That ID is mandatory to checking your bags, getting through security, getting your tickets...
Why would you need to get through security and somehow not have ID? "Uh yeah I don't physically have any tickets, or any baggage, but I forgot my ID..."
Which btw, you still need to present your tickets to get through security, which goes back to that you needed your ID in order to pick them up at the counter.
Its basically a grayscale picture of your naked body with a lighter gray outline of your clothes. It blurs out your face. Originally they claimed it could blur out your genetilia too but I guess they changed that.
I guess some people don't consider it any different than going to the doctor and pulling out your junk for a physical.
My question is, how do they choose who gets hired for that job? A newspaper ad?
Silverlight is probably the first and only plugin that insists it isn't installed even when it is. Did it for MLB.com. MLB.com still thinks I don't have it. Did it for that website. I get this:
Before installing this version of Silverlight, please close all browser windows and uninstall all previously installed versions of Silverlight.
installed version 2.0.30523.6
requested version 2.0.30226
Does it for both I.E. and firefox. Clicking on the uninstall link gives VIDEOS instead of an actual uninstaller, not that uninstalling ever fixed my problem in the past.
None of that is actually denying you the ability to sign up for insurance, as per the phone example you gave. Once you do sign-up they are legally binded to the contract given and you can sue them if they do not hold up their end of the bargin + punitive damages and lawyer fees. I agree that there is something wrong with health insurance though. I guess lesson learned is don't underestimate an employer willing to give you decent health insurance.
Your probably like me and tend not to pay attention to what your reading. When you were assigned reading homework in school, did you find yourself 3/4 of the way through a page and completely lost as to what just happened earlier in the page?
read a 7-digit phone number several times and you should be able to recall it easily and without confusion- as long as your focus doesn't go somewhere else.
child porn is banned because it is considered sexually abusive. In particular, a child isn't necessarily mentally mature enough to make a sound decision as to "if I should or shouldn't do this". Last thing we need is more messed up kids...
I'm sure the FBI and other organizations set up fake websites designed to log the IP address of individuals with the intent of finding the stuff. You can then communicate with their ISP to see what websites they go to, and eventually find websites that distribute and produce the material - then bust them for it. There's no need to allow it.
I can't disagree with your method of being a safe driver, but I do disagree with the validity of your facts. Every individuals brain is wired differently and to proclaim some activity is more distracting (or distracting at all) on a global scale is just wrong.
I'm going to say, odds are, the study you are referring to probably put subjects in a simulator, gave their subjects a cell phone they weren't familiar with, stuck them in a situation they were already unfamiliar with, then threw bad drivers at them and made them dodge them. There isn't really a correlation there with real life. 99% of my dialing in a car involves pressing the down button once and then the green button. The 1% I do while stopped at a stoplight, then continue the conversation while driving. The most near-accidents I've had recently were when I had a passenger in the car, when I glanced at the radio because I didn't know what station I was at, when someone didn't abide by the rules of right-of-way and wanted me to turn left when they were turning right, and when I had to turn off the air conditioning because the person smoking in the car in front of me was getting into my vents.
A drunk driver can't even drive straight. Having to look back and smack a kid in the mouth is much more dangerous than talking on a cell phone. Its simple common sense that cell phones aren't nearly as dangerous as drunk driving. I don't see how you could ever believe otherwise unless you have completely cut yourself off from ever being around a person on a cell phone or seeing a drunk driver on COPS.
I think you fit the profile of most people who support banning cell phones - they really don't have good facts, but they believe they do. They also already behave in such a way that their own habits aren't affected if cell phones are banned or not.
Ok hopefully I'm not repeating some already useful info that others have said but- if any lawmaker that has considered the validity of outlawing talking on a cell phone while driving...
-Talking to a passenger is statistically more dangerous than talking on a cell phone. I don't make hand gestures while on a cell phone, and a cell phone user doesn't point out things passing by me to look at.
-Anything you have to look at to verify its correctness is dangerous. Texting is dangerous. So is looking at your radio to figure out what station you're on.
-There is a correlation between slow drivers and dangerous drivers, and people talking on a cell phone. This is the same group of people who instantly dial-up someone on their cell phone the moment they get out of a college class with absolutely nothing in mind to talk about. I call them "dumb people".
