"But I think the problem is, when people get away with it so many more times than they get caught, they really believe it is in their best interest to cheat."
Unfortunately it probably is in their best interests to cheat. They managed to pass a lot of courses with minimal work. They did come out ahead-at least if their goal was to get a degree with a minimum of work.
If they get caught once, so what? What is the worst that will happen? Maybe an "F" on an assignment, possibly a course. Heck, they may have failed the course if they hadn't cheated! After all, what is the chance that they will be expelled when caught the first time or any time for that matter? Expulsion after the first or second time is the only way to really make cheating not pay considering how few people get caught. After all, as you learned, it is probably not the first time they cheated....
Now that we are really off-topic... Here are some points to consider. 1. It's easy to get scalded. Ever wonder why they suggest you turn your water heater temp down to 120 degrees? To prevent scalding (and to save energy). 2. Coffee is supposed to be brewed between 195 and 205 degrees (you DID know this, didn't you?), so it is likely to be HOT, REALLY HOT. Hot enough to cause third degree burns. 3. To summarize, the coffee wasn't "too fucking hot", she was a fool who didn't deserve ANY amount of money for burning HERSELF (or at best did something really foolish). 4. There is a reason for health insurance, so when you do something foolish or something bad happens to you (bad things happen to good people all the time...) you don't have massive medical bills.
Re:Try the County Assessor yet?
on
Open Maps?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Do you really need the accuracy and precision you are talking about? For 911 dispatch, who cares which property the tree is in. That level of precision and accuracy would be nice but is it needed or would the money be better spent elsewhere. Hell, USGS 7.5minute quads combined with Tiger, orthophoto, parcel data, and other info is probably good enough. I mean, how accurate is that water main map anyway.... After all, the responders have brains and in theory have at least a passing knowledge of the area... Finally, in theory property lines used to create parcel maps were surveyed and you could just digitize them. Then georeference them. It should be good enough. If it isn't, then I doubt any amount of GPS is going to help at anything resembling a reasonable cost (if the maps are good enougth for people to find hydrants, water mains, property-then that can be transferred to the computer). Granted, it isn't easy. It's boring. It's tedious. It's time consuming. And the surveys and maps aren't always correct. But don't assume guys pounding pavement with a gps will do any better for anything resembling the same cost. Survey grade gps does not equal absolute gps accuracy. More correctly, you would need guys driving a van with differential gps to do better for roads at least(Navtech comes to mind)...
Personally, I think you give bands that play in bars too much credit:) Sure, they all don't suck, but a hell of a lot do. I also pay for the honor of seeing them (gee, I could be spending that money on beer....) Of course it is difficult to determine their ability when almost all of them believe that LOUDER IS BETTER especially in a SMALL ENCLOSED SPACE (HINT for bands: the highest setting on the amp is OPTIONAL, and you may sound better at lower settings). Then again, maybe that is a good indication of their ability...:)
Hello? Anyone home? This hypothesis was PUBLISHED as a paper in a SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL (Geological Society of America Bulletin). This is the proper way to conduct science. Of course if your goal was to look ignorant you succeeded. But I guess it is too much trouble to click on a link in the synopsis? It certainly would have taken less time than writing your reply...
Sure the cost of a "statistical" life may be between $5 and $10 million dollars. So what. What meaning does that have? To put it another way, if someone offered you that amount of money to kill you, would you accept it? No? Why not? Isn't that the "value" of your life? Just because we can assign a value to a human life doesn't make it a meaningful value. Heck, the "value" is based in part upon a persons perception of risk. People are really bad at determining risk (familiar dangerous things considered safer than unfamiliar safer things) and our willingness to mitigate risk may be based on other factors (gee, this job is dangerous, but I kind of like having a place to live, or I don't have the skills to change a job etc.). Just because economists think they can put a value on a human life doesn't mean they are correct. Finally, if you really can put a single number value on a human life, then do they really have a inherent right to exist?
