It is their business when their business depends on it. The common complaints users have with Windows have led them there.
Bullshit. Microsoft's wholesale spying, backdoors and keylogging sure as Jerry Sandusky boinks little boys is just wrong. It's no solution, as witnessed by the wonderful breakage that W10 has inflicted upon users. All the phoning home hasn't changed that a bit.
Since I have exactly one program that I need Windows for, I have a Windows 10 machine. The machine sits by itself, with only that program running, and nothing else. No email, no browser, only that program. It wouldn't even be connected to a network if it didn't have to use IP to a piece of hardware. So it can phone home that boring shit all it wants.
If the price of using Microsoft is them having every bit of data they want on all user's computers, screw 'em, along with the websites that insist I have to allow them to install maladware on my computer.
But tell me. Since I have isolated my W10 computer form the others, does Microsoft need to know what is on my other computers as well? Do I need to install a phonehome program for OSX and Linux to report to Redmond and anyone else they and you demand?
Re:Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 1
I actually support Trump at this point. Not b'cos of Cruz's 'Dominionist' underpinnings - honestly, I don't believe you conspiracy kooks
Go to YouTube, and search on "Cruz domionist" It will take you to some talks/sermons made by Ted Cruz'z father. If you think that words right out of th horses mouth are conspiracy theories, then you might reexamine who is a kook.
As for your man Trump, he's merely another ChickenHawk who is so very tough, He's going to tell the world where the bear shit in the buckwheat, but too cowardly to face Megan Kelly. He's a bully, and when you stand him down, he retreats. Not presidential material - all show, and no blow. Kelly would make a much better, and more effect president than Trump.
Although Alex Putin really likes him. I always think that it might be a sketchy choice when a KGB guy supports an American Candidate for president. MAybe they should get a room? Trump could be the first American Tsar, eh tovarishch?
Yep, first thing Word does when it opens a document is reformat it for the default printer you're connected to and you can't stop it.
Ach - I forgot about that one. It was a nuisance doing posters in PowePoint with that "feature."
Re:Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 1
He wants to have america have a "spiritual rebirth" and he's making Bushlike pronouncements from aircraft carriers.
Are you sure you're not confusing Rand Paul with Ted Cruz? Sure, Paul gave a campaign speech on an aircraft carrier to make himself look tough, but Cruz is the Dominionist here talking about spiritual rebirths.
Glad you called me on that, because I completely misquoted the spiritual rebirth bit. So to correct myself I did a little research. http://time.com/3433033/values...
It was Cruz who spoke of a rebirth.
At the Values Voters Conference where both Cruz and Paul spoke, Paul instead noted “What America needs is not just another politician or promises,” he said. “What America really needs is a revival.” and
“Where the spirit of the lord is there is liberty,” Paul said in conclusion, quoting from Corinthians 3:17. Then he said the opposite was also true. “Where there is liberty, there is always space for God.”
Why do/did they think they can just outsource their ads for their online product?
Because directly courting advertisers and vetting every ad adds overhead to a process which already isn't that profitable.
Perhaps they shouldn't be in business then. Is it our responsibility to make certain that Wired or Forbes stay afloat?
Additionally, outsourcing the product makes the process more flexible; ads can be quickly tested and swapped out for better performing adds.
Which of course, is a whole hellava big part of the problem. You know, a lot of us would just be happy if they didn't infect our computers with malware. Or do they have to do that too?
I'm sure there are other benefits to outsourcing ads too.
Like no need for an advertising department?
I'm not defending online advertising practices. I'm just saying that there's a good reason that things evolved into the current state of affairs. It's hard to find a solution without really understanding the problem.
The problem stated in it's simplest terms is that the amount of advertising, and it's intrusion and interacting with itself and the malware that accepting the advertising puts on your computer has reached the point where not only geeks, but normal people are installing it.
To make it even shorter, present day webertising is killing itself.
Understanding the problem means being able to answer the question you posed without simply dismissing Wired and the likes as idiots.
