Yes, you're right, I didn't address how to break the laws of physics, other than you shouldn't be going at such a speed that makes it impossible for you to stop on a light change.
I think you're flailing a little, you're the one that is in danger of running (hypothetical) red lights outside your house when you've not left enough room to stop correctly, indeed you've said it yourself "speed safe for the conditions", if you run a red as you're going too fast then you're not doing that.
I don't drive in the US, in the UK "AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident", so unless you're going to cause an accident, you have to stop on amber.
So, yes in the UK, you'd get a ticket - and indeed I know people who have been pulled up for crossing on an amber lights.
So, I think best to take it as a differing driving systems.
Of course in the US the car is king, but the UK Highways code suggests that you :
"do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit" "take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations... Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution" "where there are junctions, be prepared for road users emerging" "be prepared to stop at traffic control systems, road works, pedestrian crossings or traffic lights as necessary"
I think that pretty much covers everyone who is complaining about amber lights, indeed if a traffic light is green, there is only one way the light is going to go - and it's not to blue.
.ac.uk - academic (tertiary education, further education colleges and research establishments) and learned societies .co.uk - general use (usually commercial) .gov.uk - government (central and local) .judiciary.uk - courts (to be introduced in the near future) .ltd.uk - limited companies .me.uk - general use (usually personal) .mod.uk - Ministry of Defence and HM Forces public sites .net.uk - ISPs and network companies (unlike.net, use is restricted to these users) .nhs.uk - National Health Service institutions .nic.uk - network use only (Nominet UK) .org.uk - general use (usually for non-profit organisations) .parliament.uk - parliamentary use (only for the UK Parliament and the Scottish Parliament) .plc.uk - public limited companies .police.uk - police forces .sch.uk - Local Education Authorities, schools, primary and secondary education, community education
Just because you are a good arguer doesn't make you right, it just makes people think you are. Indeed, there are many ways to win an argument - and one of the most effective is to be the last person to put their case, or to have a quiet word in the ear of the decider...
> If you want to solve crime, you do so with economics. I'm sorry it's doesn't have the quick-fix magic promised by your politicians, but it's the only thing that > works.
Interesting that you say that, as the page you linked to for London, has a lower homicide rate in 2009/10 in the middle of a recession, than in 2004 when it was a supposed "boom". So by those figures the natural conclusion should be that we should have bad economic management as the crime rates have gone down. (one theory is that people instead of going out and doing bad things, are just getting drunk instead)
But, looking further it seems that New York has a "murder" rate of (more than) double of what London does - so moving criminals from having guns to knifes seems to more than half the murder rate.
Rather than doing an undergraduate degree, why not look at a Masters? You have experience, and the open university offer distance diplomas that then give you access to Masters courses. Open University - open.ac.uk
> If your company posts zero profits in the U.S., then you get skinned alive by your shareholders in the stock market, so there is a strong incentive to not play games
Eh? I'm not sure I understand, this is exactly what is happening now - I don't see anyone being skinned alive - indeed this whole topic is about this vehicle.
You said "Any profits from sales made in the U.S".
So, lets say I sell a widget for $100 (because we all like nice round figures). Lets say I have to pay $30 to make said widget. Lets say advertising, transportation, administration and other costs be $10. Lets say I have to pay someone 10$ to sell the widget. So that's $50 profit. Now, lets say I have a company on the Cayman islands, that owes the IP on that widget - the name of the widget, the patents on it, and they charge me $50 for those things.
Or lets say, that I sell my widget for $100, but I buy that widget a company on the Cayman islands (even though said widget never actually went to the Cayman islands) for $100.
I've made no money, and don't have to pay any tax.
Tools (like socks in washing basket) disappear - indeed they may be in a locked cupboard, that only you have the key for, but they will still disappear.
The chances of the tools disappearing are directly proportional to the usage that you urgently need at that particular moment.
Also, don't use electric screwdrivers to do up any screws on servers or computers - and especially don't use them on "thumb" screws.
I know nothing about basket ball, other than it has a ball and bounces and you have to throw it through a hula hoop or something, and have to be over 7 foot to play.
But, in all sports there are certain systems that work at certain levels of play - in soccer it's the "long ball". The theory being that most goals are scored within the penalty box, therefore the quicker you get the ball into the penalty box the more likely you are to score. One dimensional teams fair well in lower divisions where the talent pool is lower, and the system can compensate for that. An ideal candidate for this would have been John Becks teams in the early/mid 1990s, and he was so rigid that the overriding aim was to get the ball into the box that would substitute a player who passed backwards...