Ah, yes, but because they have a signed piece of paper from the author of the code saying it is okay to use, there won't be a problem. I sure hope that I read that part of the interview wrong or it was written up wrong, otherwise maybe they didn't learn as many lessons as they thought... Paper trails are nice, but as you noted, they can't prove ownership. Of course, if someone later believes that piece of code was copied (maybe the author didn't have permision to use it or copied it his/her self) they have a nice way to prove infringement. After all, a paper trail does not absolve those at the top of responsibility....
Because I'm not a programmer or coder, maybe you could answer this question. How is the kernel code documentation (where the code came from) different than that in any other business? In other words, if Megacorp A wanted/needed to track down who added a particular line of code, could they? Could they determine it wasn't stolen, copyrighted, etc? Knowing how documentation is done (or not done) in organizations or lost over time, etc., is this a problem unique to the Linux kernel, or is the fact that the kernel development is so visible?
Federal law prohibits age discrimination against those 40 and older in companies with 20 or more employees. Don't fit in those categories? Then age discrimination is legal, unless state law (or case law) says otherwise. Never forget that there are a lot of "exceptions" in federal laws. So while everyone states age discrimination is illegal in the US, the reality is a little more complex. Not to mention the fact that it is very difficult fact to prove if the employer has at least a few brain cells firing (gee, we didn't hire him/her because too qualified, not the right skills, didn't seem to fit in, not enough skills or the fact that most of the US is at will employment-you can quit or be fired without cause).
Gee, I don't know, perhaps the fact that the patent has been ruled INVALID? Which indicates that it should never have been applied for (and granted) in the first place. Based on this information, I would be willing to go out on a limb and call it "dumb".
"That's because their HS teachers were too overworked to grade their writing, so they didn't assign much."
With all due respect, that is a failing of the teacher, or in other words, the difference between an excellent teacher and one that is average. My best high school teachers had no problem assigning an essay a week. Yes, they had a lot of grading, but they realized it was important and the best way for the students to learn. Any teacher unwilling to do the same is not worthy of being considered a good or excellent teacher.
Granted, a computer grading program could make it easier. In the hands of a good teacher, I don't have a problem. It certainly won't be any more biased than a person. But if the teacher wasn't willing to put forth the effort in the first place, how is this program going to make it better? Are they going to check all of the papers to make sure the program didn't screw up, use the extra time to emphasize advanced writing skills, etc.? Or are they going to treat it like an assembly line? I know which one I would place money on...
But isn't what we really want to know in the end the weather in a certain area in the future? I have little doubt that the models are improving, incorporating better and more data, etc. (I study geology). But the output is climate. How useful is it really to know that the average temperature increase is X degrees? The effects of that change is important. Does that mean winter gets warmer, summer, both, daily highs, daily lows, daily temp ranges, etc. All of these can really moderate or exagerate a change of a few degrees. How much increase is too much, can we tell? A couple of bad weeks of weather can destroy crops, or save them, but the models can't predict this.
What is the confidence level of this data? If we have to radically change our way of life to prevent further warming I would suggest that 95% confidence of somewhat vague results is not nearly good enough. Can these models realistically get better? I don't think so. Heck, I don't even know if they can get that good considering some of the data sources.
Luckily, most, (probably all) of the climate models take into account sun activity, either directly or indirectly. The real trick is to determine the value. From the scientific talks I have listened to, overestimating the sun activity is the easiest way to overestimate warming.
I don't think it applies to ALL scientific projects. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to find the answer even if we don't have all the variables of course. The problem is, the models are very sensitive to certain assumptions (or approximations). So, if the models say there is a 95% chance of a few degrees warming in the next century, is that good enough? Hell, what does that mean, really? Some places will warm more, some places may actually cool (or warm less). Is that the average temperature? The high? The low? These things really matter, and the models aren't very good at predicting the specifics (what will this mean to Ohio, Germany, Ukraine, blah, blah). You need much better information, computing power is secondary. It is likely that some places will benefit (so why do they want to prevent it...), others will lose. Oh yeah, and we're only 95% certain, for instance, of a given temperature increase, say 2 degrees warming. The EFFECTS are what are important, NOT the warming. IF 2 deg. are bad, and we are 95% certain, and to combat this we have to reduce emissions to oh, say, early 20th century levels, are you willing to do this? To take that chance, considering it WILL severely impact the economy (if we are lucky). I sure as heck am not.
