I wonder if she'd be opposed to a game where the President of the United States gets a bj in the oval office, since she didn't seem to be too bothered by it in REAL LIFE.
It's still "one" example, though. Look, I'm done with this conversation, since apologists will never accept anything that goes against their POV. I know what I know, and it seems millions of others are sharing the same frustrations as me when it comes to uber-chatty UAC dialogues. You have to ask if the supposed security benefit is worth the interruption of users' work flow or not. In my case, it ISN'T. But then again, I'm not some paranoid conspiracy theorist that would rather lockdown my computer to the point that it is nearly unusable either.
The Army is a "bottom-line" organization. They don't care WHY something happens, only that it does. In this case, it might be short-sighted, but for the short-term, I think it's a fairly decent plan, considering how many years and how much money they've wasted trying to make Windows secure for the military environment. By the time a hacking threat becomes real on OS X (if ever), the military will have moved on to the next threat.
The Air Force has had a long standing, strict, commercial-off-the-shelf policy when it comes to IT standards. In other words, they are 99% Windows based.
Back in the late 90s the Army switched its us.army.mil stuff to Mac based servers based on the input of a low ranking enlisted guy (whom I knew, and I myself was in the same unit when he made the suggestion). They publicity at the time was that the Windows servers were getting hacked on a daily basis, so they switched to the Mac OS server stuff and the problem was solved...the hackers no longer were able to hack the front page of the US Army on a daily basis. I wonder why they are just now realizing this and going back to an old solution?
Now I have to slow down to achieve the new two second gap, which will cause everyone behind me to react with breaking and more slowdowns.
Not if you slow down by backing of the gas and NOT hitting the brakes (read the relevant links provided by everyone in this thread). And if EVERYONE let people in and backed off 2-3 seconds without hiting the brakes, then there would be no traffic jams, just flowing traffic that is going a little bit slower than normal, but moving through an otherwised jammed area faster.
Do you even need a study to know the conclusion? Of COURSE people on cell phones are mucking up traffic, because they aren't paying attention to their surroundings (#1 cause of traffic jams and accidents).
there's no good reason to use the car as the solution to personal transportation.
There's no way you live in America and can say that with a straight face. I can't FIND a bus route within driving distance of my house, let alone a nice convenient walking distance.
Some people do use SUV's, though. They're really nice in mountain states in the snow and such, if you know how to drive them
Good point, but not relevant in Austin, Texas (or any other major urban area outside of the Mountain West/Pacific Northwest). So why so many SUV's in Austin? Did they all just move here from Colorado?
I don't mean ADD more roads. Use the pavement that already exists in more intelligent ways...narrower (more) lanes, better turn lanes/traffic control measures, less shoulder (i.e. unused pavement). So no, I'm not for moving people farther out. I'm for using existing infrastructure more better-er.
My Ford Contour SVT only gets 20mpg, so I understand what you are getting at. I'm talking about PHYSICAL space as well as mpg. So yes, I was using SUV as just one example. All large, non-commercial vehicles should carry a convenience tax. I can't stand to see yet another Ford F-350 tooling down the road on their way to the mall to go Christmas shopping. Unless this guy has a home business that relies on the use of a giant F-350, then the guy should pay through the nose for his ridiculously uneeded road hog. Give businesses an exemption and tax the hell out of those who wish to drive irresponsible vehicles. Yes, you could argue that my car should be taxed as well, being a somewhat sporty gas hog that it is. I'd still buy it again, understanding the price to pay for my choice, as would some of the F-350 drivers out there. But a LOT of them would get a CR-V or something like that instead if they had an incentive to do so.
if you had a difficult driving test then you would get people who would say "I passed the driving test, therefore I'm a safe driver."
I'm not talking just about the physical ability to drive a car. I'm also not testing to validate one's ability to be a safe driver. I am, however, eliminating a good third of the population that flat-out can't drive. Either they lack the physical skills to control a large vehicle (maybe they have bad spacial relationships, or poor dexterity) or they are too dumb to understand that their actions are causing traffic problems.
I'm talking about educating ALL drivers of the best practices for driving that makes driving safe and efficient for EVERYONE. If you notice, most of the points cited in this discussion that cause traffic jams are people who are oblivious to the rules of the road. If everyone in America KNEW that you only use the left lane to pass, or that at unmarked intersections you yield to the car on your right, many of our congestions problems would be solved right there.
In addition to this, retesting should occur if: 1) you get a lot of tickets, or cause an accident or 2) you reach an age, or get a physical disability that makes it hard for you to drive. In THIS case, we have to test somebody's physical ability to control a 2,000 lb vehicle and not assume that my 82 year old granny has the same motor skills and mental facility she had 60 years ago, the last time she took any type of driving test (other than a vision test...lame).