I'll dismiss them as unable to think beyond the status quo. They are telling me that in order to see their content, I must accept malware onto my computer. It's my computer, and I'll not accept that any more than some stranger knocking on my door and telling me I have to share my wife with him or else he'll go away.
Answers are no, and no. I keep my computer and my wife's integrity, and the guy at the door doesn't get laid, and I don't see any of Wired's content. Or the ads.
The answer in concept is simple. They need to serve their advertisements up in a way that I will consent to watch them. If they cannot place ads any other way than serving them up with a side of malware, and tracking, andspending more time and data for the ads, than the content - well goodbye Wired, not my problem.
As I've noted before, the web is terribly terribly broken. Ad's have broken it, and if as I think you are suggesting, there is no fix - it must be exactly like it is now - the future isn't too bright for places like Forbes, wired, and the whole internet.
I can see how "interest-based ads" based on the content of pages in your browsing history are intrusive. But without any form of tracking at all, how do you propose to not repeatedly show the same ad to the same user?
This arms race of screaming louder and louder for attention, like the monster truck voice selling cars at the dealership, can only go so high... eventually even the Zima crowd will tire of it.
1. Yes
2. We've hit that point now.
I've "fixed: a lot of balky computers for a lot of "Grandmas", because "It's running so slowly - can't you do something? And I say - yes, yes I can! so adblock goes on, and depending on their surfing habits, noscript.
Suddenly a nice running computer that they can use on the web.
And they tell their friends "That nice young man with the weird name really helped my computer problem - you should call him!
That horse is out of the barn, and your Zima people (do they still make that crap?) are installing them. They have tired of it.
I see this type of comment fairly frequently, and I understand the sentiment, but what exactly do you propose that they do instead? Just go bankrupt? Can they somehow regain your trust by running non-abusive ads?
Change the paradigm. At this point in time there are sites out there that are becoming so ad and script laden that they actually don't work. Without an adblocker, the Internet is about 80 percent of the way toward unuseable. Who will see the ads when they hit 100 percent unusable?. The sites are the problem, not the users. It has become safer to go to porn sites than to mainstream new and story providers. Read that last sentence a couple times, and think about it.
So I can only say to them what I kept saying the RIAA for the past decades: I can live without you. Can you without me?
I can't understand why you aren't modded at 5 yet. Aside whatever I am doing for research or purchasing, sites like Forbes and Wired are 100 percent voluntary, and only as entertainment value. My need actual need for them is zero.
And if they go away, it might just free up a little banwidth - so a net plus.
Or complaining that a TV station is using your electric to show you TV commercials.
If Television stations loaded malware onto my computer, I'd be plenty pissed.
You have to work pretty hard to keep your computer from turning into your personal Krojack spying machine. And if you aren't using adblock and noscript and bettersurfing - that one goes after the cookies they try to hide form you - guess what you got one.
I did an experiment and reported it here a few years ago, when the bandwidth/tracking/malware epidemic wasn't anything like is now. It's here somewhere in the bowels of Slashdot. I'm paraphrasing but here's teh basics:
I installed and activated noscript and adblock, as well as better surfing.
First I blocked everything, then started unblocking the scripts after finding out who they were
On some of the popular pages, there were as many as 30 scripts that ran. So I took the time to look 'em up.
Google analytics was there - no surprise.
One surprise was the amount of information that went to facebook on one site I checked, there were maybe ten facebook serves my computer was phoning home to.
note 1 - Facebook knows all about you even if you were wise enough to never open an account there.
There was I think 2 I never figured out. Use your imagination.
Out of all these scripts, there was exactly one that was actually trying to help, and not track or infect my computer. It was a script to help with fonting across platforms and Browsers.
And now? It's even worse. I've seen websites refuse to load for some people who have their computers so bitched up with malware. Grandma is starting to use adblockers, no so much because of the reasons I gave, but because it's getting hard to surf.
The web is in critical condition, and it isn't our fault. It's a failed paradigm, where you can go to a site that should be reputable, but it serves you malware.
So if Forbes or Wired doesn't let me in, they can go cry me a fsckin river. I consider them a malware provider, and they are a malware provider, and I don't give a rats ass if they go out of business. In fact, its just fine with me if they do. Either way, I'm not looking at their stupid ads. I call it the website self suicide option.
