That's probably the most cost-effective and least annoying solution.
It might be cost-effective, but it's a far cry from "least annoying". Streets that change the direction of permissible travel based on time of day are much more annoying than just keeping them one-way all the time.
Florida must have some really kick-ass public transit, then! I live in a city that is often cited as having wonderful public transportation, including light rail, but after using it for a couple of years I never came to love it. I gave up on it altogether.
In most states, it's just silly to use surface streets when there's a freeway - even in rush hour, the freeway will be faster. But California is broken, and they just don't want to build big enough freeways (though LA at least tried, once).
I live in a much more rural state than California, but for most of most days using the freeway is the slowest of available options. Or, best case, it's no faster than using the surface streets (but a thousand times less pleasant). As a result, I have my nav system permanently set to "avoid freeways".
This isn't anything close to a new problem. About 30 years ago, I lived on a street that was severely in need of repaving. The reason that it was in that state was because the property owners along it pressured the city heavily not to repave it. It turns out that when the street was in good repair, too many drivers used it to bypass the bad traffic on a nearby thoroughfare. Keeping the street in poor repair meant that you couldn't safely drive down it going more than about 5 MPH, which meant that people who didn't live along it would avoid it.
Since the formation of the TSA, how many US planes have been hijacked? None! It's obviously a huge success and worth every penny and minute of lost time.
That's not because of the TSA, it's because I started carrying a magic pebble.
While I've never been asked permission for a search at the airport, I have a couple of times in my life by cops. My policy is to always decline to give permission no matter what. If they have a legal right to search me, then they don't need my permission. If they don't have that right, then they have no business searching me.
Even better, design planes so that there is no passage at all between the cockpit and the passenger section. The pilots enter the cockpit through an external door.
I'm just waiting for the day when you have to ship all your luggage a day ahead of travel
I got in the habit of shipping my luggage on ahead of me using UPS and the like several decades ago, well before this TSA madness began. I started doing it because my luggage doesn't get lost or abused that way. I highly recommend the practice to anybody. Especially now, when your luggage is at greater risk of theft than ever before.
"People complain about the security procedures but if someone was able to hijack or blowup a plane the very same complainers would be howling about not having enough security"
No, different complainers would be howling.
People aren't complaining about security, they're complaining about things that don't improve security, but which do make travel an absurd hassle.
You have a point here, but I think it's overstated a bit. Speaking for myself, I would find the TSA procedures nearly as objectionable even if they did improve security -- because we're well into the land of diminishing returns with them, where the cost of the measures greatly exceeds the benefits that could be gained by them.
I cannot imagine a circumstance where I would voluntarily hand my cellphone to a cop. I'd be FAR more likely to hide my cellphone and tell the cop I don't have one. They're far too eager to search them.
Ahh, I understand now. I don't encounter the issue on many websites, probably because I block all ads and avoid using websites that are formatted in the way you describe (as well as websites that have fixed maximum widths).
This applies not just to the web, but also to most of your desktop apps.
That's another "Whaa?"! This applies to none of my desktop apps, or at least none of my top 10 most used apps. I just looked.
Resolution isn't the issue at all -- just because I can have everything on my screen rendered tiny doesn't mean I want it that way! And I don't understand how the portrait orientation improves browsing at all (and yes, I read that article).
I usually keep many windows open at once (right now, I have 15), but I do maximize the particular window I need to pay attention to. It's easier to focus and concentrate on the task at hand that way.
I find that having the monitor in portrait orientation is unbelievably annoying. Scrolling vertically is trivial and painless, so I have, in effect, unlimited vertical space no matter what the orientation is. However, horizontal space is at a premium unless the monitor is huge. And when the monitor is huge, putting it in portrait orientation means I have to move my head up and down a lot to see everything.
Landscape is the only thing that makes sense to me.
The effects are potentially massive as it funnels funds away from legitimate sites in favor of the corrupt and I say that as someone that despises advertising.
Since I can't think of a single online ad network that I don't consider corrupt, I think this is more funneling funds away from one corrupt group to another corrupt group.
If you actually thought this you would not visit those sites and would not care what they do
Not true at all. Advertising has a general corrosive effect on the web. I care about its presence even on sites I don't go to because it tends to degrade the entire web.
Slashdot Mirror
With the freeway running smoothly 24/7 and nobody ever being overcharged to use it
Any charge to use the freeway is being overcharged.
That's probably the most cost-effective and least annoying solution.
It might be cost-effective, but it's a far cry from "least annoying". Streets that change the direction of permissible travel based on time of day are much more annoying than just keeping them one-way all the time.
Florida must have some really kick-ass public transit, then! I live in a city that is often cited as having wonderful public transportation, including light rail, but after using it for a couple of years I never came to love it. I gave up on it altogether.