As for the speeding comments, if you are a resident of the US, you must certainly concede that most of our "limits" are set artificially low, and nearly ALL speeding infractions are given as revenue builders, and not as a matter of public safety. Explain why cops don't setup in residential areas, busting the teens driving 50 down my road? It is easier to sit on the main road and dish out 100 tickets in an hour for people doing 42 in a 35mph zone than waiting around all day for that one reckless teen to go ripping 50 mph down my road.
Another aspect of speed to think about is not HOW fast cars are moving, rather the difference in speed between two cars. If everyone is going 75 mph, the closing rate is, well, zero, but if 95% of the cars are going 75 and ONE granny is tooling around at 45, the car going 45 is causing the danger, not the cars going faster. (yet the cars going 75 in a 70 are the ones that will be ticketed 100% of the time).
As it is though, speeds to to be uniform and those speeds need to be fairly low.
I've read studies on this, and interestingly enough, when speed limits are left up to the judgment of the driver, the driver will drive a safe speed for that road, their vehicle and the current conditions, often SLOWER than if there were a posted speed limit of say, 75. Instead, we get artifically low speed limits that cater to the revenue hungry police departments and stupid insurance industry.
And building more road capacity is not the answer to the problem any more than building more restaurants is the answer to the obesity problem in America.
I think I can fix your analogy. Building more restaurants is the answer to solving the STARVATION problem.
I'm not suggesting MORE roads, I'm suggesting the better use of existing roads and designs. Most US roads have more space on the shoulders than the ENTIRE road of a European country. I lived in the UK and Germany, and got used to driving in slightly narrower lanes. There are some stretches of I-10 in San Antonio that could EASILY add two more lanes in both directions if they'd just utilize the center divide more intelligently, and not leave 200 feet of shoulder on both sides.
Another point to consider, instead of fighting road expansion, think of it this way. If you increase the drivable area of a patch of concrete that ALREADY exists anyway, you'll decrease traffic jams, and thus decrease the urge to want to build NEW roads.
My turn signal switch burned out a month ago, and for the half a day I had to drive around with no blinkers, I felt like the biggest asshole on the planet. If only everyone had at least a bit of conscience, no?
In Utah, they enforce the "left lane for passing only" law pretty well. Outside of Germany, I've never seen it enforced like it should be in the States. I'm originally from Oregon and their signs say "Unlawful to use left lane except for passing." There's a lot of unlawfulness going on in the Pacific Northwest (not that I live there anymore, but I do visit). If I were a cop, I'd meet my monthly icket quota in one day ticketing left lane bandits.
I'm not just pointing a finger at the elderly either.
Actually my wife just took a drive with her gradma (82) and said she drove 45mph in the left lane of the busy highway the whole time. My wife didn't say anything, but evidently granny could sense her uneasiness. Granny mumbled, "Ya, I know I'm doing 45 in the left lane, but dammit I'm not gonna get over...they can all go AROUND me!". She hasn't had a driving test in over 60 years either. That's just wrong.
This is why many forms of motor racing prohibit the use of taillights. It let's the car ahead cheat and causes people behind to slow down in reaction to seeing the brakelight.
100,000 miles on my Ford Contour SVT and still on the original brake pads.... says something about my ability to drive in traffic methinks! I've always wondered why people are replacing their pads every 40,000 miles or so. I guess they are really worse drivers than I ever imagined.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh...so don't let you children play those games.
I wonder if she'd be opposed to a game where the President of the United States gets a bj in the oval office, since she didn't seem to be too bothered by it in REAL LIFE.
It's still "one" example, though. Look, I'm done with this conversation, since apologists will never accept anything that goes against their POV. I know what I know, and it seems millions of others are sharing the same frustrations as me when it comes to uber-chatty UAC dialogues. You have to ask if the supposed security benefit is worth the interruption of users' work flow or not. In my case, it ISN'T. But then again, I'm not some paranoid conspiracy theorist that would rather lockdown my computer to the point that it is nearly unusable either.
100 million plus, the last figures I saw. So yeah, you are right, a "few tens of millions".
The Army is a "bottom-line" organization. They don't care WHY something happens, only that it does. In this case, it might be short-sighted, but for the short-term, I think it's a fairly decent plan, considering how many years and how much money they've wasted trying to make Windows secure for the military environment. By the time a hacking threat becomes real on OS X (if ever), the military will have moved on to the next threat.
The Air Force has had a long standing, strict, commercial-off-the-shelf policy when it comes to IT standards. In other words, they are 99% Windows based.
Back in the late 90s the Army switched its us.army.mil stuff to Mac based servers based on the input of a low ranking enlisted guy (whom I knew, and I myself was in the same unit when he made the suggestion). They publicity at the time was that the Windows servers were getting hacked on a daily basis, so they switched to the Mac OS server stuff and the problem was solved...the hackers no longer were able to hack the front page of the US Army on a daily basis. I wonder why they are just now realizing this and going back to an old solution?
