More likely because a conservative would follow the constitution that puts all power not specifically enumerated to the Federal Government to the states and the people -- i.e. Individual Liberty.
You are referring to Right-Wing Progressives. This is wildly different from conservatism.
Remember that next time you are being gunned down. It's not your job to pass judgement, don't stop the assailant -- that's a judges job. Be sure to set an appointment for that hearing. I'm sure it will be highly effective, and lives will be saved.
It did spiral out of control quickly, which is why the perpetrator was eliminated. Let's not use the wrong word here -- he wasn't SUSPECTED of the crimes. He was actively perpetrating them. Lethal force was absolutely warranted.
Unless it's an automatic, in which case you may need to leave the engine on while utilizing the transmission's braking bands. I've never tried that with the car in off, but I understand that most automatic transmissions require pressure from the PTO side and will not get it from the wheels.
Hang on there now... You just told us that he can SEE what gear he is in, but that he has no physical way of knowing.
That puts 100% of the blame on the driver. He knew the shifter was different when he purchased the vehicle, he chose the vehicle, he bought it. No one removed or altered the mechanism after this purchase. The display was present and accurately confirmed that he was not in park. He also chose not to use the parking brake.
How about placing the blame where it belongs -- 100% on the poor guy who got rolled by his own car. That's really a crappy way to go.
Caveat: All of the above is based on "facts" from this thread. If the gearbox did actually display that the vehicle was in park when it was not, then the manufacturer would be 50% responsible - with the user 50% responsible for not using the brake.
Publicity leads to frivolous lawsuits. At the end of the day, he died because he failed to use the safety features available to him. This thread illustrates that many of us are guilty of the same. However the fact still remains that he failed to set the parking brake, and then fought a vehicle with decent ground clearance instead of falling flat to the ground and letting it roll over him -- or getting out of the way. The shifter is a problem, but it is only one part of a multiple step process. The user chose to ignore the primary parking brake and was killed as a result of that decision. It's very unfortunate, and even more so that rather than using this incident to promote safety awareness (which would actually save more lives) -- we have to focus on finding someone to sue.
If it's a hand-brake, yes you can control it. If it's a foot-brake, then you are correct -- control is out the window. The necessary caveat is that there is no hydraulic assist, and it will require some upper body strength to utilize as an emergency brake (and it's tied to the rear wheels -- which are responsible for 30% of your braking). It's going to take a lot longer to stop.
Not at all. The handbrake is the primary brake. You are supposed to engage it first.
Prior to the electronic transmissions, you would often find it very difficult to move the shifter out of "Park" if you were on an incline and had not FIRST set the parking brake. This was due to the stress being placed on the prawl. The parking brake has always been meant as the primary means of holding the vehicle stationary with the transmission as a backup. This is true of both manual and automatic transmissions.
Bricking means that the SOFTWARE OR OPERATING SYSTEM of a device has been destroyed in such a manner that no interface remains that would allow a user to revert the change or reset the device to a factory image. If hardware must be replaced to resolve the issue, it is bricked. If software must be reloaded (and can be without hardware replacement), it is borked.
Misusing the term bricked leaves one looking like either a liar or an idiot. The headline should be corrected.
It sounds like you are a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. You "don't buy" that mandating unsustainable wages for completely unskilled workers will destroy the business unless that business finds ways to compensate. The fact that they have continued to favor employing people through this date/time undermines your opinion. Robotics have been available for decades -- only now are they being forced into a corner by destructive progressive policies.
Let's face it, bagging fries is a job, not a career. It doesn't deserve a "living wage", because it was never meant to fill a career role. Let's stop celebrating mediocrity, and expect people to be uncomfortable enough in their poverty to actually work on getting OUT of it.
Oh....and, a peer-reviewed study published in Quaternary Science Reviews (2013) found that the present day carbon dioxide level of 400 ppm was exceeded — without any human influence — 12,750 years ago when CO2 may have reached up to 425 ppm. Sorry (Tripati 2009).
Me: human emissions of CO2 are a drop in the bucket compared to what nature does....
You: WRONG AGAIN!
You: Citation -- "our output of 29 gigatons of CO2 is tiny compared to the 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle each year"
I see your point. I am clearly wrong.
The plants are still mocking you, but they're glad you kept accurate measurements of atmospheric CO2 levels for the last 20 million years. It's certainly compelling and infallible evidence.
