One question to bear in mind when doing this sort of thing: just because it works in SPICE doesn't mean it's going to work as intended when you build it. SPICE is very ideal world. That may or may not invalidate this approach.
Source: several years of arguing with SPICE in a professional capacity.
Unfortunately using SPICE pretty much requires knowing exactly how it works so that you understand it's limitations. In turn, this makes it hard to learn, especially for students.
Strangely enough I get the same from £1.75 T-shirts off Amazon and they fit better and last 4 years longer than the expensive Gieves and Hawkes (tailored) shirts I had a few years ago...
I think this is all YMMV territory and subject to mystique like wine tasting, watches (jewellery class watches) and crazy expensive HiFi products.
We have definitely found that more expensive doesn't mean a better fit. Because every person is shaped differently, what fits great for me will almost certainly not fit as well on someone else. And being more expensive doesn't solve that problem.
We use over 14 dimensions for each of our shirts, so that every person who orders from us has a great fit.
If you can find off-the-rack shirts you love at a lower cost, I think that's an awesome option. However, I can say personally I've never found anything off-the-rack I like as much as my custom stuff (both pre-MTailor and now while doing MTailor), because it fits better, especially in my shoulders, waist and the length of the shirt.
T-shirts are generally stretchy, so they don't need to be custom-made to your body size.
From personal experience: I can buy ready-to-wear shirts, but the armholes are slightly larger than necessary, and there's always excess fabric around the waste, which means it bunches up when tucked in. Some places have choices of regular/slim/extra-slim, but even extra-slim is a bit baggy for me.
When I wear a well-fitting shirt (either custom-made, or one where I've used my sewing machine to take in the sides), the shirt doesn't look better. _I_ look better.
I too would do the same if drafted for national service. I'd rather sit in a prison than fight because someone told me to. I'd defend my country at the border but nothing more. If I don't have that choice I'd rather not fight.
In the UK, we have a nut job politician[1] who recently tried to bring national service back. There are several crackheads trying to roll this back in periodically sponsored by the likes of Help the Heroes, Clarkson, Daily Mail, The Sun and a rather moronic populous. It's all propaganda driven by the armed forces themselves and utterly sickening to watch service glorified like it is.
One of the 'advantages' of national service is that it spreads the cost of war more equitably to the country. For that reason I support it. I was of the right age to have gone to Iraq or Afghanistan. Many of my friends did. I actually considered joining at a couple points.
My parents were very much in favor of the wars. They also were 100% adamant that I could not join the military.
With national service, that choice doesn't really get to get made. I feel that over the last 10+ years, the wars were out of sight and out of mind for a lot of people because their kids weren't at risk. I feel like the questions would have been a lot harder on the gov't if we still had a draft going on.
Interestingly, the US armed services absolutely 100% do not want the draft. They get less oversight without a draft. The all volunteer force is higher quality and there are fewer issues with people going AWOL, and people are more likely to stick around so training costs are lower. I think the people that don't want a draft are those that could be drafted (totally understandable, I wouldn't actually want to go to a war myself), and those that like their wars without having to deal with the costs.
I find it frightening that people support slavery because of vague and unsupported ideas about how it will influence public opinion.
I can kind of sort of understand the people who say that the draft should be used for national defense when fighting a critical war. I disagree, but I can see their point of view. But I can't understand at all the idea that we should force every person of a certain age (I'm assuming we won't leave women out anymore) into involuntary servitude because it might get people to think more carefully about waging war.
Yeah it would be great if nobody agreed to commit any violence ever.
But until that point, it's nice to have some soldiers on our side who can liberate your country if the other side does decide to fight, or special forces to rescue you if you get kidnapped in a failed state by some people who decide to fight. And let's hope they're intelligent, disciplined, responsible and care about your life.
It's at the forefront of people's minds at the moment so it is written and posted about frequently and people are interesed in historical articles as a baseline.
It's good that we're thinking like this. It's simply critical thinking.
Perhaps not yet but they have amassed all the data the author describes and much more.
For example, I just drove half way across the UK. Google knows that because I was using Google maps.
I stopped at Pizza Hut. Google knows that.
I stopped at a BP garage. Google knows that.
I searched for houses in an area in the UK via right move. Google knows that because the embedded map knows my Google cookie...
And so forth...
Now I'm not saying they have done any evil but perhaps it's fair to consider that the past doesn't always hold true in the future and by then you've already hung yourself.
Edit: why down vote facts? Someone work at Google?
Google doesn't specifically know you stopped at Pizza Hut or the BP garage. It uses coarse location (GPS being too taxing on battery to get constant location updates) which has an accuracy of 100+ meters. So it would know you stopped somewhere around the Pizza Hut, but not specifically that you went inside. Could have just as easily gone to the Tesco next door.
Actually yes it does know I stopped at both of those location.
