example of a huge program that does a lot of things well.)

True, but if you limit yourself to the 'average' commute your range is going to be too short for half of commuters, never mind if they need to divert somewhere without charge opportunity.

Actually, I said over double the average commute. Though we're also confusing median and mean, I admit I don't recall which the stat was (I've quoted it in previous EV threads -- from various sites, including government studies).

Are you driving a pure EV or a strong hybrid? I'm thinking a leaf?

Smart electric. About the same range as a Leaf, IIRC. My car usually says about 62 or 63 miles range when it's full, though the federal stat is 68 miles, IIRC. Anecdotally, even though mine says 62 or 63 miles, it is being very conservative, because e.g. I can go 20 miles, but the range estimate has only gone down 15 miles. I have noticed that many times on my one long drive weekly to a friend's house.

Yeah, $2K for free energy forever _for someone who has convenient access to a supercharger_ seems like an incredibly great deal.

I admit I'm using "gas price equivalents" here...
I drive a short distance, but even I would put in over $30 of gas more often than every 2 weeks in my car with a small tank..

That's around 2.5 years payback, and I'm lowballing some of those numbers.

Hint: Paragraphs.

OK, so you're basically unwilling to live within the system, so you're not getting a margin acct. You do realize you're not liable for anything more than $50 (and the credit card companies usually waive that) in fraudulent charges, right?

I'm not sure if he reviews all different types of batteries, but "NLee the Engineer" reviews tons of rechargeable batteries (and other stuff, as you'll see at the link) at Amazon, and he seems to really know his stuff.

Basically, after you've found what you're looking for, his reviews seem to be very knowledgeable. He'll knock bad products and give good reviews to good ones.

His link:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/p...

BTW, France also has admitted that even reprocessing fuel from thermal reactors doesn't make economic sense.

Can you provide a citation? I thought that with the proper type of reactor, the reprocessing step was basically economically neutral, but of course environmentally useful.