 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois Labreque <fla### [at] videotron ca> wrote:
> In my area, they call it a co-op.
Reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_cooperative#Finland I think
it's not exactly the same thing.
The form described there ("asunto-osake") is basically that you buy a
market share of the housing company, and you basically own the apartment.
There's little difference from owning an actual house (except that you
have to pay condo fees, etc).
That's very common here, but it's not the form of living that I'm talking
about. I do not actually own any shares. This is kind of half-way between
owning and renting.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 09:13:12 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>> On current exchange rates, that looks like considerably more money
>>> than I will ever earn.
>>
>> Well, you keep self-selecting out of positions that might get you a
>> decent salary by not applying for them. We've had that discussion
>> before.
>
> Not any more. [More on this later...]
I saw. Sounds like a pretty weird way of shutting a business down.
>>> Heh. I can still remember when I was a teenager people telling me that
>>> "in America, you can buy a CD for just £5!" (That's 3x cheaper than
>>> the UK.) I always wondered whether there was actually a shred of truth
>>> to such an outlandish claim...
>>
>> You *could* look at amazon.com and see that it is in fact true. In
>> fact, some are even cheaper than that. Then you wouldn't have to
>> wonder if it was true. You'd know.
>>
>> Of course at that price, you're generally not talking about the
>> soundtrack to a recently-released film.
>
> Well, today you can buy CDs in the UK for less than £10 - IF you buy
> them online.
>
> That still doesn't tell me whether it was possible to buy CDs 3x cheaper
> in the US highstreets when I heard this claim 10 years ago. ;-)
It was. I did.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 08:31:47 -0400, Warp wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> OIC, I'm not sure either. Could you basically walk away from it if you
>> wanted to?
>
> Yes. With a term of notice of one month.
>
> It's a mode of ownership where you kind of "half-buy" the apartment.
> This means you pay something like 15% (IIRC) of its full price, and when
> you move out, you get that money back (inflation-adjusted).
>
> It's different from a rental in that with a rental you don't pay
> anything but the rent, and you have less rights to the apartment.
That's really interesting. I've never heard of anything like that here
in the US (not that that means it doesn't exist over here).
>> What's the word in Finnish that describes it?
>
> I think the Finnish term that most accurately corresponds to this is
> "asunto-osake", which literally means "apartment share" (as in a stock
> market share). I think that you literally buy a share (in the exact same
> way as you would buy shares of any compnay) and you own the apartment as
> property. The apartment is usually located in a building and you have to
> pay a (relatively small) monthly fee for the maintenance (which would be
> exactly a "condo fee", AFAIK).
>
> This form of living is a bit like that, except you don't actually own
> the apartment as property, although you have much more rights to it than
> with a rented apartment.
It sounds very similar to a co-op, but with a different financial
arrangement between the owner and the residents. There's a word on the
tip of my brain that I think describes it, but I can't quite get it off
the tip of my brain....
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/2/2012 7:24, Invisible wrote:
> Oh, well, sure. Apart from THE LARGEST AND MOST EXPENSIVE PART OF THE
> NETWORK, it's already fiber. No problem. :-)
You do it a little at a time. One county or neighborhood at a time.
Go watch the (short) videos at fiber.google.com.
> The technology to access the Internet at gigabits per second already exists.
> The problem is that it will cost a fortune to dig up the entire country to
> lay hundreds of thousands of miles of fiber. Which is why nobody is doing
> this. (Or at least, not very fast.)
Not really. The fiber is already going to the head of the neighborhood, just
like water or electricity. You just run the cables thru the existing pipes
(or, in the case of KC, on the existing poles) that everything else goes
through. Getting the permissions to do that is the difficult and expensive
part, not the actual doing it.
> Still, Google appears very, very confident indeed. From what I can tell,
> they're only wiring on Kansas. (WTF? Why Kansas?!)
Because Kansas City promised not to be a dick about permits. When other
cities see it's actually possible, they too won't be dicks about permits.
> Um, good luck with that...
Cool thing is, it's quite likely to work, just like gmail did. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/2/2012 14:14, Francois Labreque wrote:
> In the bargain bin next to the cashier, yeah. CDs are usually around 15$ USD.
It varies greatly, but $10-$15 for a recent release of a pretty popular CD
isn't unusual. Then again, how that will hold up as more and more people go
entirely downloaded music is another question.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/2/2012 12:39, Warp wrote:
> (*) Well not "rent" per se. I think the closest term I can find with google
> is "condominium payment" or "condo fee". But this same housing cooperative
> has rental housing with the same deal.
FWIW, the word "condo fee" means the money you pay to the condo association
to maintain the part of the condo you don't own (e.g., the swimming pool,
the sidewalk, repaint the stairwells, etc.)
Home Owner Association fee is the same thing for separate houses.
The home owner association is a non-profit group made entirely of home
owners. Similarly for condos. It's there to take care of such shared property.
Rent for a condo (in the USA at least) usually includes the cost of the
condo fee.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/2/2012 14:39, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> I'm not sure what the English term for this is.
>
> OIC, I'm not sure either. Could you basically walk away from it if you
> wanted to?
Seconded. That sounds odd. An unusual form of ownership.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/3/2012 5:31, Warp wrote:
> I think the Finnish term that most accurately corresponds to this is
> "asunto-osake", which literally means "apartment share" (as in a stock
> market share). I think that you literally buy a share (in the exact same
> way as you would buy shares of any compnay) and you own the apartment as
> property. The apartment is usually located in a building and you have to
> pay a (relatively small) monthly fee for the maintenance (which would be
> exactly a "condo fee", AFAIK).
Kewl. So some organization or company owns the entire building, and you own
part of that organization, which gives you certain rights in the building. A
neat system. I think I've heard of that in the USA, but it's far from common.
> This form of living is a bit like that, except you don't actually own the
> apartment as property, although you have much more rights to it than with
> a rented apartment.
There's something in the USA called a "time-share", where you own 1/52'nd of
one apartment, and you get to use it during that week, with the intent that
you use it for vacations. Another odd thing I don't think I've seen outside
of north america.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/2/2012 13:12, clipka wrote:
> On a typical point-to-point link between a gamer's computer and the internet
> provider, the data transfer rate has absolutely, positively /nothing/ to do
> with latency.
This isn't true. The higher the throughput, the faster the end of the packet
arrives after the beginning has been sent.
Send a 1K packet 100 miles over a 300-baud modem. Now send a 1K packet 100
miles over a gigabit fiber. Which gets there first if you start them at the
same time?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/3/2012 1:17, Invisible wrote:
>>> (Hell, I have a 100 mbit *LAN* and VNC is still laggy as hell...)
>>
>> VNC is an insult to any network. X11 had some clue, but VNC really lost
>> everything. Worst than VNC, I guess, would be running VM via VNC...
>
> Funny. Everybody tells me that X11 has a really horrid wire protocol...
Compared to everything except VNC, it does.
>> Also, default client for VNC do not have compression (tsclient nor
>> vinagre).
>
> Actually I'm using TightVNC, which is supposedly one of the best.
The best VNC. That's not saying much.
> I hate to say it, but RDP seems to be more reliable. Although no less laggy...
RDP using Microsoft's client is by far the best remote experience I've had.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