1. The BP garage has a wireless AP with a known SSID to them. Location services uses this, the cell network and the GPS to build an accurate location. There are no other wireless networks at that location. I was at this location for around 10 minutes. Google location history shows this location on the mark.
2. They know that I was at the Pizza hut because I left a review in Google+ and was approximately near it at the time and stayed in roughly the same location for about 90 minutes. Google location history shows this location on the mark.
It's all about correlating events and data, not specifically accurate bits of data.
Granted these are all assumptions but they would stand as evidence in a court of law.
Now I'm not fussed about this myself as it's something I trade for the service, but the data is there.
I don't agree with gp's dismissal, but the point about gps and coarse location was that continuously updating gps (for full 3m resolution) would be too taxing on the batteries -- not that gps resolution was poor.
Don't think that applies if parent was using google maps to navigate, though -- how useful would navigation be without correct and updated position? Not to mention wi-fi location, correlation with plus posts/check-ins etc...
You didn't explain how they knew about the PH/BP, which makes people assume it was due to location data (like your first example).
However, as for comment #1, Google doesn't use the SSIDs to determine locations on mobile, they use the [MAC Addresses](http://static.googleusercontent.com/media/www.google.com/en/...). They do have a database that also includes SSIDs for these MAC addresses, but there could be a dozen SSIDs around you at any given time, and you could be at any one of those businesses. I have already explained that Google uses coarse location to determine your location, not fine because of battery issues (and you can check this in Android, it's listed under the lower-power location use). Coarse doesn't use GPS, and its accuracy is generally 100+ meters because of this. It will know the general area you were at (and, no, it won't know you were there for 10 minutes, as it only picks up your location at fixed intervals which IIRC is above 10 minutes), but it won't know, specifically, where you were in that area.
I will concede on the Pizza Hut location, but it would have only known you were there because of the review, not because of the location (for the same reason as above).
I purposely avoided explaining it to demonstrate a point: the average user doesn't know this or understand it. They understand the outcome only.
Sorry, you are 100% correct with the SSID vs MAC. If I'm in my car with the handset externally powered, does it use course location or does it use all three sources because on KitKat on my Moto G, it gives me the option to use all three at cost of battery life?
I disagree with your assessment of the location ability. It's definitely better than you explain it. I can go through at least 100 previous data points in my history and it's spot on each time.
The way Google gets your approximate location is not as simple as just sending Google a list of visible access points and figuring out where the Google Maps car was when it saw that access point, it also passes along the signal strength of every access point and because the Street View car is recording signal strength and GPS location for every measurement as it's driving by it allows for a much finer resolution than just a binary "can I see this access point".
Basically, even though there was a dozen access points visible, that increases accuracy, not decreases. Like if your phone reported that it's got the same signal strength for BP and PH it will estimate that you are in between them with other access points helping to conclude that you aren't off to the side otherwise the signal strength to xyz access point would be higher.
In other words, Just sending a list of access points and signal strengths to Google gives them a rather accurate guess as to where you are in the world, much greater than just 100+ meters.
Also, Android can also figure out when you are in a car moving at highway speeds thanks to the accelerometer and is quite accurate at telling when you're walking, jogging, biking, or driving. Enable Google Now on your phone and it will send you a summary of how many miles of what activity you've done in the last month with rather surprising accuracy for me personally.
You haven't explained why Google wouldn't know about PH/BP.
In Apple's implementation which I do know well the WiFi triangulation is enabled even at the coarsest resolution. Which is obvious since it is low cost. So if indeed there is one SSID/MAC in the area and it is coming from BP why would Google not know this ?
The presence of a SSID isn't indicative that you went to said business. If I lived above a McDonalds, Pizza Hut, and Subway, all with their respective SSIDs, that doesn't mean I am at any of the businesses. So sure, Google could know that there's a Pizza Hut near you, but they have no way of knowing whether you're actually at the Pizza Hut, or, say, the Tesco next door.
I think 100m is the best they can guarantee. You may get better results based on the data they have in your area (especially WiFi triangulation), but it's not guaranteed. In any case, the best they have for me is: http://imgur.com/vVbqSvr which is coarse enough to not actually provide much data. I could have been to any one of a dozen or so businesses in that area.
Funny thing though - Google could easily blow all those Endomondo et al. "share my running" apps out of the water by just allowing to publicly share a time-delimited subset of your location history...
No kidding, any Maps user can see their GPS location being collected when they use Maps. I think mynameisvlad may mean they wouldn't necessarily know if you stopped at a specific place as part of the location data collected when you're not using Maps, because in that case it may not use GPS. But I have a nice phone, battery life isn't really a concern to me, some software on the phone probably knows that too, and I don't trust the word of a random person on HN that the software wouldn't do an opportunistic GPS look up at least every now and then. In any case I want my phone to use GPS whenever it can so that it's as accurate as it can be, that's why I have in my settings GPS always enabled, with high accuracy (uses GPS, wi-fi, and mobile networks) and indeed I have Google Location Reporting on as well which looks up my location throughout the day whether or not I'm using Maps.
