The thing is, you don't really need to vote with your wallet in local politics. How many of these people are complaining about their cities to strangers on a forum when they couldn't even name their city councilman? It doesn't take much effort to be involved in your community...
Exactly - you wouldn't want something like the earned income tax credit or mortgage interest deduction to be invalidated and suddenly make you liable for thousands in back taxes.
As we always clamor: streamline the tax code and get rid of this myriad of deductions and loopholes
You both have good points. What it comes down to is how prone the individual is to addiction. It's fun to go out and play cards for a bit (how many people have poker nights with their friends?). Some of the fun comes from sitting around drinking, chatting and playing games, some of it comes from winning. The majority of people acknowledge that on average, they come out behind. It really comes down to knowing why you go out there. If you're playing high stakes games with money you need to survive, well you obviously have a problem. If you're out playing craps or cards with buy ins that you've allocated in your entertainment budget, that's perfectly alright.
That's the gist of the story, the commander involved here pretty clearly had an unhealthy relationship with gambling which absolutely can be used against you if you've been entrusted with serious responsibilities.
But plenty of people find it enjoyable to gamble a little every now and then
This is spot on. You can spend as little as $50 for a night at a blackjack table hanging out playing cards and being served "free" drinks (free as long as you play...). Unless you're into high-stakes games, the only thing you're really gambling is how long that $20 bill lasts you. You can certainly spend a lot more having a lot less fun at bars or clubs.
You're right - if the current caregiver is against it, a new phone won't work because they'll simply confiscate it. On the upside though, I didn't read anything in TFS that indicated trouble with the current caregiver. So... I vote Skype!
Y'know, I was enjoying reading all the little nuggets of wisdom (Video cards that could use as much as 512 mb of address space, $700 for 2GB of RAM). Then I was thinking "hey, the computer I had before this one was an Athlon 64, it wasn't *that* long ago!" Then I realized it was. Then I felt old. Now I'm crying.
Hah, I don't have mod points but this is pretty much exactly how I feel about it. If they're looking to improve safety why not watch to see if they were using the phone coming up to the light or driving away from it? Perhaps issue warnings otherwise?
Texting *can* stop as soon as the phone is dropped, but how often is it really stopped? I see a lot of people with the phone up coming to the stop and driving away from the stop.
I'm torn on this one - I don't see texting while at a stop light to really be dangerous at all. Stop lights are a great time to do things like change the radio or grab a sip of water or coffee provided you have the time to do it. However, the point is that when you're behind the wheel, driving *must* be your #1 priority. Many people simply don't bother to judge if they have time at a stoplight to do some other task - they just do it. And, if they notice the light changed in the middle of the task, they continue that task while they start driving. I've definitely seen my friends drive around with the phone up where it is painfully apparent that driving is a secondary concern to them, and I do not hesitate to point that out.
I was thinking the same thing... A lot of folks have complained about being stuck behind texters, do none of them give a polite little toot at the horn?
Dear everybody: a short toot on the horn is not a disrespectful gesture. Use it!
Speeding, drunk driving, texting, etc., none of those actions actually causes harm
I respectfully (and very strongly) disagree. About 30% of traffic accidents and fatalities are due to alcohol impairment. There are already stiff penalties for driving while intoxicated - yet people still do it. So no, I absolutely do not want you to be able to drive down the road intoxicated and have the police powerless to do anything until you actually cause an accident. Sure I'll concede that driving drunk is harmless until an accident occurs, in the same way that my shooting a gun at you is harmless until a bullet actually hits you. After all, I'm really only increasing your risk of injury by bullet. So, why bother having the police stop me until I actually cause harm?
Pre-crime would be getting arrested while walking into a bar with keys. It's a regular old crime once you get back in your car and drive off intoxicated.
You can do a lot of science without sending humans, just like you are forced to do a lot of science when you are sending humans. My argument (and opinion) is that the entire point of all our science is to enhance the human experience. We don't do that if we end up living 100% vicariously through robots, hence my analogy of looking at the pictures on Wikipedia instead of going there and seeing it for ourselves.
