So believes hessian, who is a slashdotter and therefore should not be allowed to have a girlfriend.
Damn rebellious youth! Back in my day we nerds had only our right and left hands and we were happy about it! Now you young kids with your techno and your Ruby on Rails run around talking about actually fraternizing with the other gender like it's some kind of entitlement. It's sickening I tell you! Now get off my damn lonely lawn!
Yup, damn those folks who believe something different than us slashdotters!
Don't get me wrong, creationists bug the shit out of me, but demonizing a particular group of people because they share a common belief is stupid and disingenuous no matter what that common belief is. Don't forget, every single U.S. President we have had so far has been aa creationist in one form or another. There are also quite a few very smart, capable, rational, intelligent folk who are creationists in every industry today. So yeah, creationists believe in a sky fairy overlord, snicker snicker snicker. That doesn't mean you should stop taking someone seriously just because they are a creationist...that's just limiting yourself and it is, quite honestly, stupid.
Well, maybe that will give civilian populations less incentive to fight stupid and pointless wars. If they know the only lives at risk are their own, then they don't have the convenience of armed and trained soldiers to hide behind.
It actually depends on your orbit. There are quite a bit of operations LEO satellites that spend a long time in Earth shadow (as in ~6 hours or more). Of course, your orbit is determined by your mission, so, yes, there are definitely some satellites that go through a cycle like this every day, or, for that matter, a few times a day (depending on your period, inclination, RAAN, etc. etc. etc.).
ABSL Li+ batteries should do the trick. We did a satellite design with them for a 14 year operational life. You need a ton of them, because they are small capacity. However, they are light enough that it shouldn't be a problem.
So it is logical to restrict the teenagers rights.
First off, you didn't say restrict teenagers rights the first time around. You said non-adults don't have rights, at all. Those are two very different things and your position needs to be clarified on that matter.
Secondly, it is not 'logical' to restrict teenagers rights based on the study you mentioned. In fact, there is little to no logic in your post (honestly, that's not a stab, what assumptions are you making, what axioms are you speaking from, and what inductive or deductive conclusions are you drawing from the causal relationships between said axioms). Logic and, "makes sense because modern science agrees" are not the same thing and never should be equated.
Furthermore, I will argue with that idea that just because teenagers brains are not fully developed, they should have restricted rights. First off, that study you mentioned (and I did read it) discussed the immature nature of certain centers of the brain, not the entire brain in general. For instance, it discussed control of emotions being less prevalent in younger brains. Well that's all well and good, but that does not mean that teenagers are more likely to make worse decisions than adults. Sometimes, often times (especially when dealing with basic human rights) emotions very much need to be present to make a good decision. Note that this argument does not make the assumption that a purely logical or objective decision necessarily qualifies as best. Younger folk having more active emotional centers in their brains may mean they are more empathetic (the study didn't touch on this topic). In order to make a good decision, empathy towards others needs may be a more important factor that pure logic or reason. It simply depends on the situation in question.
The problem with your argument is that you, like so many other folks in our society, assume that logic and reason is the end-all-be-all of good. Well it's not. Saying that logic encompasses the entire spectrum of good is just plain silly. (Think about it, what makes a good piece of music or a good painting good? Is it because it was logically developed? How so, if that's the case?).
Quite frankly, just because certain centers of teenage brains are less developed, there is no empirical reason to assume that a teenage brain will consistently, or more often, make worse decisions than an adult. So I consider your argument to basically dwindle down to little more than a personally held bias that you consider to be fact because it is one widely held by most of modern society. You, and most other adults (myself included) assume that your 'mature' decisions are actually better decisions for the world or society as a whole. That does not follow any available scientific evidence that I know of. That is purely derived from the assumption that, as time passes, we humans become better. Well that doesn't always make sense. Think about it, as adults age, do your muscles become more elastic? Do your bones become stronger? No. So why would you assume that, as you age, your more mature brain is making better decisions than the immature one you used to have? Is your body metabolizing food better than it used to? Now, I want to make it clear that I am not stating that teenagers unequivocally make better decisions because they are more youthful. I just want to point out that the assumption that older, more mature brains equals better is based off of the fact that older, more mature people made the studies and they are making the assumption that they have grown wiser with time. To my knowledge, this has not been scientifically demonstrated thus far. Hell, younger folk seem to be a bit more compassionate, less egotistic, and less jaded in general from what I can tell. For all we know, that's the optimum state of the human brain. We are just assuming it's not because we place a high value on young adults in our society.
