Not really. Apparently it is the 5th busiest airport in the London area with 4.5 million passengers (2017) according to Wikipedia. Compared to 61 million for Heathrow.
It's a peculiar airport in general because it's right in the middle of the old docklands on a bit of reclaimed land and only relatively small jets can land there. Unlike the other London airports which are all miles outside central London and serve all sizes of planes.
Fun fact - it's the only major airport in the world that doesn't have a control tower on site (to save space). It is remote controlled from 80 miles away.
It's also a pretty good setup for flying a plane with a light load of fuel over to Shannon where the passangers can do US immigration checks while the same plane gets fully fueled. I think BA used to do this.
Remember the days when most people who were on the internet could build their own websites? And those were rather unique, sometimes quaint and sincere? And you didn’t need a help from a solar-system-engulfing corporation to accomplish that?
What if I told you that it is still possible? Or, have we as the tech community “succeeded” in making the barrier of entry so much higher?
This definitely wins for me, a full easy to use management software to convert and burn or copy music off minidiscs (something that wasn't possible before digitally on most decks), it's very cool. This is the direct link to it running: https://web.minidisc.wiki/
Consume less = exclude myself from certain kinds of social relationships with other people, show less appreciation to the labor of inventors, engineers and people who make stuff with their hands (appreciation in action, not just in words)?
Everyone is entitled to live the way they prefer (within certain limits), of course! :) But I would want to “consume better” instead of “consuming less”.
Consume things made sustainably, buy quality products made by small/family businesses, purchase more services rather than goods, avoid consuming things made by big corporations under regimes that go against the values I believe in, support technologies that move humanity closer to the future that appears to be “a better future”, etc.. I hope that this does not sound too contrarian and does not offend anybody! Peace and happy New Year to everyone!
Yep. My hobbies are very low energy and inexpensive, but I end up spending a decent amount of money and energy in traveling. I want to cut that down substantially starting starting next year.
I think they meant consuming less means showing less appreciation, since by consuming you’re purchasing something somebody made which is a form of showing appreciation.
It's an economic model that is certainly not for everybody, nor for everything, but for dev tools that help me earn money, I can't see the problem.
And if I stop paying for it tomorrow, and don't have access to it anymore, you know what? My site will still be online.
> It's an economic model that is certainly not for everybody,
Not calling you out directly OP (in fact, I quite like your project), but the subscription model is pretty badly thought out most of the time IMO. Especially in a commercial setting. You really should not have to pay a company a monthly fee to operate cameras you bought, on your property. These trojan horse subscriptions are then normally paired with other anti-people abuses, e.g. not allowing the user to use basic functionalities without the subscription.
> My site will still be online.
Just curious: what would happen if your website went offline? If your application is phoning home to verify a license, and the website comes back with an unexpected / no response (maybe you let the hosting run out), would the software still be usable? I think there should be more provisions against this sort of thing in subscription-payed applications.
I'm not affiliated with the project; just discovered it by chance this morning and found it deserved to be better known.
So, when I said 'My site will still be online", I meant as a web developper using Polypane, when and if I decide to stop paying the subscription, this will have no impact on the web site I've developped with it.
Subscriptions might be a problem when you risk loosing access to your data (looking at you Adobe), but in this particular case I couldn't see the problem.
Most of them? If you stop paying for Creative Clouds, your Lightroom database is of no use anymore; you'll probably be able to open photoshop/illustrator files with other apps, but maybe not with all their subtleties.
On the other hand, non-subscription based software was only good as long as they were maintained for your current OS… So I don't care much if my software is subscription based or not, but I care a lot about them saving my data using open standards.
Maybe a weird but honest question: How is/was software even able to finance itself without subscriptions? People expect updates and support which are continuous expenses.
One alternative, I guess, are full-price major revisions at semi-regular intervals. But won't that result in many people never getting an upgrade because they feel it's not worth it?
As a whole, subscription-based models are pretty bad for society. Companies have figured out subscriptions are so much better because A) they're not paid all at once, making the device attractive, and B) you can constantly drip dry money out of the customer's bank account. It's a great business model for businesses, though.
So has the Japanese government indeed been struggling (I doubt there are that many things that would make such an organization struggle) or was it just avoiding running after every fashionable technological trend there was? I imagine that other governments have spent hundreds of millions in taxpayers’ money going through generations of quickly-becoming-obsolete tech in the same time.
Are we simply dealing here with different philosophies in regarding what’s important in life?