Make no mistake, I'm not arguing against robotic exploration because we learn a hell of a lot that way, I'm simply saying not to give up on manned exploration because it's more difficult.
I'm not at all saying we should only send people out instead of probes. There's very valuable things to learn from robotic probes. I'm simply saying we shouldn't eliminate manned exploration.
You guys are kind of on the same side of this argument, y'know... Fighter jets and tanks and other military hardware really is fascinating to most people. Problem is, as he said, the people in charge of using that hardware. I'm sure *most* of us (myself definitely, and GP most likely) would rather have spent our youth playing with models of real live spacecraft instead of fighter jets - but they simply don't exist.
Hiking to the top of that mountain costs a lot more energy than sitting at home looking at pictures of it on Wikipedia, but the cost isn't really the point now, is it?
Now you're talking about unlicensed food trucks and unscrupulous owners. That's not how this conversation started - it was about food trucks in general. Generally speaking (again, at least where I am), the food trucks operate above-board. *That's* what I've been talking about and all you've had to reply on has been some mystery roach coach driving in from the sticks to steal your customers and beat your dog. As I've repeated over and over again, if your town has an enforcement problem, that's a different story. You can have unscrupulous people in any business (yes, even brick and mortar restaurants skirt the law and health codes!).
In any case, I've wasted far too many keystrokes on this conversation already.
The Leaf isn't bad for what it is - but it in no way rivals the Tesla. Comparing a performance luxury sedan with a 200 mile range to an economy car with a 70 mile range is apples and oranges. A Leaf with a larger battery pack could even the comparisons, or an upmarket sedan with somewhat shorter range, but as they are the cars are simply too different.
Slashdot Mirror
...So when will Then be Now?!
Makes you wonder if there was *ever* a time when politics wasn't polarized to the point of groups not talking to each other...
I am a person! I have a name!!
The thing is, you don't really need to vote with your wallet in local politics. How many of these people are complaining about their cities to strangers on a forum when they couldn't even name their city councilman? It doesn't take much effort to be involved in your community...
Exactly - you wouldn't want something like the earned income tax credit or mortgage interest deduction to be invalidated and suddenly make you liable for thousands in back taxes.
As we always clamor: streamline the tax code and get rid of this myriad of deductions and loopholes
...or if you're gaming in a legal establishment with counterfeit chips.
Yer full of shit!
You both have good points. What it comes down to is how prone the individual is to addiction. It's fun to go out and play cards for a bit (how many people have poker nights with their friends?). Some of the fun comes from sitting around drinking, chatting and playing games, some of it comes from winning. The majority of people acknowledge that on average, they come out behind. It really comes down to knowing why you go out there. If you're playing high stakes games with money you need to survive, well you obviously have a problem. If you're out playing craps or cards with buy ins that you've allocated in your entertainment budget, that's perfectly alright.
That's the gist of the story, the commander involved here pretty clearly had an unhealthy relationship with gambling which absolutely can be used against you if you've been entrusted with serious responsibilities.
But plenty of people find it enjoyable to gamble a little every now and then
This is spot on. You can spend as little as $50 for a night at a blackjack table hanging out playing cards and being served "free" drinks (free as long as you play...). Unless you're into high-stakes games, the only thing you're really gambling is how long that $20 bill lasts you. You can certainly spend a lot more having a lot less fun at bars or clubs.
You're right - if the current caregiver is against it, a new phone won't work because they'll simply confiscate it. On the upside though, I didn't read anything in TFS that indicated trouble with the current caregiver. So... I vote Skype!
Just a marketing ploy... Nothing to see here (unless you love Versas), move along.
Or if you don't want to upgrade every year, and want a machine that will last for a decade.
...like an Athlon 64!?!?!
Y'know, I was enjoying reading all the little nuggets of wisdom (Video cards that could use as much as 512 mb of address space, $700 for 2GB of RAM). Then I was thinking "hey, the computer I had before this one was an Athlon 64, it wasn't *that* long ago!" Then I realized it was. Then I felt old. Now I'm crying.