Eventually, once the successful coach moves up a division (either with promotion, or moving on to another team due to their brilliance) the "strategy" becomes less effective - with better players/coaches in opposition being better able to cope with nullifying it.
"Eye" and "Head" mounted Cameras don't work for recording. They've been tried before and because of all the movements that we make with our heads, the resulting footage is too shaky and flighty. Police forces have tried them before. The way to get round this is with shoulder mounted cameras, as shoulders move less. So expect to read in a year that the trial of the technology has failed.
If the treaty was only for dealing with terrorist suspects, it would have made that clear. "Terrorism" may have been the reason/excuse for Parliament passing the act, but it allows any accused to be extradited. And by the letter of the law, he should have been extradited, I'm sure US authorities have some experience in dealing with suicide risks.
Now, the real debate is should something that has been done in the UK, by a UK citizen be tried in a UK court, indeed at what takes precedence? In a scenario, if a chap shoots a gun across a border, and hit hits someone on the other side of the border, where has the crime taken places? At the point of the shooting, or at the result of the shooting. If shooting a gun isn't illegal in country, would they go free?
If a chap connects to the internet and does something "illegal" in another country, where has the crime taken place? And where do you draw the line? Post a blasphemous article on a bulletin board in Saudi Arabia? You're off to Saudi to be tried? Post a libelous item in the US, on a UK server, can you be extradited to the UK?
Theresa May only had a certain frame of reference for blocking the extradition - that he should be tried in the UK is not one, and indeed two people have been extradited to the US in the last two weeks for websites created and run in the UK.
One way to block the extradition was on the grounds of illness, again, in the last two weeks one person has been extradited to the US even though he had medical certificates saying that he was a suicide risk.
Of course, the difference is that they were nutty muslim terrorists with hooks and eye patches,and not white middle class aspareger syndromes sufferers.
19,000 people? What difference is that going to make? The government of the day ignored at least 750,000 (+/- some) people who appeared in person to protest. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/2765041.stm
This sounds very similar to the Trade Mark laws no in effect in Europe. It basically boils down to, you cannot import for resale anything that is trademarked, as the trademark owner has exclusive import rights.
This was originally because of a French company exporting it's product made in France to outside of the EU. The French companies product was then imported into France, and sold at a discount.
There was a major court case between Tesco and Levis about this, which had the Tesco representitive show tow paisr of Levis, both made in Turkey. One had been imported to the UK by Levis, and the other by Tesco from Turkey. The ones that were imported by Tesco are now illegal to sell in the UK.
It only includes items bough from outside the EU, not between EU countries (so say Germany to UK = fine, USA to UK = Not okay, unless the trademark owner has ok'd it). It's worked in the EU, so I expect this will mean it will work in the US too, as we all generally follow the same IP laws.
Chip & PIN is an electronic transaction (done via credit card or by debit card as it supports both), indeed I don't think you'd find many places that can do a manual credit card transaction (although it is possible) just beacuse banks don't give out the slips and the streamline machines.
If a merchant has a business bank account, then they pay whenever they make a deposit, and a withdrawl. If they handle a lot of cash, then they also have to deal with security - safe, how to get the money deposited etc etc.
Unless a merchants average transactions are less than about 5 pounds, it makes economic sense to do things via electronic transactions rather than by cash.
Yes, the British were well known for taking over this liberal democracies and turning them into repressive states. Indeed many of these countries were already beacons of how things should be done, and their liberty and freedom were stolen from them.
Where I live we've only just gone fully digital - well since Sept 2011.
This meant that I went from having "sometimes poor reception" (about 30% power) and certain channels were affected more than others, and it seemed to be many factors - night time, birds flying, phases of the moon. To always having good reception (90%+ most of the time), and also being able to pick up another region - so I get Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.
So, now they pull this out of the hat! Yea we've moved everything, turned off analogue TV and made it all digital. Oh, but you might lose reception as we're turning 4G where the old analogue used to be, and the frequencies are right next to each other.
When Analog and Digital were running, Analogue was at 100% power transmission and digital much less so it didn't interfere with Analogue, why don't they do the same? Probably as they wouldn't then be able to sell 4G to as many companies.
Well, I would have thought it the other way, the client specifies what it wants to outsource, and the outsource company supplies that, at a 20%-30% saving, whilst taking on the clients IT.
Now, when the client wants, say for example, a new network point put in as offices are being moved, then this is an addition, the outsource company will charge at least 6 x the price that it would take normally, whilst using a contractor to do the work.