These days if I want someone to have an exact copy of a document, I produce it in LibreOffice (or OpenOffice) and export to PDF.
If exact were the metric, sure. But you don't think that the same program for two computers that you paid hundreds of dollars for shouldn't at least look sortakinda similar on both?
A trend toward moving toward "bare metal" physical boxes for the computing.
Not really. The trend is moving towards virtual machines.
The author of the linked story disagrees with you.
Re:Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 0
Oh, so you want to debate what Cruz believed when he was 18?
I would suggest that you do a little research on Ted Cruz, before you deify him.
Cruz is a Christian Dominionist. Christian Domnionists have a slightly alterd version of fundamentalism. The short story of it is exaplained by his father. There are two types of leaders in Dominionism, the Priests, and the Kings.
The Priest's job in life is to spread the dominionist's word of God. That would be like Ted's father. Ted, on the other hand, is considered a Domnionist King. A dominionist King's job in life is to declare war on the enemies of God, defeat them, and take all of their wealth. What do they do with that wealth? They give it to the Dominionist priests, to further Their version of god's worth.
Check it out on Youtube, to see who you are supporting. Actual sermons, not even opinion.
To compare a Dominionist to a Randian - even as corrupted as Paul's version has become, is seriously far fetched when you know the background and facts.
Re:Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
you might hold your nose and accept Sanders' economic policy rather than accept the Dominionist totalitarianism that the rest of the Republican candidates want.
This needs modded up. It's good to see that someone is paying attention. Dominionist is exactly where the Pubs are heading, and everyone should do some research on exactly what they are and stand for.
Re:Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 1
That doesn't necessarily make Rand Paul a socialist. Like his father he has Libertarian leanings, which means he'll agree with socialists on some stuff, and with conservatives on other stuff. (In other words, both parties get to hate him.)
He wants to have america have a "spiritual rebirth" and he's making Bushlike pronouncements from aircraft carriers.
If you want to run as a Republican, they will tell you what you believe. And none of it is libertarian in the least.
Want to know what sucked and sucked really badly? Having to pay for the mighty flagship Microsoft Office for the PC. Then paying for the mighty flagship Microsoft Office for the Mac. Then when you take a document from one to the other, they hardly resemble each other. If' I'm paying for a program on two computers it might be nice to have the same document look the same on each computer
After standardizing on the supposedly inferior free Office on my Mac's my PC's and My Linux boxes, documents are passed back and forth without an issue. Been several years now, and Microsoft Office is the incompatible one, the outlier.
It must be great to have superhuman powers and be able to pay attention to an infinite number of things at the same time without impairing any of the other tasks at hand. For us mere mortals, throwing in additional distractions will always increase the odds of missing something else.
Yeah, like driving safely in icy/snowy conditions requires infinite multitasking. Move to northwestern Ohio where all of the roads are on a grid pattern since anything other than straight roads are scawy for you.
It's difficult to find vehicles that even have a manual anymore. I love driving them! 'Merica... fuck yeah!
What's worse, those goddamn 'murricans went over to Germany and took over ZF Friedrichshafen AG where they make t. They also made them install these shifters on some Audi cars.
I don't know I lived in New England my entire life and I've never had any of the troubles you mention on snow and ice. With all wheel drive, modern snow tires, keeping you speed somewhat reasonable and engine breaking its pretty hard to slide off the road or not make it up a hill.
I have a late model Jeep with electronic traction control. It does have one issue though. The traction control is so good that I can take off n a hill on glare ice in 4WD, at angles up to the point that the thing will just slide backwards from gravity. It's actually fun to watch people's reaction to the trick.
But ice is ice, and while the antilock brakes help a lot, I really have to remember that it will go a whole lot better than it will stop, so the driver as you note has to be really careful. And at some point being on a highway under glare ice conditions is simply unwise without chains. Even then there are limits.
Also, if I have to navigate an obstacle course to get through a pedestrian crossing, I'm probably going to be looking at the obstacles, instead of the approaching cyclist or pedestrian.
