But often setting up your own company is allowed? I suppose it depends on what you mean by often; I certainly haven't done a survey of the world to find out who allows this and who doesn't. But the US? No, you'll get deported. Same for Canada (although Canada does have a startup visa process; see http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/business/start-up/eligibility.asp).
I don't know about the US, but in many countries, you don't have to be a citizen/resident of that country in order to set up a company there. You can quite legitimately start a UK Limited company, for example, without having ever been to the UK.
Of course, if you were actually doing "work" for that company from inside the UK, that could be considered employment, you could be breaching the conditions of a visitor visa.
be a bit realistic. they won't know he is working, and most travelers do exactly that, leave after 6 months, go to some place outside the eu for a month, and then come back.
You don't have to leave the EU - just go somewhere outside the Schengen area. The UK and Ireland, for example, are outside the Schengen area and have their own immigration regime.
By spending, say, 3 months there in the middle of your adventures, you can (legitimately) extend your stay in Europe.
I only have refrence of UK which is a known hell hole for trains (the last train I took in the the UK was >3hrs late and missing 2 carriages, so packed.)
Last year, 90.9% of all trains ran on time in the UK. That figure may not be ideal, but to put it in perspective - it's far better than what most airlines achieve. I don't know how it compares to trains in the Netherlands, but I'd be surprised if it's that much worse.
This figure also varies widely between train companies, with commuter operations like London Overground, c2c, Merseyrail, and Chiltern often achieving >96% on time performance, while Long-distance routes tend to perform worse.
Since your journey was delayed by more than an hour, you may be entitled to a full refund of your fare. (Exceptions apply for situations outside the control of the train company, such as extreme weather)
It would seem that this is not an entirely new discovery - paper from 2011 here:
The only application I see is the hydro-culture vegetables/fruits here in Belgium and they already have no taste compared to real soil cultivated vegetables, and now they will get rotten egg taste?
The difference in taste you describe is probably due to varieties being bred/selected for fast growth (and shelf appearance) over taste, not the medium they're grown in.
How were they paid?
I don't get it. This can't be right. The contract isn't free, Virgin doesn't supply services for free... yet apparently, no one is paying for it except "others" after the Olympics.
The only "payment" Virgin received was in the form of rights to access tube stations and install their equipment inside.
Although the service will initially be free of charge, it'll no doubt carry some form of advertising on the login screen. Virgin have stated that it will eventually be charged for like typical WiFi services. Also, it'll be free to existing Virgin Media users, thus making Virgin services more attractive to users and benefitting their business.
No, this is not really true either. While European railways as a whole often receive some form of subsidy, High-Speed passenger services between major cities in Europe are usually very profitable. It is the less-busy regional and commuter type services that tend to receive subsidies, because it is believed that there are economic and environmental benefits in doing so.
It is true that taking the train is sometimes more expensive than flying, but this is simply because rail can command higher fares because it is more convenient. If you can save a couple of hours (and, lets face it, a lot of hassle these days with security checks and such), by taking the train then most people will.
- Booming passenger numbers drive record revenues at Virgin Trains http://mediaroom.virgintrains.co.uk/2011/08/booming-passenger-numbers-drive-record.html
- SNCF: Net profit of €588 million http://www.sncf.com/Finance/pdf/en/CP_et_Presentations/SNCF_group_HY2011_Results.pdf
- Deutsche Bahn Revenue, Profit Surged in 2010 http://www.joc.com/logistics-economy/deutsche-bahn-revenue-profit-surged-2010
i don't feel like this is a super valid comparison, unless you mention that the iPhone ran like horseshit on iOS 2 onward, and the iPhone 3G always ran poorly. now my wife's 3GS runs like butt on iOS 5. the original iPhone used the current OS until it didn't get iOS 4, so from 2007-06 to 2010-06, three years, half of which it ran poorly. you have no options for upgrading for new features even if you wanted to. the iPhone 3G used the current OS until it didn't get iOS 5, so from 2008-06 to 2011-10, three years and some change, all of which it ran poorly. you have no options for upgrading for new features even if you wanted to.
You can see the iOS 5 on 3GS benchmarks for yourself at: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4956/apple-ios-5-review/15
Secondly, the only iPhone which ever had serious performance problems with an upgrade was the 3G running on iOS 4. 1st gen and 3G iPhones all run just fine with iOS 3.x. The issue (which is admittedly very bad and a huge fuck up by Apple) with the 3G on iOS 4 is mostly due to a serious bug in Location Services which causes memory consumption to increase (and thus, performance decrease) over time. So a fresh iOS 4 install on a 3G starts out pretty decent but after a few weeks it gets slower and slower until, eventually, it becomes unusable.
In reality, many areas with relatively low population/phone density can probably be covered by a macro network and high density areas - shopping malls, apartment buildings, university campuses will need to be covered by femto or pico cells.
Sure - there'll always be a mix of small and large cells. But most of London is "high density areas". And it can be very difficult/expensive to find good sites to put full sized cell towers. If you can put many smaller cells inside buildings etc, just like WiFi stations, then it'll probably save the carriers a lot of money.
AT&T is a bit like the liquid metal terminator from Terminator 2. You can break it into little pieces, but somehow, eventually, it'll find a way to reassemble itself and become a monopoly again.