First, the Prius can haul at least 4 people, maybe more. Granted, not 6, but that's mostly irrelevant. Most vehicles used for commuting only carry one person. Second, I don't know where you get the idea that it "rarely" gets its advertised mileage, sure SOME or even MANY people may not get the EPA mileage but that does not equate to rarely. Third, even if we assume really bad mileage, 30 plus mpg is still over twice what a Hummer gets. Fourth, what premium? Compare the prius to a camry (both midsize cars), they seem to cost about the same. They sure as heck don't cost as much in the long run when you factor in operating costs and I believe there is a tax rebate available for the Prius. And in any case, the Prius costs a lot less than a Hummer or many other SUV's....
Or you could insist that the police actually have good marksmenship (even under fire). Their guns and ammo were accurate enough to get head shots (not much armor there...). The users (police) obviously weren't. If I can do this at 25 yards under ideal conditions with minimal training, you should expect police to be able to do it under stressful conditions. It is their JOB after all, and lives depend on it (especially theirs). You don't need a technological solution to a training problem.
That's also why it's terrible to use speeding tickets to determine insurance rates. Enforcement is arbitary and capricious. Ten cars speeding, one cop car, they can pull over anyone they want = instant probable cause, after all, everyone was breaking the law...
Solutions: Raise the speed limits. A lot. Some states have 75mph. Others have 55 mph. The state I live in (Ohio) has 55 and 65, and these are still low in many cases. Gee, it's 55 here, 65 there, but the road is the same. Or, this country road, 1.5 lanes wide is 55 but an interstate is 55, please. Of course people speed. There is no real reason to have lower than a 75mph limit on interstates. Hell, you could eliminate the limits and say "Safe and prudent" That's what we really have now anyway.
But what you say, won't people drive like maniacs? Like we'd notice a difference?
So, enforce driving laws that deal with safety. People driving too fast (or slow) generally make illegal lane changes, follow too closely, drive erratically, drive aggresively, drive recklessly, drive in the wrong lane, etc. Laws that exist but are rarely enforced now because 'speeding is bad' and easy to enforce. This has the positive effect of making the roads safer and penalizing the insurance of those who are really the poor drivers.
"Speeding doesn't really get you anywhere appreciably faster."
Really? If I go about 10% faster, say 72 in a 65mph zone, I do get there appreciably faster. The chance of me being pulled over is about nill. The chance of me being in an accident is probably not that much greater (can't really say), considering I'm probably still the slowest vehicle on the road...
"Go the same speed as traffic....You'll get there at about the same time, and not kill anyone in the process."
You do realize that these tend to be contradictory. Keeping up with traffic for the most part requires speeding. Sometimes quite more than I want 75, 80+ in a 65 zone, 65, 70+ in a 55 zone, etc. I really do agree with your other points though, just don't equate speeding with aggressive or boneheaded driving. I see plenty of stupidity at or below the speed limit:)
True. But what exactly do safe driving discounts and being a safe driver have in common? Generally these discounts mean you have no tickets or accidents. But speeding is not very useful in determining safety. At fault accidents, probably, other moving violations, probably. After all, how many people don't speed? Probably as many as get caught speeding, if that:)
For instance, I have a speeding ticket. The second in 17 years of driving. According to insurance companies, I am suddenly a more dangerous driver, more likely to be in accidents. But my driving ability hasn't changed. Sure, they may be able to lump me in a different category, but that does not mean their model is correct. It's just that the only data they have to predict whether people MIGHT cause future accidents is tickets, so they use it and try to justify it. Garbage in, garbage out.