Do you even need a study to know the conclusion? Of COURSE people on cell phones are mucking up traffic, because they aren't paying attention to their surroundings (#1 cause of traffic jams and accidents).
Mr. Gore, have you been submitting stories to slashdot again?
I don't mean ADD more roads. Use the pavement that already exists in more intelligent ways...narrower (more) lanes, better turn lanes/traffic control measures, less shoulder (i.e. unused pavement). So no, I'm not for moving people farther out. I'm for using existing infrastructure more better-er.
My Ford Contour SVT only gets 20mpg, so I understand what you are getting at. I'm talking about PHYSICAL space as well as mpg. So yes, I was using SUV as just one example. All large, non-commercial vehicles should carry a convenience tax. I can't stand to see yet another Ford F-350 tooling down the road on their way to the mall to go Christmas shopping. Unless this guy has a home business that relies on the use of a giant F-350, then the guy should pay through the nose for his ridiculously uneeded road hog. Give businesses an exemption and tax the hell out of those who wish to drive irresponsible vehicles. Yes, you could argue that my car should be taxed as well, being a somewhat sporty gas hog that it is. I'd still buy it again, understanding the price to pay for my choice, as would some of the F-350 drivers out there. But a LOT of them would get a CR-V or something like that instead if they had an incentive to do so.
I'm talking about educating ALL drivers of the best practices for driving that makes driving safe and efficient for EVERYONE. If you notice, most of the points cited in this discussion that cause traffic jams are people who are oblivious to the rules of the road. If everyone in America KNEW that you only use the left lane to pass, or that at unmarked intersections you yield to the car on your right, many of our congestions problems would be solved right there.
In addition to this, retesting should occur if: 1) you get a lot of tickets, or cause an accident or 2) you reach an age, or get a physical disability that makes it hard for you to drive. In THIS case, we have to test somebody's physical ability to control a 2,000 lb vehicle and not assume that my 82 year old granny has the same motor skills and mental facility she had 60 years ago, the last time she took any type of driving test (other than a vision test...lame).
As for the speeding comments, if you are a resident of the US, you must certainly concede that most of our "limits" are set artificially low, and nearly ALL speeding infractions are given as revenue builders, and not as a matter of public safety. Explain why cops don't setup in residential areas, busting the teens driving 50 down my road? It is easier to sit on the main road and dish out 100 tickets in an hour for people doing 42 in a 35mph zone than waiting around all day for that one reckless teen to go ripping 50 mph down my road.
Another aspect of speed to think about is not HOW fast cars are moving, rather the difference in speed between two cars. If everyone is going 75 mph, the closing rate is, well, zero, but if 95% of the cars are going 75 and ONE granny is tooling around at 45, the car going 45 is causing the danger, not the cars going faster. (yet the cars going 75 in a 70 are the ones that will be ticketed 100% of the time).
I've read studies on this, and interestingly enough, when speed limits are left up to the judgment of the driver, the driver will drive a safe speed for that road, their vehicle and the current conditions, often SLOWER than if there were a posted speed limit of say, 75. Instead, we get artifically low speed limits that cater to the revenue hungry police departments and stupid insurance industry.I think I can fix your analogy. Building more restaurants is the answer to solving the STARVATION problem.
I'm not suggesting MORE roads, I'm suggesting the better use of existing roads and designs. Most US roads have more space on the shoulders than the ENTIRE road of a European country. I lived in the UK and Germany, and got used to driving in slightly narrower lanes. There are some stretches of I-10 in San Antonio that could EASILY add two more lanes in both directions if they'd just utilize the center divide more intelligently, and not leave 200 feet of shoulder on both sides.
Another point to consider, instead of fighting road expansion, think of it this way. If you increase the drivable area of a patch of concrete that ALREADY exists anyway, you'll decrease traffic jams, and thus decrease the urge to want to build NEW roads.
My turn signal switch burned out a month ago, and for the half a day I had to drive around with no blinkers, I felt like the biggest asshole on the planet. If only everyone had at least a bit of conscience, no?
In Utah, they enforce the "left lane for passing only" law pretty well. Outside of Germany, I've never seen it enforced like it should be in the States. I'm originally from Oregon and their signs say "Unlawful to use left lane except for passing." There's a lot of unlawfulness going on in the Pacific Northwest (not that I live there anymore, but I do visit). If I were a cop, I'd meet my monthly icket quota in one day ticketing left lane bandits.
So I AM pointing a finger at the elderly ;-)
This is why many forms of motor racing prohibit the use of taillights. It let's the car ahead cheat and causes people behind to slow down in reaction to seeing the brakelight.
100,000 miles on my Ford Contour SVT and still on the original brake pads.... says something about my ability to drive in traffic methinks! I've always wondered why people are replacing their pads every 40,000 miles or so. I guess they are really worse drivers than I ever imagined.
I can't get to within one inch of any SUVs' bumpers because they are all about three feet higher up in the air than my regular old four-door sedan.