>>>Man asks eBay for money back. eBay gives money back
What you just described is impossible. First off, ebay doesn't handle money so they can't refund anything. Second, paypal doesn't refund money back to a customer until AFTER the personal computer was returned to the seller (with proof-of-delivery).
First of all, eBay owns Paypal, so they're basically the same thing. Second, yes, there have been a lot of cases where Paypal has refunded the customer WITHOUT them returning the item.
The other is... look, I'm all for scientific progress, and I think we should research the hell out of this, but let's not jump the gun. As evidenced by the fact that we call potentially-functional strecthes of DNA "junk", we do not understand what they do. If prehistoric animals used this sequence and we don't, there is probably a reason, be it small or large. Maybe it's as simple as "it takes cellular resources and the risk of an HIV-like attack had subsided below the break-even point" - and if that turns out to be the case, FULL SPEED AHEAD! Or maybe evolutionary pressures put the protein in disfavor because it interferes with some other aspect of modern human biology, or has some secondary effect that is harmful. Now it's hard to imagine that would weigh in as "more severe than an active HIV infection", so it might still be a useful treatment for a known case of AIDS if it can be used in that way (depending on cost/benefit vs. other AIDS treatments); but not necessarily a good preventative measure if that were to turn out to be the case.
Exactly. My first thought was, "At some point, we had these sequences active. Then there was a mutation that turned them off, and that mutation propagated more successfully. Why?"
It sounds as if this defense would apply not just to HIV, but quite possibly to other viruses as well, if I understand the article correctly; it appears that the proteins make cells resistant to the incursion of the virus in the first place. I'm wondering if at some point in the past, or even currently, there's been a viral infection that offers us some evolutionary advantage? If it's something that guided our evolution and survival previously, but is no longer an issue, then fine... but what if we find out that getting "the common cold" over and over again is instrumental in our survival in some way, and enabling this sequence will prevent it?
Also I think the phrase "STOP FUCKING PEOPLE WHO AREN'T YOUR WIFE/GIRLFRIED/SIGNIFIGANT OTHER!" doesn't rule out polygamy. More like stop having one-night-stands with anonymous women (or men). I didn't see any quantity qualifier in the statement.
Yep... serial monogamy with lots of people you don't know well is more dangerous than polyamory with people you are deeply involved with.
I've been known to break things by commenting out important sections, but causing AIDS?? Someone is about to have a hell of a performance review.
Yes, I get the humor.
But... there's some slightly OCD part of me that HAS to point out that this doesn't "cause AIDS," it "deactivates a natural defense mechanism to AIDS." AIDS still exists. It's just that maybe humans could be rendered unsusceptible to it.
Some rights cannot be signed away. What these guidelines are suggesting is that the right to a warranty against material defects that the developer KNOWS are in the software when you buy it is one such right.
I think that the general concept of these guidelines is sound, but that the folks who drafted them had an insufficient grasp of the issue. Hopefully they will refine them and we'll get something workable.
The fact that you think...1 and 2 is the goal of criminal justice, is clue #1 that you don't have a clue.
I think the goal of criminal justice is to reduce crime. I think that we've adequately demonstrated that our system of punitive justice is doing a poor job of that, and the sex offender registry (as well as the stats on recidivism posted below by someone else) is proof.
And frankly, adults who feel compelled to molest children need something very different from prison. That should be blatantly obvious to pretty much anyone; these people are mentally ill, not simply lacking proper respect for authority.
Okay, write the instructions for making your paper double spaced in office 2007.
Well, actually, that's easier with the ribbon interface. And a lot of other things are, like doing a quick word count when going over a document, or inserting comments, or switching to Track Changes.
But there's a lot of things that are harder to get to now too, like the Tabs dialog. It used to be one stop off the Format menu; now, I have to be on the Home tab, click on the corner of the Paragraph group, then click on the Tab button. There may be a way to get to it with the keyboard, but I haven't found it yet.
I have a feeling that the folks who like the ribbon are those who don't use any of the features that aren't on the Home tab, or who extensively use the few things that are easier (like the Review tab). Those who are used to accessing more advanced formatting features (or even just typing their own darned page number block) hate it.