If they really were concerned about safety, they would only give discounts to people who took real driving courses. Courses that teach you how to control your car. But then they might find that those people got tickets at a similar rate as other drivers, maybe even got into just as many accidents. Would kind of destroy their system, wouldn't it? After all, what is the justification for not giving discounts for people who successfully complete intensive driving courses, regardless of their records? That perhaps our system and consequences are much more random than we would like to admit? And there is not a good and equitable way to predict these outcomes?
Everything I have read about Iraq's infrastructure states that it is a complete mess (think FUBAR). It worked poorly before the invasion (the difference?-people who criticized Hussein ended up dead...). That cannot be fixed quickly. Your point about about getting the oil flowing flowing taking more time than expected makes this point quite well. If the equipment that brings in money doesn't work well....
Rebuilding is not a quick process. Never is. Going to take more than a year (especially since conflict is NOT over). We went from being a bogeyman under a dictator (it's the fault of the US) to being the one to blame (the US is here, everything is still broken, everything is their fault). It wasn't helped when the Iraqi's stole everything that wasn't bolted down after/during the invasion. It doesn't help when the utilities are sabotoged. And it sure isn't helped when the contractors get shot at/killed/tortured.
Ultimately, we have to give the Iraqi's at least partial control of their country. With control comes responsibility. There is a reason we aren't delaying the transfer of power. Once that happens, it won't be just "our" fault any longer. Then they may realize the enormity of the problem and that it won't and can't be fixed overnight.
Finally, about your Germany comment. Remember, Germany surrendered completely. There was little or no resistence after the war. The rebuilding effort took many years. The population was fairly homogeneous, supportive of the occupation, industrious, unified against the Soviets (hated them), etc. So, exactly what lessons from reconstruction Germany apply to Iraq?
Well, we did want to instill a sense of unity in the Iraqi people... I guess it's positive in a twisted sort of way. What I'm waiting for is an official statement saying that was our goal all along:)
Re:Mastercard is not stupid.
on
RFID MasterCard
·
· Score: 1
But do the CC companies actually lose money over fraud? Sure, in the short run. But someone pays for the fraud (customer fees, interest rates, merchant fees). Don't know of many CC companies that lose money...
And I don't see how this would help fraud if someone else stole your card... As they can recover money lost through fraud by other means, they only need to make their cards appear secure. After all, if the companies insisted that merchants check ID, fraud would decrease greatly. But that would make them harder to use, and might reduce income. Whoops!
Why exactly do you consider a college education wasted time? After all, you seem to need or use that "piece of paper that gets me interviews for decently-paid jobs."
If you didn't need or want the degree, why did you go in the first place?
I would expect that people who went to college learned how to research, write, improve reasoning skills, etc. in addition to any major specific information. Yes, you might not use equation xyz, but so what. College is not a technical school.
Although, in your case, it obviously didn't help your reasoning skills....
Oh, and how many students need a college degree? Only those who want to get a job that requires one. Duh. Sure, some of those jobs may not NEED a degree, but don't blame education for the laziness of those hiring.
Just because you have wrist pain and numbness does NOT mean you have carpal tunnel syndrome. I have had similar symptoms to what you state but not due to carpal tunnel problems. Heck, excessive bending of the wrists while typing for extended periods can bring on pain and numbness. From what I have read, carpal tunnel syndrome really sucks. And what is required to treat it (often surgery) is not required to treat run of the mill really painful wrist pain.
For a start, one of the other posts had a number of good points about proper computer posture. Keep your upper legs and forearms parallel to the floor. Feet on the floor. Bend your wrists as little as possible. Support your arms at/near the elbows (adjustable arms exist on good chairs for a reason). Let your fingers do the work of typing. Take breaks. Sit up straight.
Most of my problems went away after I improved my workspace. Most workspaces I have seen (or have worked at) are awful.
Slashdot Mirror
"But I think the problem is, when people get away with it so many more times than they get caught, they really believe it is in their best interest to cheat."