For the record, I did all manner of dumb things as a kid. So have
It's not about which came out first, it's about whether or not the cart is of higher quality than the horse. Frankly, the continuity and overall universe written by Nylund is and was a more complete product than the games. The games were developed to appeal to gamers. I get that. However, in terms of environment, the games really suck-failed at keeping things continuous. Take, for instance, the pistols in all three games. The pistol in Halo 1 was overpowered and basically ruined the multiplayer aspect. However, in terms of the story, it made perfect sense. It was a high-powered, compact, useful killing machine which is exactly what marines would need in an all out space war.
Now comes Halo 2 and, for reasons unexplained, standard issue pistols could fire faster, but had the scope removed. Now the pistols are less useful for marines. In an actual war, technology tends to progress forward, not backward.
Then comes Halo 3. Now the pistols not only lose their scope, but they also fire significantly slower, but somehow have more penetration depth (damage done). Again, what was once a useful tool for space marines is artificially gimped to appeal to gamers. The same thing happened to the shotgun (reduction in number of rounds in magazine).
I can understand that the games needed to do what they did to make the game fun. That's fine. However, in terms of continuity, which is important for establishing a canonical universe, many of the details of the games did not make sense. Thus, it seems better, to me at least, to make the printed texts at least some source of official canon, while the games are acknowledged as being a prime source of canon as well, but deviating where necessary in order to make the games more appealing.
That's my gripe. I'm not saying Nylund should be canon because his stuff came first. I am saying his writing should be considered part of canon because it was more robust, complete, and sensible in the larger scope of the Halo universe.
It's funny to read your posts. I bought my Toyota MR-2 for the exact same reasons you cited for your Mazda (handling, suspension, good tire options/design). I don't think enough people realize or measure how significant a part of safety handling is in a vehicle. For what it's worth, I also ride a motorcycle, and the only reason I feel safe on a 2 wheeled overpowered engine between my thighs is that I know I can make that two-wheeled, overpowered engine go pretty much anywhere I want/need it to when I want/need it to. Compare that to my friends who drive long, lifted, over-sized trucks and I don't see how they can feel safe in a vehicle like that at all (if you turn hard, you're going head-over ass and bouncing down the road). Ah well.
Why do the youngsters today re-invent computer technology that we came up with in the 80's give it a snazzier sounding buzzword and act like they discovered penicillin?
....because none of you oldsters documented any of your work, and when we try to ask you about it we get an off-topic ramble about the way things used to be and a language called FORTRAN. So in the end we just say, "Screw it, I'll do it my way."
Instead they've only focused on the user interface, which pretty much makes this project pointless so far.
Unless, of course, one of their primary goals is to attract more users, in which case a well developed, well tested UI is probably one of the most important parts of the project. After all, 90% of social networkers (number out of my ass) probably judge software based on "How easy is it to click what I want?"
Now that doesn't mean they should neglect the back-end code, however, if they are trying to raise awareness of their product and make it more attractive, then I would think having a nicely developed UI and screenies would be pretty important right from the get go. While people find flaws in their UI, they can start to hash out the back end code.
My hypothesis is that liberal arts majors trend away from terrorism because they are used to discussing problems rather than solving them. Hence, solving the problem of a crappy social structure is something they'd more likely discuss, than try to solve...with, say, a bomb.;)
...i've met a lot of engineers that think they can solve all problems, no matter how unrelated the topic is to engineering...
Well, engineering is basically just the art and science of solving problems that manifest themselves in the physical realm. That being the case, it's no surprise that most engineers you know look at the world in terms of solving problem. It's also little surprise that the field tends to attract individuals that are problem solvers.
Actually that depends on the product and company. In a lot of small companies, engineers build what they design as well. This forces them to consider buildability (which can actually be a huge make or break for a product) while designing the product. The most elegant design in the world isn't worth shit if the screwdriver can't get access to the screw heads.