I think it could be a good thing overall, but they just did some kind of stupid things with it. Maybe if it adapted to you, putting your most frequently used functions on a tab as you use it? That might be fun.
My oldest is still younger than your target group, but I can tell you a bit about what he finds entertaining and educational.
First of all, he's pre-literate. Computer games have been a real motivator for his literacy and numeracy, though. While our generation's first sight words were things like dog, cat, boy, girl... he recognizes start, next, exit, off, on, and his own name, as well as our names (he started picking those up when we were all playing Peggle a whole lot, and we didn't want him playing under our names!).
So, games that don't require a ton of literacy to play, but where it's going to be easier to do things if you can read prompts or buttons, can encourage sight-reading in younger kids. I wouldn't be surprised if instructions or useful background information that scrolls by at a slow speed might improve reading speed and accuracy in older kids.
Numeracy has been an even bigger thing for our son, though. One day he was watching me play Bubble Spinner. He read off my score: "You have 83 points!" then I shot a ball and got three more points. "86!" I made another shot and got six points. "89-- er... 92 points!" he had intuitively assumed that 89 was next in the series, without being aware he was identifying a pattern or doing math. He can also read off five digit numbers correctly, and thanks to various iterations of Desktop Tower Defense, is learning how "money" works.
So, you can teach a lot about math and numbers just by having a semi-complicated scoring system, such as one where you earn points that you can then spend on upgrades, which cost different amounts of money, have different ammunition requirements, can kill different numbers of creatures (or pop different numbers of balloons, or stun different numbers of monkeys, or whatever) per shot, and so on.
The hardest part is to balance the relatively low tolerance for frustration that most kids have, with the need to be persistently engaging and somewhat challenging so they don't get bored. Something that you can have fun with at first, but can do MORE with as you learn more about it, is ideal.
Actually, the even worse parts about the whole sex offender registry are:
1) It makes explicit what we've known for a long time... our criminal justice system has no rehabilitation element. People come out of prison just as dangerous as when they went in, if not more so.
2) It gives a false sense of security to parents. They warn their kids to stay away from the guy who GOT CAUGHT, when there's probably three other pervs in the area who never have been.
I think those registries are an affront to society in a ton of ways. I will never look at them. Instead, I teach my kids to trust their instincts about people and follow normal safety rules. I never imply that they should allow someone to hug or kiss them just because it's a relative or friend; THEY always get to decide about their comfort level with affection. And I keep an eye on them.
Well, they're not... they're passing a perfectly constitutional guideline on Federal funding. It's a workaround, let's say. So, the question would be... is there a reason they *shouldn't* work around this law? Is there something harmful about incentivizing consistent legislation when it comes to driving, since it's an activity that easily crosses state lines? Is there a public good to have different states with different laws about texting while driving?
And, thanks... I think I stole it, but I can't remember where from.;-)
When the Police send a uniformed Police Officer to your location after telling the police that your domain was stolen I would imagine that one question that would be asked would be "What is a domain?". This is not a jab at cops for being dumb, because they tend not to be dumb.
If someone sent a police officer to your location after telling the police that your African Basengi was stolen, I would imagine the officer would ask, "What's a Basengi?"
But I think the OP's jab was at IT professionals and how all-knowing they are. Next time I need to secure a crime scene, pursue a suspect, or arrest someone safely, I'll be sure to ask the nearest geek.;-)
Funny thing is, IT professionals (at the trenches level) and cops have similar pay. One has to know what a domain name is, the other how to use lethal force without getting locked up. I'm glad I've got the job that is less likely to get me killed. (And I'm sure glad I'm not a garbage collector.)
Well, the Old Pasadena changes were studied and documented by Dr. Don Shoup, and discussed in his book The High Cost of Free Parking, if you want to know more. They compared it to the Westwood area near the UCLA campus, where meter prices were lowered to try to revive the street shopping area, without success.
It's not just "meters," though. It's a whole conscientious approach to parking. You have to lift the burden of providing off-street parking from the shopowners, for one thing; in the City of Los Angeles, the in-lieu system is arcane and impossible to negotiate, so everyone has to provide the required parking or get a variance. I believe Pasadena switched to a simple system of charging a flat fee of $100 per year per space not provided (so, a store that would normally be required to provide 10 spaces could provide none and pay the city $1,000 a year instead).