Also, that new employee needs a new computer? Look at £800 for a basic model... new printer? £200, Dual Monitor setup system? £1600? Oh, you just want to move your office around? You're not allowed to touch the computers, £300 for that.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, you're right, I didn't address how to break the laws of physics, other than you shouldn't be going at such a speed that makes it impossible for you to stop on a light change.
I think you're flailing a little, you're the one that is in danger of running (hypothetical) red lights outside your house when you've not left enough room to stop correctly, indeed you've said it yourself "speed safe for the conditions", if you run a red as you're going too fast then you're not doing that.
I don't drive in the US, in the UK "AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident", so unless you're going to cause an accident, you have to stop on amber.
So, yes in the UK, you'd get a ticket - and indeed I know people who have been pulled up for crossing on an amber lights.
So, I think best to take it as a differing driving systems.
Of course in the US the car is king, but the UK Highways code suggests that you :
"do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit" ... Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution"
"take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations
"where there are junctions, be prepared for road users emerging"
"be prepared to stop at traffic control systems, road works, pedestrian crossings or traffic lights as necessary"
https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-riders-103-to-158/general-advice-144-to-158
I think that pretty much covers everyone who is complaining about amber lights, indeed if a traffic light is green, there is only one way the light is going to go - and it's not to blue.
Nicked from Wikipedia
All seems rather sensible, I thought.
Remind me, what did SCO do?
Just because you are a good arguer doesn't make you right, it just makes people think you are. Indeed, there are many ways to win an argument - and one of the most effective is to be the last person to put their case, or to have a quiet word in the ear of the decider ...
> If you want to solve crime, you do so with economics. I'm sorry it's doesn't have the quick-fix magic promised by your politicians, but it's the only thing that
> works.
Interesting that you say that, as the page you linked to for London, has a lower homicide rate in 2009/10 in the middle of a recession, than in 2004 when it was a supposed "boom". So by those figures the natural conclusion should be that we should have bad economic management as the crime rates have gone down. (one theory is that people instead of going out and doing bad things, are just getting drunk instead)
But, looking further it seems that New York has a "murder" rate of (more than) double of what London does - so moving criminals from having guns to knifes seems to more than half the murder rate.
Rather than doing an undergraduate degree, why not look at a Masters? You have experience, and the open university offer distance diplomas that then give you access to Masters courses. Open University - open.ac.uk
> If your company posts zero profits in the U.S., then you get skinned alive by your shareholders in the stock market, so there is a strong incentive to not play games
Eh? I'm not sure I understand, this is exactly what is happening now - I don't see anyone being skinned alive - indeed this whole topic is about this vehicle.
You said "Any profits from sales made in the U.S".
So, lets say I sell a widget for $100 (because we all like nice round figures). Lets say I have to pay $30 to make said widget. Lets say advertising, transportation, administration and other costs be $10. Lets say I have to pay someone 10$ to sell the widget. So that's $50 profit. Now, lets say I have a company on the Cayman islands, that owes the IP on that widget - the name of the widget, the patents on it, and they charge me $50 for those things.
Or lets say, that I sell my widget for $100, but I buy that widget a company on the Cayman islands (even though said widget never actually went to the Cayman islands) for $100.
I've made no money, and don't have to pay any tax.
Tools (like socks in washing basket) disappear - indeed they may be in a locked cupboard, that only you have the key for, but they will still disappear.
The chances of the tools disappearing are directly proportional to the usage that you urgently need at that particular moment.
Also, don't use electric screwdrivers to do up any screws on servers or computers - and especially don't use them on "thumb" screws.
Just don't carry them in the back of your car, and don't buy a knife and baseball bat at the same time as you will be going to jail!
> common law [wikipedia.org] system, which is not used that much outside the US
And the sun never sets on the British Empire :-)
I know nothing about basket ball, other than it has a ball and bounces and you have to throw it through a hula hoop or something, and have to be over 7 foot to play.
But, in all sports there are certain systems that work at certain levels of play - in soccer it's the "long ball". The theory being that most goals are scored within the penalty box, therefore the quicker you get the ball into the penalty box the more likely you are to score. One dimensional teams fair well in lower divisions where the talent pool is lower, and the system can compensate for that. An ideal candidate for this would have been John Becks teams in the early/mid 1990s, and he was so rigid that the overriding aim was to get the ball into the box that would substitute a player who passed backwards ...
Eventually, once the successful coach moves up a division (either with promotion, or moving on to another team due to their brilliance) the "strategy" becomes less effective - with better players/coaches in opposition being better able to cope with nullifying it.