So you are admitting you can't drive for shit? Is there some vision problem? Or bad reflexes or mental fog or what? Most of us can go around corners without plowing into things. Better get that checked out.
That's all fine and good until you throw snow and ice into the mix, then all those objects become wrapped around cars and cause accidents from the excessive braking/swerving required to navigate them during inclement weather. I've lost count of how many signs and poles I've seen bent over clear to the ground after storms, or cars losing control in S-curves from the "scenic/safer" road design.
Bolshy yarblockos. If a person slips going around a curve, and hits something, they would have trouble braking in a straight line. Your bizzare analogy is trying to argue that going in a straight line on ice is safe. Drive for the conditions, and don't blame a curvy road for bad driving decisions.
Which by the way, I've seen street signs taken down by idiots on nice straight roads. Usually sent flying because those straight roads allowed them to have greater speed before they hit the brakes and plowed into the sign.
The street I grew up on was designed for horses, not multi-ton vehicles.
Or are you saying kids should have to transverse a mile of crosswalks to play in a park infested with transients simply to avoid commuters looking for "shortcut"?
So many people believe that their right to drive whatever speed they desire, down any street they desire is somewhere in the constitution. They tend to believe they are superior drivers, have almost superhuman reflexes, and that laws are for other people.
I know it is fashionable on slashdot to jump on the "Won't someone think of the Children?" meme, but some of these folk better hope they never kill a kid, and their posting behavior is illuminated in a criminal or civil trial.
Because it is our neighborhood, it is our children's neighborhood. and they are a guest in it. And we rather like our children, and if some asshat thinks that reckless disregard for them is also a right, well, they might just find our reactions less than accomodating.
Slashdot Mirror
It is their business when their business depends on it. The common complaints users have with Windows have led them there.
Bullshit. Microsoft's wholesale spying, backdoors and keylogging sure as Jerry Sandusky boinks little boys is just wrong. It's no solution, as witnessed by the wonderful breakage that W10 has inflicted upon users. All the phoning home hasn't changed that a bit.
Since I have exactly one program that I need Windows for, I have a Windows 10 machine. The machine sits by itself, with only that program running, and nothing else. No email, no browser, only that program. It wouldn't even be connected to a network if it didn't have to use IP to a piece of hardware. So it can phone home that boring shit all it wants.
If the price of using Microsoft is them having every bit of data they want on all user's computers, screw 'em, along with the websites that insist I have to allow them to install maladware on my computer.
But tell me. Since I have isolated my W10 computer form the others, does Microsoft need to know what is on my other computers as well? Do I need to install a phonehome program for OSX and Linux to report to Redmond and anyone else they and you demand?
I actually support Trump at this point. Not b'cos of Cruz's 'Dominionist' underpinnings - honestly, I don't believe you conspiracy kooks
Go to YouTube, and search on "Cruz domionist" It will take you to some talks/sermons made by Ted Cruz'z father. If you think that words right out of th horses mouth are conspiracy theories, then you might reexamine who is a kook.
As for your man Trump, he's merely another ChickenHawk who is so very tough, He's going to tell the world where the bear shit in the buckwheat, but too cowardly to face Megan Kelly. He's a bully, and when you stand him down, he retreats. Not presidential material - all show, and no blow. Kelly would make a much better, and more effect president than Trump.
Although Alex Putin really likes him. I always think that it might be a sketchy choice when a KGB guy supports an American Candidate for president. MAybe they should get a room? Trump could be the first American Tsar, eh tovarishch?
Yep, first thing Word does when it opens a document is reformat it for the default printer you're connected to and you can't stop it.
Ach - I forgot about that one. It was a nuisance doing posters in PowePoint with that "feature."
He wants to have america have a "spiritual rebirth" and he's making Bushlike pronouncements from aircraft carriers.
Are you sure you're not confusing Rand Paul with Ted Cruz? Sure, Paul gave a campaign speech on an aircraft carrier to make himself look tough, but Cruz is the Dominionist here talking about spiritual rebirths.