Another important component is correct pricing. In many areas, meters stop at 6... just when night life gets started. In Old Pasadena, they run until midnight, seven days a week.
Sufficient off-street parking is important too. City-owned and operated structures offer monthly parking for employees of the area and longer-term parking for people expecting to spend more time there. Business-owned parking structures don't work as well; for example, the Arclight Cinemas complex and the Sunset & Vine complex are across the street from each other, each with their own parking structure... and if you want to go to Borders after your movie, you're expected to drive across the street and use THEIR parking. A city lot has no interest in where your feet take you after you store your car, so they're much more friendly toward high street shops.
But the real clincher for Old Pasadena was where the money goes. Shopowners hated the idea of bringing in meters until the City pledged the revenue to streetscape improvements, in the form of wrought-iron benches, vintage-style lighting, decorative tree grates, and weekly power-washing of the concrete.
None of that deals with the snow issue, of course. OTOH, I'm not quite sure why going to the meter is a special hazard... usually, after you park your car, you need to walk past the meter to get anywhere, so it seems street parking is hazardous (especially to elderly folks with fragile hips) in those conditions, whether the meters are operational or not.
No, the mall a mile away went out of business, while the street shops had a total renaissance. You were arguing that meters drive people away from high street shops and into big-box and megamalls. The opposite turns out to be the case, with effectively managed parking.
The mall continued to have the same free parking, but it wasn't *quite* as convenient (or as pretty and fun) as the redone Old Pasadena. Nowadays, you drive down that stretch of Colorado practically anytime, and there's a ton of folks walking up and down, shopping, going to dinner, etc. It's awesome.
And Transportation Services can ticket you for parking at an "Out of Service" meter.
Pay-and-display is a lot more useful though. Just a couple of boxes per block to secure, and if one goes down, you can still use another to pay... so no free parking due to down equipment. Also raises revenues, since you can't use the time the previous person left on the meter.
otherwise it will always be employee's of the stores that have parking and people shopping will not have access to the stores.
Huh?
Do you mind explaining the part about people not having access to the stores because only employees will have the hack, or something?
Sure, everyone will have the hack... but the employees get there before the customers. Hence, all the parking spaces are taken already.
Don't you think that maybe after the first few days when the parking enforcement notices that they have collected NO money from the parking meters that they might start monitoring a little more closely?
But the meters are "collecting revenue." It will take a lot longer for people to notice, because they have to notice they're collecting more revenue at the meter than they are selling onto the smart cards. (The meter is paid by deducting from a smart card inserted into it; you are supposed to have to load the card by paying actual money to someone, but the hackers found a way around that part.)
Many businesses hate parking meters, it doesn't help their store, but it definitely keeps people from ever parking as they head off to a big box so they don't need to deal with the crap of a city nickel and diming them, as they have to consider a constantly running down meter, and the cost of even looking at one of our stores is higher than our competitor due to the meter, as well as the downtown it out of the way compared to a mall shopping plaza.
Uh, yeah. Tell that to the Old Pasadena shopping district on Colorado Blvd. in Pasadena, California. When they put in meters (and dedicated the revenue to streetscape maintenance), built a couple of city-owned pay parking structures, and let any ol' business open in any appropriate space without requiring them to provide off-street parking (they pay reasonable annual in-lieu fees to offset the costs of the city-run structures), the nearby Plaza Pasadena shopping mall went OUT OF BUSINESS and was torn down. They replaced it with a more inviting open-air mall, and STILL didn't get the business they wanted until they converted the top two levels into housing.
I'm sorry if the meters on your street are not priced correctly for demand, but when meters are used appropriately, they help businesses tremendously.
Many cities around the world deploy parking meters in places where there is no lack of parking places as a form of revenue for the local authorities.
Also parking meters are usually deployed in such a way as to eliminate all other parking alternatives (if the purpose was to make parking spaces available for those who really need it, then only some of the places would need to be made "premium" with parking meters while most spaces would remain free)
In that circumstance, you have people circling and circling the block to get a free space, and the metered spaces stay empty. Also, you have compliance issues if only *some* spaces have meters; people will simply not realize the difference between that space and the one next to it.