Because in this instance, the argument/discussion is about the phone specifically, not Google Maps. When my phone is on stand-by, like when I'm driving and not using the GPS, the phone will rely on less battery-taxing things like triangulation, Wi-Fi AP's that Google knows (MAC/SSID ?). Google Maps would however use GPS when it is on, not when the user hasn't specifically turned it on.
It's you who's confused (as you said previously, no offence). The post you replied to talked about "I just drove half way across the UK. Google knows that because I was using Google maps", and the mention of not using highest resolution is about Google (not Maps) using other means to determine location. Clear difference between Google Maps and Google.
Silly technicalities, don't know what the downvote was for, was only trying to help your initial confusion :)
> [Google] uses coarse location (GPS being too taxing on battery to get constant location updates) which has an accuracy of 100+ meters.
You mean Google Maps -- the app -- doesn't use location data from GPS? I am pretty sure that isn't true.
If you meant Google Maps -- the service -- then the sentence doesn't make much sense, since it doesn't use any location service on the mobile directly. It is just interfacing with the mobile app over a network.
No I mean Google, the company. Specifically, Google pings your location at intervals (building their Location history, linked above). For this specific use (which isn't tied to Google Maps), it's done through the Google Play Services, which, under the Location setting on your phone is listed as "Low battery use". This indicates that it is not using the GPS chip, but relying only on WiFi and Cell tower triangulation.
No. Use what you are comfortable with. There is a cost incurred for changing (time) that may or may not have a sensible return as an editor is a very personal thing to choose.
How else can you get comfortable with something different that is potentially better than what you're currently using?
Learning Emacs or Vim is an investment, one that last your entire life. I will gladly be less productive for a few weeks to gain much more in the long run.
It could be argued that they also cost a lifetime to learn. With normal, full blown editors (eg: editors that require Java) I get a ton of intuitive functionality for free, and I can start using it right away.
Until it goes wrong or you have to delve into elisp or you get carpal tunnel...
After 20 years of switching back and forth I decided I wanted an extensible editor not a programming language with an editor built in. That's worked well for me.
I really always just want the simplest thing that will work as I need to rely on it entirely and understand how it works. If I was to use emacs, I'd probably use mg as shipped with OpenBSD.
Why? Emacs reports errors fine in my experience and if not it includes a debugger.
> or you have to delve into elisp
What's the problem with elisp? I guess its a matter of preference, but in my opinion elisp is easier to understand than vim script. Emacs includes extensive(!) documentation for it in it's base distribution. Granted, it's a dated language nowadays, but 3rd party libraries - easily installed through elpa - like dash.el and s.el make it a much more pleasant experience.
> or you get carpal tunnel...
Again: Why? This article is about viper-mode which emulates vims key bindings so RSI should be exactly as likely as with vim itself. You could also adapt them to your needs, of course.
This seems to boil down to "I don't understand things written in a language I don't understand" which is fine and all but haven't you ever been curious why so many people will assert it is worth the time to learn?
I think the second part kind of misses the point, as someone in vim has already implemented the feature you wanted, the way that you wanted. So you are basically turning on a parameter.
What is much more important to ask here is how would I implement that functionality [in whichever editor] from scratch, and can I even do that?
That's because EmacsWiki is old, poorly organized and not always up to date. It's to be expected when the area to cover is this huge. "Meanwhile", in recent Emacsen, what you want is
linum-mode
You can also customize this with
M-x customize-group RET linum
where you can set font, format for numbers and enable/disable line numbers globally.
Things that look like (a . b) are pairs of things a and b. Enclosing them in brackets, ((a . b)) means making a list, with one element, which is that pair (you need a quote or a backquote before it). (list (cons a b)) is the verbose equivalent. In this case, I think, ".*" is a regular expression matching file names, and temporary-file-directory is the directory for file names that match the regular expression.
This is actually quite nice to customize because you can change little bits of behaviour by just adding another pair (regex . string) to the list. Typing "C-h v backup-directory-alist" also explains what the list is for and lets you customize it with a gui.
The reason the backup-directory in emacs is an association list instead of a simple string is that some people might want some backups in some dirs and other backups other places. More powerful → more complex.
Turn on line numbers everywhere by putting this in ~/.emacs.d/init.el:
(global-linum-mode)
(Yeah, EmacsWiki is a mess, but that's not emacs' fault.)
I don't really want masses of extensibility but what I want is something that works out of the box, is understandable and doesn't require masses of customisation that I have to drag around with me everywhere.
On this basis using viper with Emacs is as illogical as using vsvim with visual studio. One should use vim (or vi which I'm equally happy with)
The bit that gets me is that I have as shonky and relatively unreliable internet connection and work from home. This is not an issue when my toolchain sits locally.
I really couldn't risk using an entirely online service for direct productivity.
Source: several years of arguing with SPICE in a professional capacity.