Re:SWAT and BRs in multiplayer
on
Review: Halo: Reach
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I never understood the draw to the 'realism' in COD type games. It's annoying. If I am playing a video game, I want to pretend to be a 9 foot tall space cyborg that can jump 20 feet in the air and kick a motorcycle a half-mile at an enemy. I don't want to pretend I am in Iraq getting shit on by insurgents with RPG's. Video games, at least the way I figure, at about a certain suspension of reality. It's funner to be a fire-breathing raptor and think about why on Earth I would be so interested in hunting down laser wielding zombies than it is to pretend to be fighting a real war with real people.
I get your joke, but I wonder if they could have made more money by releasing for Playstation instead. I get the feeling Halo is 90% of the reason the original Xbox even got as big as it did. If it had never been released for Xbox, I wonder what kind of console-scape we would have today.
The Halo 3 story line was a poached piece of shit. In order to understand 90% of what is going on in Halo 3, you need to read the short story in Halo: Evolutions by Karen Traviss, which, incidentally, is one of the better sci-fi short stories in that book. It touches on and develops some of the interesting bits of science that may go into developing and sustaining a smart AI, such as clock cycle length, and sensory input.
But yeah, Halo 3 was a rush release by Microsoft to milk the last $$'s from it's flagship product. Considering that they butchered the canon and time line established by Nylund in the original Halo trilogy of books, and simultaneously disrupted continuity through various weapons and technologies being present in Halo: Contact Harvest (part of the Halo 3 marketing campaign), I would wager that either Bungie, or Microsoft didn't give a damn about the story of Halo 3 at all. They just wanted to try to recreate the glory of Halo: CE as best they could.
I always found I enjoyed the novels and stories written by Eric Nylund the most. Many of the other novels were pretty shallow and unoriginal in my opinion. That's just me though.
I have a question. I am starting to look into purchasing a smartphone sometime in the next couple of months. Is there a phone on the market, running Android, that gives me root access to the OS which allows me to undo, redo, or just do anything I want, including stupid arbitrary crap that the carriers place on the phones? I run Linux on my home PCs because I can hack that stupid OS to do anything and everything I want if my silly little heart desires. Can I do that with any phone on the market today?
Likewise, as someone looking to purchase a new smart phone and cellular service in the next couple of months, the increasing complexity of the Android scape has been turning me off from wanting to adopt that platform. So far, the best argument I can come up with to buy an Android derived phones is, "well there isn't much better." Frankly, that's about as shitty as my choice in politicians lately, and I am tired of that being the case. Will I do more research? Yes. Will I eventually make a choice? Yes. Do I wish that I didn't have to draw a complicated mental block diagram of what features were available on what phones under what companies, as well as keeping track of which unlocked phones I could purchase independently and try to negotiate my carrier into a cheaper service. Yes. I am really sick of shit in the U.S. getting convoluted due to artificial restriction and barriers and having it labeled as "Choice and Freedom."
I don't think there is anything more oppressing than having to learn an entire labyrinth just to eat a fucking meal.
I've been living around SLO now for six years or so. The Sherriff's Department is in a bit of an awkward position. On one hand, they have local politicians breathing down their necks to be tougher on crime. Between the Cal Poly party scene and the inevitable knee-jerk hatred of the college kids, there is definitely a sharp ideological divide between the SLOcals and the Polywags. On the other hand, there are some pretty high crime rate areas in the county (like my current town, Oceano) where violent crimes and gang activities are pretty common. Thus, the Sherriff's department is usually in a game of tug-o-war between what the county-seat residents demand (more enforcement in San Luis Obispo proper) and what is probably needed most (more enforcement in surrounding communities). As such, the Sherriff's department has to come up with a lot of unique ways of addressing odd problems.
It wouldn't surprise me if this flier was released in response to some of the SLOcals shitting bricks over something one of their teenage kids read in an internet forum. However, the Sheriff's department probably doesn't want to spend any time or manpower on the issue. So they probably released the flier to shut the local whiners up while maintaining enough autonomy to do their real jobs. For what it's worth, every time I've dealt with a Sheriff deupty here, it's been pretty pleasant. One of them helped scrape me off the road when I crashed my motorcycle, and even gave me a ride home when I refused to go to the hospital. Another couple of them recognize me when I am jogging now and wave and say hi if they are outside of their cars. I've never had them stop me for trivial bullshit. I've never had them stop me period. It's always been SLO PD and the CHP that give me shit over ridiculous stuff.