"Eye" and "Head" mounted Cameras don't work for recording. They've been tried before and because of all the movements that we make with our heads, the resulting footage is too shaky and flighty. Police forces have tried them before. The way to get round this is with shoulder mounted cameras, as shoulders move less. So expect to read in a year that the trial of the technology has failed.
If the treaty was only for dealing with terrorist suspects, it would have made that clear. "Terrorism" may have been the reason/excuse for Parliament passing the act, but it allows any accused to be extradited. And by the letter of the law, he should have been extradited, I'm sure US authorities have some experience in dealing with suicide risks.
Now, the real debate is should something that has been done in the UK, by a UK citizen be tried in a UK court, indeed at what takes precedence? In a scenario, if a chap shoots a gun across a border, and hit hits someone on the other side of the border, where has the crime taken places? At the point of the shooting, or at the result of the shooting. If shooting a gun isn't illegal in country, would they go free?
If a chap connects to the internet and does something "illegal" in another country, where has the crime taken place? And where do you draw the line? Post a blasphemous article on a bulletin board in Saudi Arabia? You're off to Saudi to be tried? Post a libelous item in the US, on a UK server, can you be extradited to the UK?
Theresa May only had a certain frame of reference for blocking the extradition - that he should be tried in the UK is not one, and indeed two people have been extradited to the US in the last two weeks for websites created and run in the UK.
One way to block the extradition was on the grounds of illness, again, in the last two weeks one person has been extradited to the US even though he had medical certificates saying that he was a suicide risk.
Of course, the difference is that they were nutty muslim terrorists with hooks and eye patches,and not white middle class aspareger syndromes sufferers.
19,000 people? What difference is that going to make? The government of the day ignored at least 750,000 (+/- some) people who appeared in person to protest. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/2765041.stm
This sounds very similar to the Trade Mark laws no in effect in Europe. It basically boils down to, you cannot import for resale anything that is trademarked, as the trademark owner has exclusive import rights.
This was originally because of a French company exporting it's product made in France to outside of the EU. The French companies product was then imported into France, and sold at a discount.
There was a major court case between Tesco and Levis about this, which had the Tesco representitive show tow paisr of Levis, both made in Turkey. One had been imported to the UK by Levis, and the other by Tesco from Turkey. The ones that were imported by Tesco are now illegal to sell in the UK.
It only includes items bough from outside the EU, not between EU countries (so say Germany to UK = fine, USA to UK = Not okay, unless the trademark owner has ok'd it). It's worked in the EU, so I expect this will mean it will work in the US too, as we all generally follow the same IP laws.
Chip & PIN is an electronic transaction (done via credit card or by debit card as it supports both), indeed I don't think you'd find many places that can do a manual credit card transaction (although it is possible) just beacuse banks don't give out the slips and the streamline machines.
If a merchant has a business bank account, then they pay whenever they make a deposit, and a withdrawl. If they handle a lot of cash, then they also have to deal with security - safe, how to get the money deposited etc etc.
Unless a merchants average transactions are less than about 5 pounds, it makes economic sense to do things via electronic transactions rather than by cash.
> (er, I mean personal PIN numbers)
You do know that PIN is a TLA that stands for "Personal Identification Number" :-)
Yes, the British were well known for taking over this liberal democracies and turning them into repressive states. Indeed many of these countries were already beacons of how things should be done, and their liberty and freedom were stolen from them.
Where I live we've only just gone fully digital - well since Sept 2011.
This meant that I went from having "sometimes poor reception" (about 30% power) and certain channels were affected more than others, and it seemed to be many factors - night time, birds flying, phases of the moon. To always having good reception (90%+ most of the time), and also being able to pick up another region - so I get Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.
So, now they pull this out of the hat! Yea we've moved everything, turned off analogue TV and made it all digital. Oh, but you might lose reception as we're turning 4G where the old analogue used to be, and the frequencies are right next to each other.
When Analog and Digital were running, Analogue was at 100% power transmission and digital much less so it didn't interfere with Analogue, why don't they do the same? Probably as they wouldn't then be able to sell 4G to as many companies.
Well, I would have thought it the other way, the client specifies what it wants to outsource, and the outsource company supplies that, at a 20%-30% saving, whilst taking on the clients IT.
Now, when the client wants, say for example, a new network point put in as offices are being moved, then this is an addition, the outsource company will charge at least 6 x the price that it would take normally, whilst using a contractor to do the work.
Also, that new employee needs a new computer? Look at £800 for a basic model ... new printer? £200, Dual Monitor setup system? £1600? Oh, you just want to move your office around? You're not allowed to touch the computers, £300 for that.
Except for the DL360s. I'll take them any day.