Glad you called me on that, because I completely misquoted the spiritual rebirth bit. So to correct myself I did a little research. http://time.com/3433033/values...
It was Cruz who spoke of a rebirth.
At the Values Voters Conference where both Cruz and Paul spoke, Paul instead noted “What America needs is not just another politician or promises,” he said. “What America really needs is a revival.” and
“Where the spirit of the lord is there is liberty,” Paul said in conclusion, quoting from Corinthians 3:17. Then he said the opposite was also true. “Where there is liberty, there is always space for God.”
I've used MS office all my life, and never actually PAID for it.
Well, working for the folks I did, we sorta had to pay for it.
Why do/did they think they can just outsource their ads for their online product?
Because directly courting advertisers and vetting every ad adds overhead to a process which already isn't that profitable.
Perhaps they shouldn't be in business then. Is it our responsibility to make certain that Wired or Forbes stay afloat? Additionally, outsourcing the product makes the process more flexible; ads can be quickly tested and swapped out for better performing adds.
Which of course, is a whole hellava big part of the problem. You know, a lot of us would just be happy if they didn't infect our computers with malware. Or do they have to do that too?
I'm sure there are other benefits to outsourcing ads too.
Like no need for an advertising department?
I'm not defending online advertising practices. I'm just saying that there's a good reason that things evolved into the current state of affairs. It's hard to find a solution without really understanding the problem.
The problem stated in it's simplest terms is that the amount of advertising, and it's intrusion and interacting with itself and the malware that accepting the advertising puts on your computer has reached the point where not only geeks, but normal people are installing it.
To make it even shorter, present day webertising is killing itself.
Understanding the problem means being able to answer the question you posed without simply dismissing Wired and the likes as idiots.
I'll dismiss them as unable to think beyond the status quo. They are telling me that in order to see their content, I must accept malware onto my computer. It's my computer, and I'll not accept that any more than some stranger knocking on my door and telling me I have to share my wife with him or else he'll go away.
Answers are no, and no. I keep my computer and my wife's integrity, and the guy at the door doesn't get laid, and I don't see any of Wired's content. Or the ads.
The answer in concept is simple. They need to serve their advertisements up in a way that I will consent to watch them. If they cannot place ads any other way than serving them up with a side of malware, and tracking, andspending more time and data for the ads, than the content - well goodbye Wired, not my problem.
As I've noted before, the web is terribly terribly broken. Ad's have broken it, and if as I think you are suggesting, there is no fix - it must be exactly like it is now - the future isn't too bright for places like Forbes, wired, and the whole internet.
I can see how "interest-based ads" based on the content of pages in your browsing history are intrusive. But without any form of tracking at all, how do you propose to not repeatedly show the same ad to the same user?
Sounds like television.
This arms race of screaming louder and louder for attention, like the monster truck voice selling cars at the dealership, can only go so high... eventually even the Zima crowd will tire of it.
1. Yes
2. We've hit that point now.
I've "fixed: a lot of balky computers for a lot of "Grandmas", because "It's running so slowly - can't you do something? And I say - yes, yes I can! so adblock goes on, and depending on their surfing habits, noscript.
Suddenly a nice running computer that they can use on the web.
And they tell their friends "That nice young man with the weird name really helped my computer problem - you should call him!
That horse is out of the barn, and your Zima people (do they still make that crap?) are installing them. They have tired of it.
I see this type of comment fairly frequently, and I understand the sentiment, but what exactly do you propose that they do instead? Just go bankrupt? Can they somehow regain your trust by running non-abusive ads?
Change the paradigm. At this point in time there are sites out there that are becoming so ad and script laden that they actually don't work. Without an adblocker, the Internet is about 80 percent of the way toward unuseable. Who will see the ads when they hit 100 percent unusable?. The sites are the problem, not the users. It has become safer to go to porn sites than to mainstream new and story providers. Read that last sentence a couple times, and think about it.
Right. Nobody is forcing me to go there.
So I can only say to them what I kept saying the RIAA for the past decades: I can live without you. Can you without me?