Actually I said that it is not a pollutant -- it's plant food necessary for the creation of Oxygen and the sustaining of life on Earth.
Whether or not it can become one (by combining it with other elements to create something new) is irrelevant.
I've also stated that if you disagree so vehemently, that you act on your misguided ideas and stop exhaling.
Since you're still here, you've clearly demonstrated that you have no real belief in the fallacy you continue to perpetuate.
Plants can't keep up to the gigatons of emissions of sequestered co2 emitted by humans yearly.
Good to know. Apparently we all died of CO2 poisoning. Thanks for enlightening me. Oh, nevermind....human emissions of CO2 (yes, including cars/manufacturing) is a drop in the bucket compared to what nature does regularly. Common sense facts and thousands of years of evidence to the contrary invalidate your baseless argument.
Partisan politics in any branch of government does nothing to change a scientific fact. Legislating (from the bench no less), that 2+2 equals five is not a supporting argument.
But thank you for re-validating my point. By your logic anything and everything is a pollutant -- because it is POSSIBLE to do bad things with it if you try REALLY hard.
Well, 100% nitrogen has been looked at as a method of capital punishment in certain barbaric countries, so yes, one could say that too much is a "pollutant".
And co2 is used to kill critters in labs when experiments are finished, or in poultry farms when bird flu breaks out
Yep. You can also drown in distilled water. It is, therefore a pollutant. We could go on forever with the bar set this low....
Let's also not forget the fact that CO2 would have to increase 150x the current levels to reach 6% (where it would actually become toxic to humans), and if it didn't exist -- we wouldn't exist.
It's a required component of the atmosphere for life to exist, not a pollutant.
Slashdot Mirror
More likely because a conservative would follow the constitution that puts all power not specifically enumerated to the Federal Government to the states and the people -- i.e. Individual Liberty.
You are referring to Right-Wing Progressives. This is wildly different from conservatism.
You can't use statistics. Numbers are racist. Doesn't matter if they're true -- if the outcome doesn't fit an agenda, it's racist. It just is.
Remember that next time you are being gunned down. It's not your job to pass judgement, don't stop the assailant -- that's a judges job. Be sure to set an appointment for that hearing. I'm sure it will be highly effective, and lives will be saved.
It did spiral out of control quickly, which is why the perpetrator was eliminated. Let's not use the wrong word here -- he wasn't SUSPECTED of the crimes. He was actively perpetrating them. Lethal force was absolutely warranted.
If the press was doing it's job, the public outcry would make what just happened an impossibility. You're in denial.
Mosiac Law was fulfilled and replaced by Christ. Thus CHRISTianity does not espouse and eye for an eye.
Unless it's an automatic, in which case you may need to leave the engine on while utilizing the transmission's braking bands. I've never tried that with the car in off, but I understand that most automatic transmissions require pressure from the PTO side and will not get it from the wheels.
Hang on there now... You just told us that he can SEE what gear he is in, but that he has no physical way of knowing.
That puts 100% of the blame on the driver. He knew the shifter was different when he purchased the vehicle, he chose the vehicle, he bought it. No one removed or altered the mechanism after this purchase. The display was present and accurately confirmed that he was not in park. He also chose not to use the parking brake.
How about placing the blame where it belongs -- 100% on the poor guy who got rolled by his own car. That's really a crappy way to go.
Caveat: All of the above is based on "facts" from this thread. If the gearbox did actually display that the vehicle was in park when it was not, then the manufacturer would be 50% responsible - with the user 50% responsible for not using the brake.
Publicity leads to frivolous lawsuits. At the end of the day, he died because he failed to use the safety features available to him. This thread illustrates that many of us are guilty of the same. However the fact still remains that he failed to set the parking brake, and then fought a vehicle with decent ground clearance instead of falling flat to the ground and letting it roll over him -- or getting out of the way. The shifter is a problem, but it is only one part of a multiple step process. The user chose to ignore the primary parking brake and was killed as a result of that decision. It's very unfortunate, and even more so that rather than using this incident to promote safety awareness (which would actually save more lives) -- we have to focus on finding someone to sue.
If it's a hand-brake, yes you can control it. If it's a foot-brake, then you are correct -- control is out the window. The necessary caveat is that there is no hydraulic assist, and it will require some upper body strength to utilize as an emergency brake (and it's tied to the rear wheels -- which are responsible for 30% of your braking). It's going to take a lot longer to stop.