Meters are priced correctly when approximately 7% of parking spaces remain free during peak times. That's the rate at which people are likely to find a space acceptably close to their destination in one pass. Right-priced street parking not only increases business revenue (by ensuring that customers can get to the business in an efficient manner) but also reduces traffic congestion by cutting circling.
[...] The reason for meters besides revenue collection is to control the availability of parking spots. Metered parking helps keeps store front spots open for customers. As well keeps abandoned or broken cars sitting indefinitely in good parking spots.
Theoretically, yes. But in practice it fails. Local employees just feed the meters (which itself might be illegal but is much more difficult to enforce). Meanwhile, the people you want to attract -- new customers -- have to worry about having change or a parking card AND finding a convenient, open parking spot before they can visit your store.
That means that the meters are underpriced. If it's cheap enough for long-term parking, the meters aren't doing their job.
Funny thing is, local shopowners tend to get up-in-arms about installation of or price hikes on meters outside their shops. But in practice, when meters are priced correctly, customers with money to spend find it MORE convenient to shop there, and revenues go up for the businesses.
Parking meters are for allocating parking. What is near your work? What used to be? For example, if you work in an office building with its own parking that is semi-inconvenient, parking meters may have been installed because employees were using up all the street parking instead of parking off-street, and short-term visits (clients, vendors, deliveries) were having to park off-street or very far away. That's an inefficient use of parking; the most convenient parking should be allocated to short-term uses, while less convenient parking should be used for longer duration more intensive use.
Another possibility is that there *were* stores where you work before the building was constructed, and the parking meters haven't been removed. If that's the case, you could always ask the City if they'd consider removing them, as they no longer serve their purpose.
You're not positioned properly. Line up the body of your motorcycle with the edge of the induction loop, so that the maximum amount of metal is above the maximum area of wire. Then you'll be detected.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>Man asks eBay for money back. eBay gives money back
What you just described is impossible. First off, ebay doesn't handle money so they can't refund anything. Second, paypal doesn't refund money back to a customer until AFTER the personal computer was returned to the seller (with proof-of-delivery).
First of all, eBay owns Paypal, so they're basically the same thing. Second, yes, there have been a lot of cases where Paypal has refunded the customer WITHOUT them returning the item.
The other is... look, I'm all for scientific progress, and I think we should research the hell out of this, but let's not jump the gun. As evidenced by the fact that we call potentially-functional strecthes of DNA "junk", we do not understand what they do. If prehistoric animals used this sequence and we don't, there is probably a reason, be it small or large. Maybe it's as simple as "it takes cellular resources and the risk of an HIV-like attack had subsided below the break-even point" - and if that turns out to be the case, FULL SPEED AHEAD! Or maybe evolutionary pressures put the protein in disfavor because it interferes with some other aspect of modern human biology, or has some secondary effect that is harmful. Now it's hard to imagine that would weigh in as "more severe than an active HIV infection", so it might still be a useful treatment for a known case of AIDS if it can be used in that way (depending on cost/benefit vs. other AIDS treatments); but not necessarily a good preventative measure if that were to turn out to be the case.
Exactly. My first thought was, "At some point, we had these sequences active. Then there was a mutation that turned them off, and that mutation propagated more successfully. Why?"
It sounds as if this defense would apply not just to HIV, but quite possibly to other viruses as well, if I understand the article correctly; it appears that the proteins make cells resistant to the incursion of the virus in the first place. I'm wondering if at some point in the past, or even currently, there's been a viral infection that offers us some evolutionary advantage? If it's something that guided our evolution and survival previously, but is no longer an issue, then fine... but what if we find out that getting "the common cold" over and over again is instrumental in our survival in some way, and enabling this sequence will prevent it?
Also I think the phrase "STOP FUCKING PEOPLE WHO AREN'T YOUR WIFE/GIRLFRIED/SIGNIFIGANT OTHER!" doesn't rule out polygamy. More like stop having one-night-stands with anonymous women (or men). I didn't see any quantity qualifier in the statement.
Yep... serial monogamy with lots of people you don't know well is more dangerous than polyamory with people you are deeply involved with.