Unfortunately it probably is in their best interests to cheat. They managed to pass a lot of courses with minimal work. They did come out ahead-at least if their goal was to get a degree with a minimum of work.
If they get caught once, so what? What is the worst that will happen? Maybe an "F" on an assignment, possibly a course. Heck, they may have failed the course if they hadn't cheated! After all, what is the chance that they will be expelled when caught the first time or any time for that matter? Expulsion after the first or second time is the only way to really make cheating not pay considering how few people get caught. After all, as you learned, it is probably not the first time they cheated....
Now that we are really off-topic... Here are some points to consider.
1. It's easy to get scalded. Ever wonder why they suggest you turn your water heater temp down to 120 degrees? To prevent scalding (and to save energy).
2. Coffee is supposed to be brewed between 195 and 205 degrees (you DID know this, didn't you?), so it is likely to be HOT, REALLY HOT. Hot enough to cause third degree burns.
3. To summarize, the coffee wasn't "too fucking hot", she was a fool who didn't deserve ANY amount of money for burning HERSELF (or at best did something really foolish).
4. There is a reason for health insurance, so when you do something foolish or something bad happens to you (bad things happen to good people all the time...) you don't have massive medical bills.
Do you really need the accuracy and precision you are talking about? For 911 dispatch, who cares which property the tree is in. That level of precision and accuracy would be nice but is it needed or would the money be better spent elsewhere. Hell, USGS 7.5minute quads combined with Tiger, orthophoto, parcel data, and other info is probably good enough. I mean, how accurate is that water main map anyway.... After all, the responders have brains and in theory have at least a passing knowledge of the area...
Finally, in theory property lines used to create parcel maps were surveyed and you could just digitize them. Then georeference them. It should be good enough. If it isn't, then I doubt any amount of GPS is going to help at anything resembling a reasonable cost (if the maps are good enougth for people to find hydrants, water mains, property-then that can be transferred to the computer). Granted, it isn't easy. It's boring. It's tedious. It's time consuming. And the surveys and maps aren't always correct. But don't assume guys pounding pavement with a gps will do any better for anything resembling the same cost. Survey grade gps does not equal absolute gps accuracy. More correctly, you would need guys driving a van with differential gps to do better for roads at least(Navtech comes to mind)...
Personally, I think you give bands that play in bars too much credit :) Sure, they all don't suck, but a hell of a lot do. I also pay for the honor of seeing them (gee, I could be spending that money on beer....) Of course it is difficult to determine their ability when almost all of them believe that LOUDER IS BETTER especially in a SMALL ENCLOSED SPACE (HINT for bands: the highest setting on the amp is OPTIONAL, and you may sound better at lower settings). Then again, maybe that is a good indication of their ability... :)
Hello? Anyone home? This hypothesis was PUBLISHED as a paper in a SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL (Geological Society of America Bulletin). This is the proper way to conduct science. Of course if your goal was to look ignorant you succeeded. But I guess it is too much trouble to click on a link in the synopsis? It certainly would have taken less time than writing your reply...
Okay, here comes a rant...
Sure the cost of a "statistical" life may be between $5 and $10 million dollars. So what. What meaning does that have? To put it another way, if someone offered you that amount of money to kill you, would you accept it? No? Why not? Isn't that the "value" of your life?
Just because we can assign a value to a human life doesn't make it a meaningful value. Heck, the "value" is based in part upon a persons perception of risk. People are really bad at determining risk (familiar dangerous things considered safer than unfamiliar safer things) and our willingness to mitigate risk may be based on other factors (gee, this job is dangerous, but I kind of like having a place to live, or I don't have the skills to change a job etc.). Just because economists think they can put a value on a human life doesn't mean they are correct.
Finally, if you really can put a single number value on a human life, then do they really have a inherent right to exist?
Rant off...