All in all, SLO county is a delightfully weird place to live. the SLO folk are so hell bent about maintaining a nice community that they pass all sorts of batshit insane, jerk off laws. For instance, just this year a city-wide ban on smoking was enacted. You can't smoke anywhere in public now, or within 20 feet of another person's residence. So if you smoke, you're screwed. Then there was the measure that made it so noise ordinance violations could be classified as "unruly gatherings" and, rather than simply fining the offenders, all members present can now be criminally prosecuted and arrested. As such, I'd hate to work for the Sheriff's department. They are stuck between trying to prevent real crimes (like the constant stabbings in Oceano, or the poaching of wildlife up in Cayucos) and pandering to a bunch of rich whiny twats that want to create the "perfect community." It's strange.
Well that's a shitty view to take of things. I thought all men were created equal and were endowed by their creator (whatever that is) with certain unalienable rights. I didn't think all men were created equal and were endowed by their society with certain unalienable rights once they reached a certain age.
I know when I was 16 that if someone had tried to suppress my rights to speak my mind, defend myself, or reserve my privacy both of my parents would have been up in arms about it. Then again, my parents raised me with enough respect and trust that they probably felt I wouldn't abuse those rights to an egregious extent. Quite frankly, I find the fact that you think non-adults don't have any rights to be one of the most offensive and blatantly bigoted things I've ever seen modded up on slashdot. Remember, the current dividing line between adult and non-adult is an arbitrary one that varies from society to society. What's to stop society from drawing other arbitrary lines to determine who does and doesn't have rights? Jackass.
When you're driving down the road and the retard on the cell phone doesn't see a stop sign, runs it, and is headed straight for your driver's side door, deeper insight isn't particularly valuable.
A corollary to that: if you do start riding, invest a lot of money in a good helmet and a decent jacket. As someone who just put my bike down on the road for the first time a month or so ago, I can tell you that the $400 I spent on the best helmet I could find was, by far, the best money I've ever spent in my life. I wouldn't have a jaw anymore if I didn't buy such a nice helmet. If you ride, eventually, you will crash. It's important to protect your squishy parts as much as you can when that day comes.
Slashdot Mirror
So believes hessian, who is a slashdotter and therefore should not be allowed to have a girlfriend.
Damn rebellious youth! Back in my day we nerds had only our right and left hands and we were happy about it! Now you young kids with your techno and your Ruby on Rails run around talking about actually fraternizing with the other gender like it's some kind of entitlement. It's sickening I tell you! Now get off my damn lonely lawn!
She's also a creationist.
Yup, damn those folks who believe something different than us slashdotters!
Don't get me wrong, creationists bug the shit out of me, but demonizing a particular group of people because they share a common belief is stupid and disingenuous no matter what that common belief is. Don't forget, every single U.S. President we have had so far has been aa creationist in one form or another. There are also quite a few very smart, capable, rational, intelligent folk who are creationists in every industry today. So yeah, creationists believe in a sky fairy overlord, snicker snicker snicker. That doesn't mean you should stop taking someone seriously just because they are a creationist...that's just limiting yourself and it is, quite honestly, stupid.
Well, maybe that will give civilian populations less incentive to fight stupid and pointless wars. If they know the only lives at risk are their own, then they don't have the convenience of armed and trained soldiers to hide behind.
It actually depends on your orbit. There are quite a bit of operations LEO satellites that spend a long time in Earth shadow (as in ~6 hours or more). Of course, your orbit is determined by your mission, so, yes, there are definitely some satellites that go through a cycle like this every day, or, for that matter, a few times a day (depending on your period, inclination, RAAN, etc. etc. etc.).
ABSL Li+ batteries should do the trick. We did a satellite design with them for a 14 year operational life. You need a ton of them, because they are small capacity. However, they are light enough that it shouldn't be a problem.
So it is logical to restrict the teenagers rights.
First off, you didn't say restrict teenagers rights the first time around. You said non-adults don't have rights, at all. Those are two very different things and your position needs to be clarified on that matter.
Secondly, it is not 'logical' to restrict teenagers rights based on the study you mentioned. In fact, there is little to no logic in your post (honestly, that's not a stab, what assumptions are you making, what axioms are you speaking from, and what inductive or deductive conclusions are you drawing from the causal relationships between said axioms). Logic and, "makes sense because modern science agrees" are not the same thing and never should be equated.