I've been known to break things by commenting out important sections, but causing AIDS?? Someone is about to have a hell of a performance review.
Yes, I get the humor.
But... there's some slightly OCD part of me that HAS to point out that this doesn't "cause AIDS," it "deactivates a natural defense mechanism to AIDS." AIDS still exists. It's just that maybe humans could be rendered unsusceptible to it.
*respeck knucks*
mewsenews is a terrorist! Get 'im!
Sorry, too much Fox News exposure...
Some rights cannot be signed away. What these guidelines are suggesting is that the right to a warranty against material defects that the developer KNOWS are in the software when you buy it is one such right.
I think that the general concept of these guidelines is sound, but that the folks who drafted them had an insufficient grasp of the issue. Hopefully they will refine them and we'll get something workable.
The fact that you think ...1 and 2 is the goal of criminal justice, is clue #1 that you don't have a clue.
I think the goal of criminal justice is to reduce crime. I think that we've adequately demonstrated that our system of punitive justice is doing a poor job of that, and the sex offender registry (as well as the stats on recidivism posted below by someone else) is proof.
And frankly, adults who feel compelled to molest children need something very different from prison. That should be blatantly obvious to pretty much anyone; these people are mentally ill, not simply lacking proper respect for authority.
Okay, write the instructions for making your paper double spaced in office 2007.
Well, actually, that's easier with the ribbon interface. And a lot of other things are, like doing a quick word count when going over a document, or inserting comments, or switching to Track Changes.
But there's a lot of things that are harder to get to now too, like the Tabs dialog. It used to be one stop off the Format menu; now, I have to be on the Home tab, click on the corner of the Paragraph group, then click on the Tab button. There may be a way to get to it with the keyboard, but I haven't found it yet.
I have a feeling that the folks who like the ribbon are those who don't use any of the features that aren't on the Home tab, or who extensively use the few things that are easier (like the Review tab). Those who are used to accessing more advanced formatting features (or even just typing their own darned page number block) hate it.
I think it could be a good thing overall, but they just did some kind of stupid things with it. Maybe if it adapted to you, putting your most frequently used functions on a tab as you use it? That might be fun.
My oldest is still younger than your target group, but I can tell you a bit about what he finds entertaining and educational.
First of all, he's pre-literate. Computer games have been a real motivator for his literacy and numeracy, though. While our generation's first sight words were things like dog, cat, boy, girl... he recognizes start, next, exit, off, on, and his own name, as well as our names (he started picking those up when we were all playing Peggle a whole lot, and we didn't want him playing under our names!).
So, games that don't require a ton of literacy to play, but where it's going to be easier to do things if you can read prompts or buttons, can encourage sight-reading in younger kids. I wouldn't be surprised if instructions or useful background information that scrolls by at a slow speed might improve reading speed and accuracy in older kids.
Numeracy has been an even bigger thing for our son, though. One day he was watching me play Bubble Spinner. He read off my score: "You have 83 points!" then I shot a ball and got three more points. "86!" I made another shot and got six points. "89-- er... 92 points!" he had intuitively assumed that 89 was next in the series, without being aware he was identifying a pattern or doing math. He can also read off five digit numbers correctly, and thanks to various iterations of Desktop Tower Defense, is learning how "money" works.
So, you can teach a lot about math and numbers just by having a semi-complicated scoring system, such as one where you earn points that you can then spend on upgrades, which cost different amounts of money, have different ammunition requirements, can kill different numbers of creatures (or pop different numbers of balloons, or stun different numbers of monkeys, or whatever) per shot, and so on.
The hardest part is to balance the relatively low tolerance for frustration that most kids have, with the need to be persistently engaging and somewhat challenging so they don't get bored. Something that you can have fun with at first, but can do MORE with as you learn more about it, is ideal.
It's an attack with Mr T in the middle.
You mean it's a man-in-the-middle attack?
Actually, the even worse parts about the whole sex offender registry are:
1) It makes explicit what we've known for a long time... our criminal justice system has no rehabilitation element. People come out of prison just as dangerous as when they went in, if not more so.
2) It gives a false sense of security to parents. They warn their kids to stay away from the guy who GOT CAUGHT, when there's probably three other pervs in the area who never have been.