Ah, yes, but because they have a signed piece of paper from the author of the code saying it is okay to use, there won't be a problem. I sure hope that I read that part of the interview wrong or it was written up wrong, otherwise maybe they didn't learn as many lessons as they thought...
Paper trails are nice, but as you noted, they can't prove ownership. Of course, if someone later believes that piece of code was copied (maybe the author didn't have permision to use it or copied it his/her self) they have a nice way to prove infringement. After all, a paper trail does not absolve those at the top of responsibility....
Because I'm not a programmer or coder, maybe you could answer this question. How is the kernel code documentation (where the code came from) different than that in any other business? In other words, if Megacorp A wanted/needed to track down who added a particular line of code, could they? Could they determine it wasn't stolen, copyrighted, etc? Knowing how documentation is done (or not done) in organizations or lost over time, etc., is this a problem unique to the Linux kernel, or is the fact that the kernel development is so visible?
Federal law prohibits age discrimination against those 40 and older in companies with 20 or more employees. Don't fit in those categories? Then age discrimination is legal, unless state law (or case law) says otherwise.
Never forget that there are a lot of "exceptions" in federal laws. So while everyone states age discrimination is illegal in the US, the reality is a little more complex. Not to mention the fact that it is very difficult fact to prove if the employer has at least a few brain cells firing (gee, we didn't hire him/her because too qualified, not the right skills, didn't seem to fit in, not enough skills or the fact that most of the US is at will employment-you can quit or be fired without cause).
"I'm sorry, what's dumb about this patent?"
Gee, I don't know, perhaps the fact that the patent has been ruled INVALID? Which indicates that it should never have been applied for (and granted) in the first place. Based on this information, I would be willing to go out on a limb and call it "dumb".
"That's because their HS teachers were too overworked to grade their writing, so they didn't assign much."
With all due respect, that is a failing of the teacher, or in other words, the difference between an excellent teacher and one that is average. My best high school teachers had no problem assigning an essay a week. Yes, they had a lot of grading, but they realized it was important and the best way for the students to learn. Any teacher unwilling to do the same is not worthy of being considered a good or excellent teacher.
Granted, a computer grading program could make it easier. In the hands of a good teacher, I don't have a problem. It certainly won't be any more biased than a person. But if the teacher wasn't willing to put forth the effort in the first place, how is this program going to make it better? Are they going to check all of the papers to make sure the program didn't screw up, use the extra time to emphasize advanced writing skills, etc.? Or are they going to treat it like an assembly line? I know which one I would place money on...
But isn't what we really want to know in the end the weather in a certain area in the future? I have little doubt that the models are improving, incorporating better and more data, etc. (I study geology). But the output is climate. How useful is it really to know that the average temperature increase is X degrees? The effects of that change is important. Does that mean winter gets warmer, summer, both, daily highs, daily lows, daily temp ranges, etc. All of these can really moderate or exagerate a change of a few degrees. How much increase is too much, can we tell? A couple of bad weeks of weather can destroy crops, or save them, but the models can't predict this.
What is the confidence level of this data? If we have to radically change our way of life to prevent further warming I would suggest that 95% confidence of somewhat vague results is not nearly good enough. Can these models realistically get better? I don't think so. Heck, I don't even know if they can get that good considering some of the data sources.
Luckily, most, (probably all) of the climate models take into account sun activity, either directly or indirectly. The real trick is to determine the value. From the scientific talks I have listened to, overestimating the sun activity is the easiest way to overestimate warming.
I don't think it applies to ALL scientific projects. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to find the answer even if we don't have all the variables of course. The problem is, the models are very sensitive to certain assumptions (or approximations). So, if the models say there is a 95% chance of a few degrees warming in the next century, is that good enough?
Hell, what does that mean, really? Some places will warm more, some places may actually cool (or warm less). Is that the average temperature? The high? The low? These things really matter, and the models aren't very good at predicting the specifics (what will this mean to Ohio, Germany, Ukraine, blah, blah). You need much better information, computing power is secondary.