Furthermore, I will argue with that idea that just because teenagers brains are not fully developed, they should have restricted rights. First off, that study you mentioned (and I did read it) discussed the immature nature of certain centers of the brain, not the entire brain in general. For instance, it discussed control of emotions being less prevalent in younger brains. Well that's all well and good, but that does not mean that teenagers are more likely to make worse decisions than adults. Sometimes, often times (especially when dealing with basic human rights) emotions very much need to be present to make a good decision. Note that this argument does not make the assumption that a purely logical or objective decision necessarily qualifies as best. Younger folk having more active emotional centers in their brains may mean they are more empathetic (the study didn't touch on this topic). In order to make a good decision, empathy towards others needs may be a more important factor that pure logic or reason. It simply depends on the situation in question.
The problem with your argument is that you, like so many other folks in our society, assume that logic and reason is the end-all-be-all of good. Well it's not. Saying that logic encompasses the entire spectrum of good is just plain silly. (Think about it, what makes a good piece of music or a good painting good? Is it because it was logically developed? How so, if that's the case?).
Quite frankly, just because certain centers of teenage brains are less developed, there is no empirical reason to assume that a teenage brain will consistently, or more often, make
worse decisions than an adult. So I consider your argument to basically dwindle down to little more than a personally held bias that you consider to be fact because it is one widely held by most of modern society. You, and most other adults (myself included) assume that your 'mature' decisions are actually better decisions for the world or society as a whole. That does not follow any available scientific evidence that I know of. That is purely derived from the assumption that, as time passes, we humans become better. Well that doesn't always make sense. Think about it, as adults age, do your muscles become more elastic? Do your bones become stronger? No. So why would you assume that, as you age, your more mature brain is making better decisions than the immature one you used to have? Is your body metabolizing food better than it used to? Now, I want to make it clear that I am not stating that teenagers unequivocally make better decisions because they are more youthful. I just want to point out that the assumption that older, more mature brains equals better is based off of the fact that older, more mature people made the studies and they are making the assumption that they have grown wiser with time. To my knowledge, this has not been scientifically demonstrated thus far. Hell, younger folk seem to be a bit more compassionate, less egotistic, and less jaded in general from what I can tell. For all we know, that's the optimum state of the human brain. We are just assuming it's not because we place a high value on young adults in our society.
For the record, I did all manner of dumb things as a kid. So have
It's not about which came out first, it's about whether or not the cart is of higher quality than the horse. Frankly, the continuity and overall universe written by Nylund is and was a more complete product than the games. The games were developed to appeal to gamers. I get that. However, in terms of environment, the games really suck-failed at keeping things continuous. Take, for instance, the pistols in all three games. The pistol in Halo 1 was overpowered and basically ruined the multiplayer aspect. However, in terms of the story, it made perfect sense. It was a high-powered, compact, useful killing machine which is exactly what marines would need in an all out space war.
Now comes Halo 2 and, for reasons unexplained, standard issue pistols could fire faster, but had the scope removed. Now the pistols are less useful for marines. In an actual war, technology tends to progress forward, not backward.
Then comes Halo 3. Now the pistols not only lose their scope, but they also fire significantly slower, but somehow have more penetration depth (damage done). Again, what was once a useful tool for space marines is artificially gimped to appeal to gamers. The same thing happened to the shotgun (reduction in number of rounds in magazine).
I can understand that the games needed to do what they did to make the game fun. That's fine. However, in terms of continuity, which is important for establishing a canonical universe, many of the details of the games did not make sense. Thus, it seems better, to me at least, to make the printed texts at least some source of official canon, while the games are acknowledged as being a prime source of canon as well, but deviating where necessary in order to make the games more appealing.
That's my gripe. I'm not saying Nylund should be canon because his stuff came first. I am saying his writing should be considered part of canon because it was more robust, complete, and sensible in the larger scope of the Halo universe.