I found it interesting that the woman continued texting the instant the exchange was over and she had phoned for help.
How else was she going to tweet about the jackass jeep that stopped short in front of her?
Hah, I don't have mod points but this is pretty much exactly how I feel about it. If they're looking to improve safety why not watch to see if they were using the phone coming up to the light or driving away from it? Perhaps issue warnings otherwise?
Texting *can* stop as soon as the phone is dropped, but how often is it really stopped? I see a lot of people with the phone up coming to the stop and driving away from the stop.
I'm torn on this one - I don't see texting while at a stop light to really be dangerous at all. Stop lights are a great time to do things like change the radio or grab a sip of water or coffee provided you have the time to do it. However, the point is that when you're behind the wheel, driving *must* be your #1 priority. Many people simply don't bother to judge if they have time at a stoplight to do some other task - they just do it. And, if they notice the light changed in the middle of the task, they continue that task while they start driving. I've definitely seen my friends drive around with the phone up where it is painfully apparent that driving is a secondary concern to them, and I do not hesitate to point that out.
I was thinking the same thing... A lot of folks have complained about being stuck behind texters, do none of them give a polite little toot at the horn?
Dear everybody: a short toot on the horn is not a disrespectful gesture. Use it!
Speeding, drunk driving, texting, etc., none of those actions actually causes harm
I respectfully (and very strongly) disagree. About 30% of traffic accidents and fatalities are due to alcohol impairment. There are already stiff penalties for driving while intoxicated - yet people still do it. So no, I absolutely do not want you to be able to drive down the road intoxicated and have the police powerless to do anything until you actually cause an accident. Sure I'll concede that driving drunk is harmless until an accident occurs, in the same way that my shooting a gun at you is harmless until a bullet actually hits you. After all, I'm really only increasing your risk of injury by bullet. So, why bother having the police stop me until I actually cause harm?
Pre-crime would be getting arrested while walking into a bar with keys. It's a regular old crime once you get back in your car and drive off intoxicated.
Driving a sports car isn't illegal... Texting while on the motorway is.
You can do a lot of science without sending humans, just like you are forced to do a lot of science when you are sending humans. My argument (and opinion) is that the entire point of all our science is to enhance the human experience. We don't do that if we end up living 100% vicariously through robots, hence my analogy of looking at the pictures on Wikipedia instead of going there and seeing it for ourselves.
Make no mistake, I'm not arguing against robotic exploration because we learn a hell of a lot that way, I'm simply saying not to give up on manned exploration because it's more difficult.
I'm not at all saying we should only send people out instead of probes. There's very valuable things to learn from robotic probes. I'm simply saying we shouldn't eliminate manned exploration.
You guys are kind of on the same side of this argument, y'know... Fighter jets and tanks and other military hardware really is fascinating to most people. Problem is, as he said, the people in charge of using that hardware. I'm sure *most* of us (myself definitely, and GP most likely) would rather have spent our youth playing with models of real live spacecraft instead of fighter jets - but they simply don't exist.
Hiking to the top of that mountain costs a lot more energy than sitting at home looking at pictures of it on Wikipedia, but the cost isn't really the point now, is it?
Now you're talking about unlicensed food trucks and unscrupulous owners. That's not how this conversation started - it was about food trucks in general. Generally speaking (again, at least where I am), the food trucks operate above-board. *That's* what I've been talking about and all you've had to reply on has been some mystery roach coach driving in from the sticks to steal your customers and beat your dog. As I've repeated over and over again, if your town has an enforcement problem, that's a different story. You can have unscrupulous people in any business (yes, even brick and mortar restaurants skirt the law and health codes!).
In any case, I've wasted far too many keystrokes on this conversation already.
The Leaf isn't bad for what it is - but it in no way rivals the Tesla. Comparing a performance luxury sedan with a 200 mile range to an economy car with a 70 mile range is apples and oranges. A Leaf with a larger battery pack could even the comparisons, or an upmarket sedan with somewhat shorter range, but as they are the cars are simply too different.