I can't understand why you aren't modded at 5 yet. Aside whatever I am doing for research or purchasing, sites like Forbes and Wired are 100 percent voluntary, and only as entertainment value. My need actual need for them is zero.
And if they go away, it might just free up a little banwidth - so a net plus.
Or complaining that a TV station is using your electric to show you TV commercials.
If Television stations loaded malware onto my computer, I'd be plenty pissed.
You have to work pretty hard to keep your computer from turning into your personal Krojack spying machine. And if you aren't using adblock and noscript and bettersurfing - that one goes after the cookies they try to hide form you - guess what you got one.
I did an experiment and reported it here a few years ago, when the bandwidth/tracking/malware epidemic wasn't anything like is now. It's here somewhere in the bowels of Slashdot. I'm paraphrasing but here's teh basics:
I installed and activated noscript and adblock, as well as better surfing.
First I blocked everything, then started unblocking the scripts after finding out who they were On some of the popular pages, there were as many as 30 scripts that ran. So I took the time to look 'em up.
Google analytics was there - no surprise.
One surprise was the amount of information that went to facebook on one site I checked, there were maybe ten facebook serves my computer was phoning home to.
note 1 - Facebook knows all about you even if you were wise enough to never open an account there.
There was I think 2 I never figured out. Use your imagination.
Out of all these scripts, there was exactly one that was actually trying to help, and not track or infect my computer. It was a script to help with fonting across platforms and Browsers.
And now? It's even worse. I've seen websites refuse to load for some people who have their computers so bitched up with malware. Grandma is starting to use adblockers, no so much because of the reasons I gave, but because it's getting hard to surf.
The web is in critical condition, and it isn't our fault. It's a failed paradigm, where you can go to a site that should be reputable, but it serves you malware.
So if Forbes or Wired doesn't let me in, they can go cry me a fsckin river. I consider them a malware provider, and they are a malware provider, and I don't give a rats ass if they go out of business. In fact, its just fine with me if they do. Either way, I'm not looking at their stupid ads. I call it the website self suicide option.
These days if I want someone to have an exact copy of a document, I produce it in LibreOffice (or OpenOffice) and export to PDF.
If exact were the metric, sure. But you don't think that the same program for two computers that you paid hundreds of dollars for shouldn't at least look sortakinda similar on both?
The tool you were after was Adobe FrameMaker
Or Scribus. Or TeX. Or anything that makes PDFs.
Or Apache Office. Where I don't have those issues. They give a free refund as well, if I'm not satisfied.
A trend toward moving toward "bare metal" physical boxes for the computing.
Not really. The trend is moving towards virtual machines.
The author of the linked story disagrees with you.
Oh, so you want to debate what Cruz believed when he was 18?
I would suggest that you do a little research on Ted Cruz, before you deify him.
Cruz is a Christian Dominionist. Christian Domnionists have a slightly alterd version of fundamentalism. The short story of it is exaplained by his father. There are two types of leaders in Dominionism, the Priests, and the Kings.
The Priest's job in life is to spread the dominionist's word of God. That would be like Ted's father. Ted, on the other hand, is considered a Domnionist King. A dominionist King's job in life is to declare war on the enemies of God, defeat them, and take all of their wealth. What do they do with that wealth? They give it to the Dominionist priests, to further Their version of god's worth.
Check it out on Youtube, to see who you are supporting. Actual sermons, not even opinion.
To compare a Dominionist to a Randian - even as corrupted as Paul's version has become, is seriously far fetched when you know the background and facts.
you might hold your nose and accept Sanders' economic policy rather than accept the Dominionist totalitarianism that the rest of the Republican candidates want.
This needs modded up. It's good to see that someone is paying attention. Dominionist is exactly where the Pubs are heading, and everyone should do some research on exactly what they are and stand for.
That doesn't necessarily make Rand Paul a socialist. Like his father he has Libertarian leanings, which means he'll agree with socialists on some stuff, and with conservatives on other stuff. (In other words, both parties get to hate him.)
He wants to have america have a "spiritual rebirth" and he's making Bushlike pronouncements from aircraft carriers.