It's funny to read your posts. I bought my Toyota MR-2 for the exact same reasons you cited for your Mazda (handling, suspension, good tire options/design). I don't think enough people realize or measure how significant a part of safety handling is in a vehicle. For what it's worth, I also ride a motorcycle, and the only reason I feel safe on a 2 wheeled overpowered engine between my thighs is that I know I can make that two-wheeled, overpowered engine go pretty much anywhere I want/need it to when I want/need it to. Compare that to my friends who drive long, lifted, over-sized trucks and I don't see how they can feel safe in a vehicle like that at all (if you turn hard, you're going head-over ass and bouncing down the road). Ah well.
Why do the youngsters today re-invent computer technology that we came up with in the 80's give it a snazzier sounding buzzword and act like they discovered penicillin?
=P
Instead they've only focused on the user interface, which pretty much makes this project pointless so far.
Unless, of course, one of their primary goals is to attract more users, in which case a well developed, well tested UI is probably one of the most important parts of the project. After all, 90% of social networkers (number out of my ass) probably judge software based on "How easy is it to click what I want?"
Now that doesn't mean they should neglect the back-end code, however, if they are trying to raise awareness of their product and make it more attractive, then I would think having a nicely developed UI and screenies would be pretty important right from the get go. While people find flaws in their UI, they can start to hash out the back end code.
My hypothesis is that liberal arts majors trend away from terrorism because they are used to discussing problems rather than solving them. Hence, solving the problem of a crappy social structure is something they'd more likely discuss, than try to solve...with, say, a bomb. ;)
...i've met a lot of engineers that think they can solve all problems, no matter how unrelated the topic is to engineering...
Well, engineering is basically just the art and science of solving problems that manifest themselves in the physical realm. That being the case, it's no surprise that most engineers you know look at the world in terms of solving problem. It's also little surprise that the field tends to attract individuals that are problem solvers.
Actually that depends on the product and company. In a lot of small companies, engineers build what they design as well. This forces them to consider buildability (which can actually be a huge make or break for a product) while designing the product. The most elegant design in the world isn't worth shit if the screwdriver can't get access to the screw heads.
I never understood the draw to the 'realism' in COD type games. It's annoying. If I am playing a video game, I want to pretend to be a 9 foot tall space cyborg that can jump 20 feet in the air and kick a motorcycle a half-mile at an enemy. I don't want to pretend I am in Iraq getting shit on by insurgents with RPG's. Video games, at least the way I figure, at about a certain suspension of reality. It's funner to be a fire-breathing raptor and think about why on Earth I would be so interested in hunting down laser wielding zombies than it is to pretend to be fighting a real war with real people.
I get your joke, but I wonder if they could have made more money by releasing for Playstation instead. I get the feeling Halo is 90% of the reason the original Xbox even got as big as it did. If it had never been released for Xbox, I wonder what kind of console-scape we would have today.
The Halo 3 story line was a poached piece of shit. In order to understand 90% of what is going on in Halo 3, you need to read the short story in Halo: Evolutions by Karen Traviss, which, incidentally, is one of the better sci-fi short stories in that book. It touches on and develops some of the interesting bits of science that may go into developing and sustaining a smart AI, such as clock cycle length, and sensory input.
But yeah, Halo 3 was a rush release by Microsoft to milk the last $$'s from it's flagship product. Considering that they butchered the canon and time line established by Nylund in the original Halo trilogy of books, and simultaneously disrupted continuity through various weapons and technologies being present in Halo: Contact Harvest (part of the Halo 3 marketing campaign), I would wager that either Bungie, or Microsoft didn't give a damn about the story of Halo 3 at all. They just wanted to try to recreate the glory of Halo: CE as best they could.
I always found I enjoyed the novels and stories written by Eric Nylund the most. Many of the other novels were pretty shallow and unoriginal in my opinion. That's just me though.
That's when you shoot the frog and tell the EPA a snake ate the last one. Problem solved.
I have a question. I am starting to look into purchasing a smartphone sometime in the next couple of months. Is there a phone on the market, running Android, that gives me root access to the OS which allows me to undo, redo, or just do anything I want, including stupid arbitrary crap that the carriers place on the phones? I run Linux on my home PCs because I can hack that stupid OS to do anything and everything I want if my silly little heart desires. Can I do that with any phone on the market today?