-Outlawing people on a cell phone creates a more dangerous environment. Not only are people going to continue to talk on their cell phone while in a car, but now they are more distracted because they have to look out for cops while they are at it. In addition, they'll panic when they see a cop.
-The only difference between talking on a cell phone and using a hands-free headset is one hand (or a titled head). Are one-handed people (or people with kneck injuries) unallowed to drive?
-Reaching for something in a difficult place is dangerous, however you cannot enforce that people are putting their cell-phones in an easy to access spot.
-Men talking to their wives on a cell phone are 100% not distracted. All of their attention is on the road, and none of it is on the yapping in their ear.
From my experience, nvidia's 3d stereo drivers (used for shutter glasses so you can play games in 3d) do not work with widescreen monitors. It intentionally disables that functionality. Likewise, the backlight for widescreen monitors clearly show through when you a rapidly turning pixels on and off, while they do not for "standard" monitors. My Dell 17 inch monitor with 16 ms response time is better for 3d than a brand new samsung with 2 ms response time (which like all the other widescreen monitors isn't really suitable at all, even with custom drivers).
Where I work they log everything, including IM conversations. Its actually kind of handy when something important is said in an IM conversation and you need to look it up (or as a boss if you want to see what your subordinates are talking about). The tool itself is just an SQL server that logs what you say character for character and does no post-formatting. That means if you stick HTML in your IM message it shows up that way on the page. One of my female coworkers thought they found a way around it by sticking secret messages in less-than and greater-than symbols. She demonstrated by sending a message with "hi" followed by her calling me gay as a secret message. She then refreshed the page to show me that the secret message wouldn't show up.
She put a space between the less-than sign and her first character, so the browser displayed everything.
I'd rather sue for gas costs. Forcing people to suddenly change their speed is a complete waste of gas. I'd imagine every day these "short lights" (and I have to go through 3 of these every day to work) waste at least 30 bucks worth of gas EACH- EVERYDAY. There is, for example, a poorly set up light I have to drive through that is up-hill on each side (so its downhill approaching the intersection, in other words). When it turns red, that means your wasting gas by braking and then wasting gas some more by accelerating back up the hill. Its very poorly set-up as the light is only 3 seconds for 45 mph, and the farthest back sensor is just too close - if there is even a moment it doesn't detect cars it will switch from green to red, which I found results in a LOT of instances where an oncoming line of 50 cars all have to stop for it because one car pulled up to the intersection to make a left turn.
One thing that really irritates me are those poorly put together lights that somehow glitch-out, and will be stuck giving the wrong side green until a car hits the farthest back sensor. It then instantly goes to red as that car approaches the intersection, and the way the farthest back sensor is usually set-up, you'd be running the light unless your a bit above the speed limit. It actually becomes designed to waste as much gas as possible.
And its not people running red lights that are dangerous (unless its by an extreme amount, which I've only seen semitrucks and military people who came back from iraq do) its people JUMPING green lights (which you dont see much of). As I saw in a study, these lights increase rear-endings, which is no big deal- you know, costing people more money for repairs and giving them whiplash is no big deal. I honestly don't see how a camera that takes a picture when the light turns red can possibly increase safety - the time it takes for a car to even accelerate into the intersection is at least 2 seconds from the time it turns green (reaction time + normal acceleration). If anything it should be taking a picture of the other side of the intersection...
And I saw in another study that these red light cameras actually decrease a city's revenue - they make everyone paranoid so nobody gets a ticket...
Its complete bullcrap that a city's means of getting revenue is to falsely get them to do something wrong. It just detracts from their focus on people who legitimately do something wrong.
I took AP CS A and got a 3 on it. When I applied into college they told me I should take the introductory course because most people who got a 3 on the AP test and skipped it would fail the next step up.
I skipped it and the next step up was extremely easy. When I was writing my review of that class I told them I could have learned almost everything they taught me in that semester in a week.
