I did. I interpreted as a sarcastic response to Microlith assertion that Mir isn't needed because Wayland already exists and solved the same problem.
So when I read your sarcastic remark to the sarcastic remark I interpreted that you agreed with Microlith that Mir wasn't needed.
What sealed the deal for me in the AC remark was "If Wayland is justified then so is Mir."
Your response is a combination of reductio ad absurdum:
Hell, if that's the approach you want to take, why even have a computer? It solves pretty much the same problems that pencil and paper had already solved. Why have pencil and paper? It pretty much solves the same problems cuniform tablets had already solved.
and ad hominem:
I assume you really can see the difference between a new display server and antiquated X, but maybe not. I'll chalk it up to the state of the school system in today's world.
It's very weak and emotional filled response. It makes me think you more of a Wayland fanboi who can't handle the competition than someone who has anything important to add to the conversation.
While I do think it's detracts from the efforts being made by Wayland, I don't see anything wrong with Mir's existence. We always said competition is good. We said this when Linux went against Windows, to justify the multiple desktops available (e.g. Gnome, Qt, XFCE, OpenStep, etc.) and I can see the same argument said for Mir versus Wayland.
Wayland is competing against X windows. They are offering the promise of improved performance and maintainability by jettisoning the legacy code of X. I don't see Mir any differently. I see what the AC is going for and agree. Wayland may have some of the same programmers of X, but that doesn't necessarily mean X is abandonware.
X is only network transparent if all your apps are from 1995 and are written against Motif. Everything newer than that is not network transparent, it's just shoving uncompressed bitmaps across the network in a highly inefficient wrapper protocol that makes large numbers of inefficient, lag inducing round-trips.
This is why I use NX. It solved that problem for me and I've been using X over a crappy VPN for years without the pain of plain X.
If it takes a major effort to bring water to the region for irrigation and governmental subsidies to make it financially feasible it doesn't sound like an ideal place to grow crops.
I agree with Jnaujok on this one. The problem isn't that the land was never used for farming. The problem is that the farming has grown well past the size that the area could support without involving the US Corps. of Engineers and having farm subsidies.
Efficiencies in food production are irrelevant. People talk about an "efficient" food chain to avoid discussing the real problem which is population control.
If our population growth continues unabated, we will be deforesting to grow crops to grow food instead of feed.
To eliminate meat production because of some idealized fantasy that a vegetarian life will save us all is equivalent to rearranging the deck chair on the Titanic. It may make people feel good to pursue the goal because they feel like they are solving a problem but in reality the inevitable will happen regardless.
I'm sure the overuse of water has more to do with people insisting on living in areas where there isn't enough water to sustain the population or land use than growing crops explicitly for feed.
Farms do not shut down voluntarily. If they aren't using the water to grow alfalfa then they would just use it to grow a different cash crop.
I think the report is a creative way to further the vegan agenda.
Several rail companies were offering intermodal cargo transportation (truck to rail to truck) since the 1960's.
Even FedEx and UPS use rail to transport their trailers and containers.
A 10% increase in fuel prices would have a notable impact on OTR trucking, even if it didn't substantially change my transportation habits.
Keep in mind that the OTR industry has already absorbed a fuel cost increase from $1.509/gal (2003) to $3.992/gal (2013) [source: EIA].
The educational system has turned into the educator of many trades and the master of none already.
I would argue that we teach too many subjects in high school as it is. We need to not only increase the high school graduation rates but also have the graduates have an equivalent of a 12 grade intelligence when they graduate.
What else would you expect from the TSA? Their #1 job is to justify their existence and the only way they can is by finding more "restricted items". When passengers start complying with the current set of rules, the amount of restricted items goes down. To counter this downward trend, it is TSA HQ's job to issue more directives that are designed to increase the number of confiscations and therefore increase the justification for the TSA.
Who else would keep these "dangerous" items off the plane?
I was taken aback when I heard the news. My thoughts go out to his family and friends. My understanding is that it may have been a heart attack.
You will be missed Jim. RIP.