Likewise, as someone looking to purchase a new smart phone and cellular service in the next couple of months, the increasing complexity of the Android scape has been turning me off from wanting to adopt that platform. So far, the best argument I can come up with to buy an Android derived phones is, "well there isn't much better." Frankly, that's about as shitty as my choice in politicians lately, and I am tired of that being the case. Will I do more research? Yes. Will I eventually make a choice? Yes. Do I wish that I didn't have to draw a complicated mental block diagram of what features were available on what phones under what companies, as well as keeping track of which unlocked phones I could purchase independently and try to negotiate my carrier into a cheaper service. Yes. I am really sick of shit in the U.S. getting convoluted due to artificial restriction and barriers and having it labeled as "Choice and Freedom."
I don't think there is anything more oppressing than having to learn an entire labyrinth just to eat a fucking meal.
I've been living around SLO now for six years or so. The Sherriff's Department is in a bit of an awkward position. On one hand, they have local politicians breathing down their necks to be tougher on crime. Between the Cal Poly party scene and the inevitable knee-jerk hatred of the college kids, there is definitely a sharp ideological divide between the SLOcals and the Polywags. On the other hand, there are some pretty high crime rate areas in the county (like my current town, Oceano) where violent crimes and gang activities are pretty common. Thus, the Sherriff's department is usually in a game of tug-o-war between what the county-seat residents demand (more enforcement in San Luis Obispo proper) and what is probably needed most (more enforcement in surrounding communities). As such, the Sherriff's department has to come up with a lot of unique ways of addressing odd problems.
It wouldn't surprise me if this flier was released in response to some of the SLOcals shitting bricks over something one of their teenage kids read in an internet forum. However, the Sheriff's department probably doesn't want to spend any time or manpower on the issue. So they probably released the flier to shut the local whiners up while maintaining enough autonomy to do their real jobs. For what it's worth, every time I've dealt with a Sheriff deupty here, it's been pretty pleasant. One of them helped scrape me off the road when I crashed my motorcycle, and even gave me a ride home when I refused to go to the hospital. Another couple of them recognize me when I am jogging now and wave and say hi if they are outside of their cars. I've never had them stop me for trivial bullshit. I've never had them stop me period. It's always been SLO PD and the CHP that give me shit over ridiculous stuff.
All in all, SLO county is a delightfully weird place to live. the SLO folk are so hell bent about maintaining a nice community that they pass all sorts of batshit insane, jerk off laws. For instance, just this year a city-wide ban on smoking was enacted. You can't smoke anywhere in public now, or within 20 feet of another person's residence. So if you smoke, you're screwed. Then there was the measure that made it so noise ordinance violations could be classified as "unruly gatherings" and, rather than simply fining the offenders, all members present can now be criminally prosecuted and arrested. As such, I'd hate to work for the Sheriff's department. They are stuck between trying to prevent real crimes (like the constant stabbings in Oceano, or the poaching of wildlife up in Cayucos) and pandering to a bunch of rich whiny twats that want to create the "perfect community." It's strange.
I'm sorry but non-adults don't have rights.
Well that's a shitty view to take of things. I thought all men were created equal and were endowed by their creator (whatever that is) with certain unalienable rights. I didn't think all men were created equal and were endowed by their society with certain unalienable rights once they reached a certain age.
I know when I was 16 that if someone had tried to suppress my rights to speak my mind, defend myself, or reserve my privacy both of my parents would have been up in arms about it. Then again, my parents raised me with enough respect and trust that they probably felt I wouldn't abuse those rights to an egregious extent. Quite frankly, I find the fact that you think non-adults don't have any rights to be one of the most offensive and blatantly bigoted things I've ever seen modded up on slashdot. Remember, the current dividing line between adult and non-adult is an arbitrary one that varies from society to society. What's to stop society from drawing other arbitrary lines to determine who does and doesn't have rights? Jackass.
Well, yeah, that makes sense then.
When you're driving down the road and the retard on the cell phone doesn't see a stop sign, runs it, and is headed straight for your driver's side door, deeper insight isn't particularly valuable.
A corollary to that: if you do start riding, invest a lot of money in a good helmet and a decent jacket. As someone who just put my bike down on the road for the first time a month or so ago, I can tell you that the $400 I spent on the best helmet I could find was, by far, the best money I've ever spent in my life. I wouldn't have a jaw anymore if I didn't buy such a nice helmet. If you ride, eventually, you will crash. It's important to protect your squishy parts as much as you can when that day comes.