Just goes to show what trash the grader was on the AP test. They probably thought all of my lower case 'j's were 'i's, and probably marked me down for declaring new variables anywhere but the beginning of the function. To put it in perspective, a 3 is supposed to be the same as a C in college, yet I went through college never getting a C in anything and getting predominately A's and B+s in most CS classes- even the ones with a 90% failure/drop-out rate.
Part of it is that the teacher of my AP class, a female cheerleading coach (no kidding), was a decent teacher and could get you to learn a concept like new data structures or pointers in 20 minutes.
Most people have a particular pizza brand in mind. Nobody searches for pizza completely oblivious of what is out there. Nobody is that inept anymore that they would be unable to find the website of their favorite pizza place. Simply getting a hit is not a sign of effectiveness.
And I bet you most hits for "pizza.com" are age 13 and under.
I'm curious as to why they find it likely. Was the pitching on every single team that poor and his hitting that good? For example, the odds of winning MLB.com's "beat the streak" are very very small, even when you stack the odds in your favor by exploiting the most lopsided team match-ups each day and picking the most statistically likely player. A player with an awesome.333 average has only an 81.8% chance of getting a hit if they had 4 at-bats. After 10 days of getting 4 at-bats each game, same average, there's only a 13.4% probability of getting a hit each day. At 20 days your looking at a 1.8% chance. At 56 days your looking at a.0013% chance. I just can't see how you can say there is any certainty unless you have some bug in your code that isn't doing the math right.
Multiplying two vectors together is NOT ISO C++. The meaning of that with even something as simple as integers is ambiguous (is this array math or matrix math?) and wouldn't make sense with most datatypes (how do I multiply a vector of strings together?).
I dont understand- is this entry a joke? This is about as ground-breaking as "a local McDonald's increases $1 menu to $1.05 menu!" In other news, inflation was 8% last year!
Slashdot Mirror
That ID is mandatory to checking your bags, getting through security, getting your tickets...
Why would you need to get through security and somehow not have ID? "Uh yeah I don't physically have any tickets, or any baggage, but I forgot my ID..."
Which btw, you still need to present your tickets to get through security, which goes back to that you needed your ID in order to pick them up at the counter.
Its basically a grayscale picture of your naked body with a lighter gray outline of your clothes. It blurs out your face. Originally they claimed it could blur out your genetilia too but I guess they changed that.
I guess some people don't consider it any different than going to the doctor and pulling out your junk for a physical.
My question is, how do they choose who gets hired for that job? A newspaper ad?
"Need person to look at naked people all day"
Silverlight is probably the first and only plugin that insists it isn't installed even when it is. Did it for MLB.com. MLB.com still thinks I don't have it. Did it for that website. I get this:
Before installing this version of Silverlight, please close all browser windows and uninstall all previously installed versions of Silverlight.
installed version 2.0.30523.6
requested version 2.0.30226
Does it for both I.E. and firefox. Clicking on the uninstall link gives VIDEOS instead of an actual uninstaller, not that uninstalling ever fixed my problem in the past.
seeing lots of use lately.
My Nintendo Wii has been gathering dust for months now.
None of that is actually denying you the ability to sign up for insurance, as per the phone example you gave. Once you do sign-up they are legally binded to the contract given and you can sue them if they do not hold up their end of the bargin + punitive damages and lawyer fees. I agree that there is something wrong with health insurance though. I guess lesson learned is don't underestimate an employer willing to give you decent health insurance.
That would never happen. What kind of country do you live in where it's possible to deny someone insurance?
Your confusing patriotism with "a name that meets the minimum number of syllables"
Your probably like me and tend not to pay attention to what your reading. When you were assigned reading homework in school, did you find yourself 3/4 of the way through a page and completely lost as to what just happened earlier in the page?
read a 7-digit phone number several times and you should be able to recall it easily and without confusion- as long as your focus doesn't go somewhere else.
child porn is banned because it is considered sexually abusive. In particular, a child isn't necessarily mentally mature enough to make a sound decision as to "if I should or shouldn't do this". Last thing we need is more messed up kids...
I'm sure the FBI and other organizations set up fake websites designed to log the IP address of individuals with the intent of finding the stuff. You can then communicate with their ISP to see what websites they go to, and eventually find websites that distribute and produce the material - then bust them for it. There's no need to allow it.