It is likely that some places will benefit (so why do they want to prevent it...), others will lose. Oh yeah, and we're only 95% certain, for instance, of a given temperature increase, say 2 degrees warming. The EFFECTS are what are important, NOT the warming. IF 2 deg. are bad, and we are 95% certain, and to combat this we have to reduce emissions to oh, say, early 20th century levels, are you willing to do this? To take that chance, considering it WILL severely impact the economy (if we are lucky). I sure as heck am not.
First, the Prius can haul at least 4 people, maybe more. Granted, not 6, but that's mostly irrelevant. Most vehicles used for commuting only carry one person.
Second, I don't know where you get the idea that it "rarely" gets its advertised mileage, sure SOME or even MANY people may not get the EPA mileage but that does not equate to rarely.
Third, even if we assume really bad mileage, 30 plus mpg is still over twice what a Hummer gets.
Fourth, what premium? Compare the prius to a camry (both midsize cars), they seem to cost about the same. They sure as heck don't cost as much in the long run when you factor in operating costs and I believe there is a tax rebate available for the Prius. And in any case, the Prius costs a lot less than a Hummer or many other SUV's....
Or you could insist that the police actually have good marksmenship (even under fire). Their guns and ammo were accurate enough to get head shots (not much armor there...). The users (police) obviously weren't. If I can do this at 25 yards under ideal conditions with minimal training, you should expect police to be able to do it under stressful conditions. It is their JOB after all, and lives depend on it (especially theirs). You don't need a technological solution to a training problem.
That's also why it's terrible to use speeding tickets to determine insurance rates. Enforcement is arbitary and capricious. Ten cars speeding, one cop car, they can pull over anyone they want = instant probable cause, after all, everyone was breaking the law...
Solutions:
Raise the speed limits. A lot. Some states have 75mph. Others have 55 mph. The state I live in (Ohio) has 55 and 65, and these are still low in many cases. Gee, it's 55 here, 65 there, but the road is the same. Or, this country road, 1.5 lanes wide is 55 but an interstate is 55, please. Of course people speed. There is no real reason to have lower than a 75mph limit on interstates. Hell, you could eliminate the limits and say "Safe and prudent" That's what we really have now anyway.
But what you say, won't people drive like maniacs? Like we'd notice a difference?
So, enforce driving laws that deal with safety. People driving too fast (or slow) generally make illegal lane changes, follow too closely, drive erratically, drive aggresively, drive recklessly, drive in the wrong lane, etc. Laws that exist but are rarely enforced now because 'speeding is bad' and easy to enforce. This has the positive effect of making the roads safer and penalizing the insurance of those who are really the poor drivers.
"Speeding doesn't really get you anywhere appreciably faster."
:)
Really? If I go about 10% faster, say 72 in a 65mph zone, I do get there appreciably faster. The chance of me being pulled over is about nill. The chance of me being in an accident is probably not that much greater (can't really say), considering I'm probably still the slowest vehicle on the road...
"Go the same speed as traffic....You'll get there at about the same time, and not kill anyone in the process."
You do realize that these tend to be contradictory. Keeping up with traffic for the most part requires speeding. Sometimes quite more than I want 75, 80+ in a 65 zone, 65, 70+ in a 55 zone, etc. I really do agree with your other points though, just don't equate speeding with aggressive or boneheaded driving. I see plenty of stupidity at or below the speed limit
True. But what exactly do safe driving discounts and being a safe driver have in common? Generally these discounts mean you have no tickets or accidents. But speeding is not very useful in determining safety. At fault accidents, probably, other moving violations, probably. After all, how many people don't speed? Probably as many as get caught speeding, if that :)
For instance, I have a speeding ticket. The second in 17 years of driving. According to insurance companies, I am suddenly a more dangerous driver, more likely to be in accidents. But my driving ability hasn't changed. Sure, they may be able to lump me in a different category, but that does not mean their model is correct. It's just that the only data they have to predict whether people MIGHT cause future accidents is tickets, so they use it and try to justify it. Garbage in, garbage out.