We don't need the brake because we can apply the brake. Gotcha.
Not at all. The handbrake is the primary brake. You are supposed to engage it first.
Prior to the electronic transmissions, you would often find it very difficult to move the shifter out of "Park" if you were on an incline and had not FIRST set the parking brake. This was due to the stress being placed on the prawl. The parking brake has always been meant as the primary means of holding the vehicle stationary with the transmission as a backup. This is true of both manual and automatic transmissions.
Rampant driver ignorance aside.
No one is forced to accept the terms and subscribe to the service. If you don't like it, don't enter into the contract.
The article first says the device was bricked, but then clarifies that it only causes random reboots.
Android sent an update a couple months back that did the same thing -- I don't recall anyone claiming it bricked millions of android phones....
Yes, it sucked. But it clearly did not brick anything.
This is just an example of poor QA prior to release.
Shall we compare your net income with Lexus' net income? Seems they know a bit more than you do.
Bricking means that the SOFTWARE OR OPERATING SYSTEM of a device has been destroyed in such a manner that no interface remains that would allow a user to revert the change or reset the device to a factory image. If hardware must be replaced to resolve the issue, it is bricked. If software must be reloaded (and can be without hardware replacement), it is borked. Misusing the term bricked leaves one looking like either a liar or an idiot. The headline should be corrected.
After reading the headline ... said to self, "That's gotta be in California".
Sure enough. It was.
If you have to legislate jobs, then you have clearly failed miserably. New Jersey -- The armpit of America.
It sounds like you are a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. You "don't buy" that mandating unsustainable wages for completely unskilled workers will destroy the business unless that business finds ways to compensate. The fact that they have continued to favor employing people through this date/time undermines your opinion. Robotics have been available for decades -- only now are they being forced into a corner by destructive progressive policies. Let's face it, bagging fries is a job, not a career. It doesn't deserve a "living wage", because it was never meant to fill a career role. Let's stop celebrating mediocrity, and expect people to be uncomfortable enough in their poverty to actually work on getting OUT of it.
Did that. It's still crappy though.
Oh....and, a peer-reviewed study published in Quaternary Science Reviews (2013) found that the present day carbon dioxide level of 400 ppm was exceeded — without any human influence — 12,750 years ago when CO2 may have reached up to 425 ppm. Sorry (Tripati 2009).
Me: human emissions of CO2 are a drop in the bucket compared to what nature does.... You: WRONG AGAIN! You: Citation -- "our output of 29 gigatons of CO2 is tiny compared to the 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle each year" I see your point. I am clearly wrong. The plants are still mocking you, but they're glad you kept accurate measurements of atmospheric CO2 levels for the last 20 million years. It's certainly compelling and infallible evidence.
Actually I said that it is not a pollutant -- it's plant food necessary for the creation of Oxygen and the sustaining of life on Earth. Whether or not it can become one (by combining it with other elements to create something new) is irrelevant. I've also stated that if you disagree so vehemently, that you act on your misguided ideas and stop exhaling. Since you're still here, you've clearly demonstrated that you have no real belief in the fallacy you continue to perpetuate.
Plants can't keep up to the gigatons of emissions of sequestered co2 emitted by humans yearly.
Good to know. Apparently we all died of CO2 poisoning. Thanks for enlightening me. Oh, nevermind....human emissions of CO2 (yes, including cars/manufacturing) is a drop in the bucket compared to what nature does regularly. Common sense facts and thousands of years of evidence to the contrary invalidate your baseless argument. Partisan politics in any branch of government does nothing to change a scientific fact. Legislating (from the bench no less), that 2+2 equals five is not a supporting argument. But thank you for re-validating my point. By your logic anything and everything is a pollutant -- because it is POSSIBLE to do bad things with it if you try REALLY hard.
Well, 100% nitrogen has been looked at as a method of capital punishment in certain barbaric countries, so yes, one could say that too much is a "pollutant".
And co2 is used to kill critters in labs when experiments are finished, or in poultry farms when bird flu breaks out
Yep. You can also drown in distilled water. It is, therefore a pollutant. We could go on forever with the bar set this low....
Let's also not forget the fact that CO2 would have to increase 150x the current levels to reach 6% (where it would actually become toxic to humans), and if it didn't exist -- we wouldn't exist. It's a required component of the atmosphere for life to exist, not a pollutant.