In most states, it's just silly to use surface streets when there's a freeway - even in rush hour, the freeway will be faster. But California is broken, and they just don't want to build big enough freeways (though LA at least tried, once).
I live in a much more rural state than California, but for most of most days using the freeway is the slowest of available options. Or, best case, it's no faster than using the surface streets (but a thousand times less pleasant). As a result, I have my nav system permanently set to "avoid freeways".
This isn't anything close to a new problem. About 30 years ago, I lived on a street that was severely in need of repaving. The reason that it was in that state was because the property owners along it pressured the city heavily not to repave it. It turns out that when the street was in good repair, too many drivers used it to bypass the bad traffic on a nearby thoroughfare. Keeping the street in poor repair meant that you couldn't safely drive down it going more than about 5 MPH, which meant that people who didn't live along it would avoid it.
Since the formation of the TSA, how many US planes have been hijacked? None! It's obviously a huge success and worth every penny and minute of lost time.
That's not because of the TSA, it's because I started carrying a magic pebble.
While I've never been asked permission for a search at the airport, I have a couple of times in my life by cops. My policy is to always decline to give permission no matter what. If they have a legal right to search me, then they don't need my permission. If they don't have that right, then they have no business searching me.
But it is really complaints like this that turned TSA into a paper tiger.
I disagree. The TSA was a paper tiger from day one. The complaints about it had nothing to do with it.
Lock the cockpit door.
Even better, design planes so that there is no passage at all between the cockpit and the passenger section. The pilots enter the cockpit through an external door.
I'm just waiting for the day when you have to ship all your luggage a day ahead of travel
I got in the habit of shipping my luggage on ahead of me using UPS and the like several decades ago, well before this TSA madness began. I started doing it because my luggage doesn't get lost or abused that way. I highly recommend the practice to anybody. Especially now, when your luggage is at greater risk of theft than ever before.
"People complain about the security procedures but if someone was able to hijack or blowup a plane the very same complainers would be howling about not having enough security"
No, different complainers would be howling.
People aren't complaining about security, they're complaining about things that don't improve security, but which do make travel an absurd hassle.
You have a point here, but I think it's overstated a bit. Speaking for myself, I would find the TSA procedures nearly as objectionable even if they did improve security -- because we're well into the land of diminishing returns with them, where the cost of the measures greatly exceeds the benefits that could be gained by them.
Oregon is another.
That would matter a lot more if the Supreme Court hadn't just ruled that unconstitutional.
As if the cops care.
I cannot imagine a circumstance where I would voluntarily hand my cellphone to a cop. I'd be FAR more likely to hide my cellphone and tell the cop I don't have one. They're far too eager to search them.
Ahh, I understand now. I don't encounter the issue on many websites, probably because I block all ads and avoid using websites that are formatted in the way you describe (as well as websites that have fixed maximum widths).
This applies not just to the web, but also to most of your desktop apps.
That's another "Whaa?"! This applies to none of my desktop apps, or at least none of my top 10 most used apps. I just looked.
Resolution isn't the issue at all -- just because I can have everything on my screen rendered tiny doesn't mean I want it that way! And I don't understand how the portrait orientation improves browsing at all (and yes, I read that article).
It also takes time & energy to, you know, develop, maintain, and generate content for a website.
True, as I know well by running a few popular web sites. So what's your point?
I use my tablet in the landscape orientation 90% of the time.
I usually keep many windows open at once (right now, I have 15), but I do maximize the particular window I need to pay attention to. It's easier to focus and concentrate on the task at hand that way.
Most of the space towards the left and right of a monitor is not used -- the viewer does not pay much attention to those areas of the monitor.
Whaa? On my machines, the entirety of the space to the left and right are used.
The examples show lots of web sites in a maximized browser window.
Yes, and those websites are all incredibly poorly designed. No website should ever have a fixed maximum width.
I find that having the monitor in portrait orientation is unbelievably annoying. Scrolling vertically is trivial and painless, so I have, in effect, unlimited vertical space no matter what the orientation is. However, horizontal space is at a premium unless the monitor is huge. And when the monitor is huge, putting it in portrait orientation means I have to move my head up and down a lot to see everything.
Landscape is the only thing that makes sense to me.
Which is fraud, because when you join an ad network you enter into a contractual agreement not to do that.
The effects are potentially massive as it funnels funds away from legitimate sites in favor of the corrupt and I say that as someone that despises advertising.
Since I can't think of a single online ad network that I don't consider corrupt, I think this is more funneling funds away from one corrupt group to another corrupt group.
If you actually thought this you would not visit those sites and would not care what they do
Not true at all. Advertising has a general corrosive effect on the web. I care about its presence even on sites I don't go to because it tends to degrade the entire web.