I can't disagree with your method of being a safe driver, but I do disagree with the validity of your facts. Every individuals brain is wired differently and to proclaim some activity is more distracting (or distracting at all) on a global scale is just wrong.
I'm going to say, odds are, the study you are referring to probably put subjects in a simulator, gave their subjects a cell phone they weren't familiar with, stuck them in a situation they were already unfamiliar with, then threw bad drivers at them and made them dodge them. There isn't really a correlation there with real life. 99% of my dialing in a car involves pressing the down button once and then the green button. The 1% I do while stopped at a stoplight, then continue the conversation while driving. The most near-accidents I've had recently were when I had a passenger in the car, when I glanced at the radio because I didn't know what station I was at, when someone didn't abide by the rules of right-of-way and wanted me to turn left when they were turning right, and when I had to turn off the air conditioning because the person smoking in the car in front of me was getting into my vents.
A drunk driver can't even drive straight. Having to look back and smack a kid in the mouth is much more dangerous than talking on a cell phone. Its simple common sense that cell phones aren't nearly as dangerous as drunk driving. I don't see how you could ever believe otherwise unless you have completely cut yourself off from ever being around a person on a cell phone or seeing a drunk driver on COPS.
I think you fit the profile of most people who support banning cell phones - they really don't have good facts, but they believe they do. They also already behave in such a way that their own habits aren't affected if cell phones are banned or not.
You mean like how in South Park, the boys complained to Mel Gibson about the Passion of the Christ? (and got their money back for BASEketball)
Ok hopefully I'm not repeating some already useful info that others have said but- if any lawmaker that has considered the validity of outlawing talking on a cell phone while driving...
-Talking to a passenger is statistically more dangerous than talking on a cell phone. I don't make hand gestures while on a cell phone, and a cell phone user doesn't point out things passing by me to look at.
-Anything you have to look at to verify its correctness is dangerous. Texting is dangerous. So is looking at your radio to figure out what station you're on.
-There is a correlation between slow drivers and dangerous drivers, and people talking on a cell phone. This is the same group of people who instantly dial-up someone on their cell phone the moment they get out of a college class with absolutely nothing in mind to talk about. I call them "dumb people".
-Outlawing people on a cell phone creates a more dangerous environment. Not only are people going to continue to talk on their cell phone while in a car, but now they are more distracted because they have to look out for cops while they are at it. In addition, they'll panic when they see a cop.
-The only difference between talking on a cell phone and using a hands-free headset is one hand (or a titled head). Are one-handed people (or people with kneck injuries) unallowed to drive?
-Reaching for something in a difficult place is dangerous, however you cannot enforce that people are putting their cell-phones in an easy to access spot.
-Men talking to their wives on a cell phone are 100% not distracted. All of their attention is on the road, and none of it is on the yapping in their ear.
From my experience, nvidia's 3d stereo drivers (used for shutter glasses so you can play games in 3d) do not work with widescreen monitors. It intentionally disables that functionality. Likewise, the backlight for widescreen monitors clearly show through when you a rapidly turning pixels on and off, while they do not for "standard" monitors. My Dell 17 inch monitor with 16 ms response time is better for 3d than a brand new samsung with 2 ms response time (which like all the other widescreen monitors isn't really suitable at all, even with custom drivers).
Damn kids, need to get off my lawn!
Where I work they log everything, including IM conversations. Its actually kind of handy when something important is said in an IM conversation and you need to look it up (or as a boss if you want to see what your subordinates are talking about). The tool itself is just an SQL server that logs what you say character for character and does no post-formatting. That means if you stick HTML in your IM message it shows up that way on the page. One of my female coworkers thought they found a way around it by sticking secret messages in less-than and greater-than symbols. She demonstrated by sending a message with "hi" followed by her calling me gay as a secret message. She then refreshed the page to show me that the secret message wouldn't show up.
She put a space between the less-than sign and her first character, so the browser displayed everything.