I think those registries are an affront to society in a ton of ways. I will never look at them. Instead, I teach my kids to trust their instincts about people and follow normal safety rules. I never imply that they should allow someone to hug or kiss them just because it's a relative or friend; THEY always get to decide about their comfort level with affection. And I keep an eye on them.
Well, they're not... they're passing a perfectly constitutional guideline on Federal funding. It's a workaround, let's say. So, the question would be... is there a reason they *shouldn't* work around this law? Is there something harmful about incentivizing consistent legislation when it comes to driving, since it's an activity that easily crosses state lines? Is there a public good to have different states with different laws about texting while driving?
And, thanks... I think I stole it, but I can't remember where from. ;-)
>
When the Police send a uniformed Police Officer to your location after telling the police that your domain was stolen I would imagine that one question that would be asked would be "What is a domain?". This is not a jab at cops for being dumb, because they tend not to be dumb.
If someone sent a police officer to your location after telling the police that your African Basengi was stolen, I would imagine the officer would ask, "What's a Basengi?"
But I think the OP's jab was at IT professionals and how all-knowing they are. Next time I need to secure a crime scene, pursue a suspect, or arrest someone safely, I'll be sure to ask the nearest geek. ;-)
Funny thing is, IT professionals (at the trenches level) and cops have similar pay. One has to know what a domain name is, the other how to use lethal force without getting locked up. I'm glad I've got the job that is less likely to get me killed. (And I'm sure glad I'm not a garbage collector.)
Well, the Old Pasadena changes were studied and documented by Dr. Don Shoup, and discussed in his book The High Cost of Free Parking, if you want to know more. They compared it to the Westwood area near the UCLA campus, where meter prices were lowered to try to revive the street shopping area, without success.
It's not just "meters," though. It's a whole conscientious approach to parking. You have to lift the burden of providing off-street parking from the shopowners, for one thing; in the City of Los Angeles, the in-lieu system is arcane and impossible to negotiate, so everyone has to provide the required parking or get a variance. I believe Pasadena switched to a simple system of charging a flat fee of $100 per year per space not provided (so, a store that would normally be required to provide 10 spaces could provide none and pay the city $1,000 a year instead).
Another important component is correct pricing. In many areas, meters stop at 6... just when night life gets started. In Old Pasadena, they run until midnight, seven days a week.
Sufficient off-street parking is important too. City-owned and operated structures offer monthly parking for employees of the area and longer-term parking for people expecting to spend more time there. Business-owned parking structures don't work as well; for example, the Arclight Cinemas complex and the Sunset & Vine complex are across the street from each other, each with their own parking structure... and if you want to go to Borders after your movie, you're expected to drive across the street and use THEIR parking. A city lot has no interest in where your feet take you after you store your car, so they're much more friendly toward high street shops.
But the real clincher for Old Pasadena was where the money goes. Shopowners hated the idea of bringing in meters until the City pledged the revenue to streetscape improvements, in the form of wrought-iron benches, vintage-style lighting, decorative tree grates, and weekly power-washing of the concrete.
None of that deals with the snow issue, of course. OTOH, I'm not quite sure why going to the meter is a special hazard... usually, after you park your car, you need to walk past the meter to get anywhere, so it seems street parking is hazardous (especially to elderly folks with fragile hips) in those conditions, whether the meters are operational or not.
So, the Constitution shouldn't allow it because the constitution doesn't allow it?
No, the mall a mile away went out of business, while the street shops had a total renaissance. You were arguing that meters drive people away from high street shops and into big-box and megamalls. The opposite turns out to be the case, with effectively managed parking.
The mall continued to have the same free parking, but it wasn't *quite* as convenient (or as pretty and fun) as the redone Old Pasadena. Nowadays, you drive down that stretch of Colorado practically anytime, and there's a ton of folks walking up and down, shopping, going to dinner, etc. It's awesome.
And Transportation Services can ticket you for parking at an "Out of Service" meter.
Pay-and-display is a lot more useful though. Just a couple of boxes per block to secure, and if one goes down, you can still use another to pay... so no free parking due to down equipment. Also raises revenues, since you can't use the time the previous person left on the meter.