If they really were concerned about safety, they would only give discounts to people who took real driving courses. Courses that teach you how to control your car. But then they might find that those people got tickets at a similar rate as other drivers, maybe even got into just as many accidents. Would kind of destroy their system, wouldn't it? After all, what is the justification for not giving discounts for people who successfully complete intensive driving courses, regardless of their records? That perhaps our system and consequences are much more random than we would like to admit? And there is not a good and equitable way to predict these outcomes?
Easier? How exactly?
Everything I have read about Iraq's infrastructure states that it is a complete mess (think FUBAR). It worked poorly before the invasion (the difference?-people who criticized Hussein ended up dead...). That cannot be fixed quickly. Your point about about getting the oil flowing flowing taking more time than expected makes this point quite well. If the equipment that brings in money doesn't work well....
Rebuilding is not a quick process. Never is. Going to take more than a year (especially since conflict is NOT over). We went from being a bogeyman under a dictator (it's the fault of the US) to being the one to blame (the US is here, everything is still broken, everything is their fault). It wasn't helped when the Iraqi's stole everything that wasn't bolted down after/during the invasion. It doesn't help when the utilities are sabotoged. And it sure isn't helped when the contractors get shot at/killed/tortured.
Ultimately, we have to give the Iraqi's at least partial control of their country. With control comes responsibility. There is a reason we aren't delaying the transfer of power. Once that happens, it won't be just "our" fault any longer. Then they may realize the enormity of the problem and that it won't and can't be fixed overnight.
Finally, about your Germany comment. Remember, Germany surrendered completely. There was little or no resistence after the war. The rebuilding effort took many years. The population was fairly homogeneous, supportive of the occupation, industrious, unified against the Soviets (hated them), etc.
So, exactly what lessons from reconstruction Germany apply to Iraq?
Well, we did want to instill a sense of unity in the Iraqi people... I guess it's positive in a twisted sort of way. What I'm waiting for is an official statement saying that was our goal all along :)
But do the CC companies actually lose money over fraud? Sure, in the short run. But someone pays for the fraud (customer fees, interest rates, merchant fees). Don't know of many CC companies that lose money...
And I don't see how this would help fraud if someone else stole your card... As they can recover money lost through fraud by other means, they only need to make their cards appear secure. After all, if the companies insisted that merchants check ID, fraud would decrease greatly. But that would make them harder to use, and might reduce income. Whoops!
Why exactly do you consider a college education wasted time? After all, you seem to need or use that "piece of paper that gets me interviews for decently-paid jobs."
If you didn't need or want the degree, why did you go in the first place?
I would expect that people who went to college learned how to research, write, improve reasoning skills, etc. in addition to any major specific information. Yes, you might not use equation xyz, but so what. College is not a technical school.
Although, in your case, it obviously didn't help your reasoning skills....
Oh, and how many students need a college degree?
Only those who want to get a job that requires one. Duh. Sure, some of those jobs may not NEED a degree, but don't blame education for the laziness of those hiring.
I used to play the oboe. Did not help my wrist pain one bit (made it worse....)
and get a proper diagnosis first.
Just because you have wrist pain and numbness does NOT mean you have carpal tunnel syndrome. I have had similar symptoms to what you state but not due to carpal tunnel problems. Heck, excessive bending of the wrists while typing for extended periods can bring on pain and numbness. From what I have read, carpal tunnel syndrome really sucks. And what is required to treat it (often surgery) is not required to treat run of the mill really painful wrist pain.
For a start, one of the other posts had a number of good points about proper computer posture. Keep your upper legs and forearms parallel to the floor. Feet on the floor. Bend your wrists as little as possible. Support your arms at/near the elbows (adjustable arms exist on good chairs for a reason). Let your fingers do the work of typing. Take breaks. Sit up straight.
Most of my problems went away after I improved my workspace. Most workspaces I have seen (or have worked at) are awful.