I'd rather sue for gas costs. Forcing people to suddenly change their speed is a complete waste of gas. I'd imagine every day these "short lights" (and I have to go through 3 of these every day to work) waste at least 30 bucks worth of gas EACH- EVERYDAY. There is, for example, a poorly set up light I have to drive through that is up-hill on each side (so its downhill approaching the intersection, in other words). When it turns red, that means your wasting gas by braking and then wasting gas some more by accelerating back up the hill. Its very poorly set-up as the light is only 3 seconds for 45 mph, and the farthest back sensor is just too close - if there is even a moment it doesn't detect cars it will switch from green to red, which I found results in a LOT of instances where an oncoming line of 50 cars all have to stop for it because one car pulled up to the intersection to make a left turn.
One thing that really irritates me are those poorly put together lights that somehow glitch-out, and will be stuck giving the wrong side green until a car hits the farthest back sensor. It then instantly goes to red as that car approaches the intersection, and the way the farthest back sensor is usually set-up, you'd be running the light unless your a bit above the speed limit. It actually becomes designed to waste as much gas as possible.
And its not people running red lights that are dangerous (unless its by an extreme amount, which I've only seen semitrucks and military people who came back from iraq do) its people JUMPING green lights (which you dont see much of). As I saw in a study, these lights increase rear-endings, which is no big deal- you know, costing people more money for repairs and giving them whiplash is no big deal. I honestly don't see how a camera that takes a picture when the light turns red can possibly increase safety - the time it takes for a car to even accelerate into the intersection is at least 2 seconds from the time it turns green (reaction time + normal acceleration). If anything it should be taking a picture of the other side of the intersection...
And I saw in another study that these red light cameras actually decrease a city's revenue - they make everyone paranoid so nobody gets a ticket...
Its complete bullcrap that a city's means of getting revenue is to falsely get them to do something wrong. It just detracts from their focus on people who legitimately do something wrong.
I took AP CS A and got a 3 on it. When I applied into college they told me I should take the introductory course because most people who got a 3 on the AP test and skipped it would fail the next step up.
I skipped it and the next step up was extremely easy. When I was writing my review of that class I told them I could have learned almost everything they taught me in that semester in a week.
Just goes to show what trash the grader was on the AP test. They probably thought all of my lower case 'j's were 'i's, and probably marked me down for declaring new variables anywhere but the beginning of the function. To put it in perspective, a 3 is supposed to be the same as a C in college, yet I went through college never getting a C in anything and getting predominately A's and B+s in most CS classes- even the ones with a 90% failure/drop-out rate.
Part of it is that the teacher of my AP class, a female cheerleading coach (no kidding), was a decent teacher and could get you to learn a concept like new data structures or pointers in 20 minutes.
In the future, the letter 'a' will take up 5 megabytes of space.
Most people have a particular pizza brand in mind. Nobody searches for pizza completely oblivious of what is out there. Nobody is that inept anymore that they would be unable to find the website of their favorite pizza place. Simply getting a hit is not a sign of effectiveness.
And I bet you most hits for "pizza.com" are age 13 and under.
Micron and other corporations are already appealing this decision...
I'm curious as to why they find it likely. Was the pitching on every single team that poor and his hitting that good? For example, the odds of winning MLB.com's "beat the streak" are very very small, even when you stack the odds in your favor by exploiting the most lopsided team match-ups each day and picking the most statistically likely player. A player with an awesome .333 average has only an 81.8% chance of getting a hit if they had 4 at-bats. After 10 days of getting 4 at-bats each game, same average, there's only a 13.4% probability of getting a hit each day. At 20 days your looking at a 1.8% chance. At 56 days your looking at a .0013% chance. I just can't see how you can say there is any certainty unless you have some bug in your code that isn't doing the math right.
Multiplying two vectors together is NOT ISO C++. The meaning of that with even something as simple as integers is ambiguous (is this array math or matrix math?) and wouldn't make sense with most datatypes (how do I multiply a vector of strings together?).
Jesus, the man is right! People don't know C++!
I heard that vikings intentionally swapped the two names so that people would go to the wrong island. Is that true?
Bingo.
I dont understand- is this entry a joke? This is about as ground-breaking as "a local McDonald's increases $1 menu to $1.05 menu!" In other news, inflation was 8% last year!