Publicizing the hack is what will get it fixed, so that others aren't able to exploit it anymore.
Huh?
Do you mind explaining the part about people not having access to the stores because only employees will have the hack, or something?
Sure, everyone will have the hack... but the employees get there before the customers. Hence, all the parking spaces are taken already.
Don't you think that maybe after the first few days when the parking enforcement notices that they have collected NO money from the parking meters that they might start monitoring a little more closely?
But the meters are "collecting revenue." It will take a lot longer for people to notice, because they have to notice they're collecting more revenue at the meter than they are selling onto the smart cards. (The meter is paid by deducting from a smart card inserted into it; you are supposed to have to load the card by paying actual money to someone, but the hackers found a way around that part.)
Many businesses hate parking meters, it doesn't help their store, but it definitely keeps people from ever parking as they head off to a big box so they don't need to deal with the crap of a city nickel and diming them, as they have to consider a constantly running down meter, and the cost of even looking at one of our stores is higher than our competitor due to the meter, as well as the downtown it out of the way compared to a mall shopping plaza.
Uh, yeah. Tell that to the Old Pasadena shopping district on Colorado Blvd. in Pasadena, California. When they put in meters (and dedicated the revenue to streetscape maintenance), built a couple of city-owned pay parking structures, and let any ol' business open in any appropriate space without requiring them to provide off-street parking (they pay reasonable annual in-lieu fees to offset the costs of the city-run structures), the nearby Plaza Pasadena shopping mall went OUT OF BUSINESS and was torn down. They replaced it with a more inviting open-air mall, and STILL didn't get the business they wanted until they converted the top two levels into housing.
I'm sorry if the meters on your street are not priced correctly for demand, but when meters are used appropriately, they help businesses tremendously.
Many cities around the world deploy parking meters in places where there is no lack of parking places as a form of revenue for the local authorities.
Also parking meters are usually deployed in such a way as to eliminate all other parking alternatives (if the purpose was to make parking spaces available for those who really need it, then only some of the places would need to be made "premium" with parking meters while most spaces would remain free)
In that circumstance, you have people circling and circling the block to get a free space, and the metered spaces stay empty. Also, you have compliance issues if only *some* spaces have meters; people will simply not realize the difference between that space and the one next to it.
Meters are priced correctly when approximately 7% of parking spaces remain free during peak times. That's the rate at which people are likely to find a space acceptably close to their destination in one pass. Right-priced street parking not only increases business revenue (by ensuring that customers can get to the business in an efficient manner) but also reduces traffic congestion by cutting circling.
[...]
The reason for meters besides revenue collection is to control the availability of parking spots. Metered parking helps keeps store front spots open for customers. As well keeps abandoned or broken cars sitting indefinitely in good parking spots.
Theoretically, yes. But in practice it fails. Local employees just feed the meters (which itself might be illegal but is much more difficult to enforce). Meanwhile, the people you want to attract -- new customers -- have to worry about having change or a parking card AND finding a convenient, open parking spot before they can visit your store.
That means that the meters are underpriced. If it's cheap enough for long-term parking, the meters aren't doing their job.
Funny thing is, local shopowners tend to get up-in-arms about installation of or price hikes on meters outside their shops. But in practice, when meters are priced correctly, customers with money to spend find it MORE convenient to shop there, and revenues go up for the businesses.
Parking meters are for allocating parking. What is near your work? What used to be? For example, if you work in an office building with its own parking that is semi-inconvenient, parking meters may have been installed because employees were using up all the street parking instead of parking off-street, and short-term visits (clients, vendors, deliveries) were having to park off-street or very far away. That's an inefficient use of parking; the most convenient parking should be allocated to short-term uses, while less convenient parking should be used for longer duration more intensive use.
Another possibility is that there *were* stores where you work before the building was constructed, and the parking meters haven't been removed. If that's the case, you could always ask the City if they'd consider removing them, as they no longer serve their purpose.
I'd have to disagree with you. Doesn't matter what the person did while they were alive, a rotting body still stinks up the place.
You're not positioned properly. Line up the body of your motorcycle with the edge of the induction loop, so that the maximum amount of metal is above the maximum area of wire. Then you'll be detected.