If you want to run as a Republican, they will tell you what you believe. And none of it is libertarian in the least.
Or do libertarians have no principles whatsoever?
OpenOffice kind of sucked.
Want to know what sucked and sucked really badly? Having to pay for the mighty flagship Microsoft Office for the PC. Then paying for the mighty flagship Microsoft Office for the Mac. Then when you take a document from one to the other, they hardly resemble each other. If' I'm paying for a program on two computers it might be nice to have the same document look the same on each computer
After standardizing on the supposedly inferior free Office on my Mac's my PC's and My Linux boxes, documents are passed back and forth without an issue. Been several years now, and Microsoft Office is the incompatible one, the outlier.
It must be great to have superhuman powers and be able to pay attention to an infinite number of things at the same time without impairing any of the other tasks at hand. For us mere mortals, throwing in additional distractions will always increase the odds of missing something else.
Yeah, like driving safely in icy/snowy conditions requires infinite multitasking. Move to northwestern Ohio where all of the roads are on a grid pattern since anything other than straight roads are scawy for you.
It's difficult to find vehicles that even have a manual anymore. I love driving them! 'Merica... fuck yeah!
What's worse, those goddamn 'murricans went over to Germany and took over ZF Friedrichshafen AG where they make t. They also made them install these shifters on some Audi cars.
http://www.zf.com/corporate/en... Gehrdehrm 'murricans!
Curves and obstacles do not slow people down. Instead, people have more problems staying in their own lane.
You live in Northern Ohio where all the roads can be straight or something? We don't have your problem here in the no a straight roads PA.
I don't know I lived in New England my entire life and I've never had any of the troubles you mention on snow and ice. With all wheel drive, modern snow tires, keeping you speed somewhat reasonable and engine breaking its pretty hard to slide off the road or not make it up a hill.
I have a late model Jeep with electronic traction control. It does have one issue though. The traction control is so good that I can take off n a hill on glare ice in 4WD, at angles up to the point that the thing will just slide backwards from gravity. It's actually fun to watch people's reaction to the trick.
But ice is ice, and while the antilock brakes help a lot, I really have to remember that it will go a whole lot better than it will stop, so the driver as you note has to be really careful. And at some point being on a highway under glare ice conditions is simply unwise without chains. Even then there are limits.
Also, if I have to navigate an obstacle course to get through a pedestrian crossing, I'm probably going to be looking at the obstacles, instead of the approaching cyclist or pedestrian.
So you are admitting you can't drive for shit? Is there some vision problem? Or bad reflexes or mental fog or what? Most of us can go around corners without plowing into things. Better get that checked out.
That's all fine and good until you throw snow and ice into the mix, then all those objects become wrapped around cars and cause accidents from the excessive braking/swerving required to navigate them during inclement weather. I've lost count of how many signs and poles I've seen bent over clear to the ground after storms, or cars losing control in S-curves from the "scenic/safer" road design.
Bolshy yarblockos. If a person slips going around a curve, and hits something, they would have trouble braking in a straight line. Your bizzare analogy is trying to argue that going in a straight line on ice is safe. Drive for the conditions, and don't blame a curvy road for bad driving decisions.
Which by the way, I've seen street signs taken down by idiots on nice straight roads. Usually sent flying because those straight roads allowed them to have greater speed before they hit the brakes and plowed into the sign.
The street I grew up on was designed for horses, not multi-ton vehicles.
Or are you saying kids should have to transverse a mile of crosswalks to play in a park infested with transients simply to avoid commuters looking for "shortcut"?
So many people believe that their right to drive whatever speed they desire, down any street they desire is somewhere in the constitution. They tend to believe they are superior drivers, have almost superhuman reflexes, and that laws are for other people.
I know it is fashionable on slashdot to jump on the "Won't someone think of the Children?" meme, but some of these folk better hope they never kill a kid, and their posting behavior is illuminated in a criminal or civil trial.
Because it is our neighborhood, it is our children's neighborhood. and they are a guest in it. And we rather like our children, and if some asshat thinks that reckless disregard for them is also a right, well, they might just find our reactions less than accomodating.