It's just like speeding, or having insurance, or seat belts, or having a driver's license; you agree to these terms to be able to use public roads.
So you won't mind another black box that records your location and speed continuously, then uploads that information automatically to the various governments that have jurisdictions over the roads you traveled?
Emphasis mine.
That, I would mind, and it is a separate issue. The issue of a device that records the cars data and keeps it there is acceptable, but one that transmits data to other parties is completely unacceptable. My mistake if I was unclear in that.
I really haven't used a desktop client for email in years. Where's the gain for the user?
Multiple E-mail accounts, for multiple purposes all in the same application window. Personal and professional separate, and switch between them seamlessly. Literally check my E-mail at one click of the mouse.
I want my mail and calendar wherever I am. So why keep multiple copies of gigabytes of mail on multiple machines. I just don't see the gain for the average user.
That's what IMAP is for. If I'm somewhere other than my home computer or laptop, all have web interfaces that suffice, but I have to then log into each account separately.
Personally, I use Postbox; it was the first client I ran across that integrates GMail's Archive (without creating a separate "Archive" directory). It's got some issues with my account on Live.com (issued by my college) via Outlook services (not synching sent/outgoing, not authenticating properly) but every client I've used has the same issues with that account)
Compare it to a flight data recorder. The pilots surrender that specific freedom to be able to fly and earn their wage for their chosen profession. They know about it, and they willingly accept it.
The only thing wrong here is that the public isn't generally "in the know" about these, but the premise is the same: you are using a federally funded system of roads, there are requirements for its use, public safety is involved, so it is not unreasonable to add on a requirement that a car data recorder be in place so long as the driver is aware it is there. If you don't like it, don't drive.
It's just like speeding, or having insurance, or seat belts, or having a driver's license; you agree to these terms to be able to use public roads.
Consider gun ranges. Everyone is armed, yet no one is killed.
The problem is the image guns have; (my opinion respectfully disagrees with yours, unlike many gun nuts who get pissed off at statements such as yours) many people see them only as dangerous and tools to destroy. I see them as dangerous and tools to protect as well. Guns are so entrenched in American culture (what little culture we have) that they are quite ubiquitous. Gun control efforts simply remove guns from law-abiding citizens, and those who would do harm with them don't care, because now those whom they would harm are disarmed.
Cite? No sources. Just my opinion. What's overall gun ownership in Newark like?
Now if guns were much easier to get, criminals would get more, definitely, and crime would probably spike, but as responsible citizens got armed as well, crime rates would probably settle down to lower than what they began at as criminals start getting shot back at.
All conjecture. I'd like to see someone with the resources study this more thoroughly and properly, but there is so much bias in gun control that it'd likely be done by gun nuts like the NRA (I'm a part of, I believe they are a necessary evil in our times, but they are hugely sensationalist) or anti-gun nuts like the Brady Campaign.
Guns are enablers. As authority (from whomever) increases due to increased weapons (guns), then our ability to say "no" decreases unless we similarly escalate. Some other countries don't have such problems, I think, because it is SO much more difficult to get guns into the country, so very few criminals are even able to get guns.
Serious, here we go again with the same "we don't need no education" bullshit. In America, we are the land of the dumbasses looking for the miracle pill indeed.
Nah, we're the land of the "I deserve that because."
Yea, just because. No reason, just because someone thinks they deserve that. We're the land of entitlement without earning anything.
Students who want to avoid $200,000 in student-loan debt might consider enrolling in a technology boot camp, where you can learn to write code in 8 to 10 weeks for about $10,000.
I don't understand how students rack up so much debt. This semester, I brought in more in financial aid (no loans) than my tuition is (over $1000 more, off-campus living expenses considered), so did several of my buddies. I'm a white male, so most scholarships I run across I don't even qualify for for those exact reasons. So I suppose I do understand; they're being lazy and not going for the financial aid that's available.
And it seems to me that if a student would be racking up student loan debt, that same person wouldn't be able to outright pay for that $10,000 2 month camp, and would have to take a loan to get it (or other financial aid), resulting in debt that's a) NOT subsidized interest and b) higher interest rate and c) not deferred payments until you graduate.
My sister was looking at new cars. To get built-in Sirius it was going to be an extra $1200; to just add her own deck that mounted with a suction cup to the windshield was only a couple hundred. AND she had more features (stop, rewind, 1 hour recording, bigger display == more information) available in the dash-mounted unit vs the built in.
Ridiculous. So she had a brand new car, and then immediately mounted stuff on the dash...automakers just don't get it.
Drivers are not. I recently drove past a guy in a truck that stopped in the right lane (I was in the left, each direction had two lanes coming into the roundabout) to wait for a vehicle that was 90 degrees out...at least in America, too many drivers don't know how to use roundabouts. I don't know how many times I've almost been run over on my motorcycle in a roundabout...
Stripes on the pavement to indicate that at the speed limit, you should not stop if you are past this point. This reduces the guesswork that currently makes it difficult to assess whether to enter a light or not.
Can you expand on this? Are the stripes for a 3000lb car with 4 wheel anti-lock brakes in ideal conditions (dry pavement)?
Maybe they're for a 3500lb car with drum brakes all around and potentially locking up tires in slippery conditions.
Am I liable, then, if I miss the light because in my 6500lb truck with 2000lbs of cargo I began braking at the line and didn't stop until the intersection (assuming I don't know about such things as increased stopping distances with increased weight).
What if it's raining and I stop at the line but cannot stop in time, and slide into the intersection, causing an accident? Is it my fault? I started stopping where I was supposed to. It is my fault? Then why have the lines if they cannot be relied upon?
While not a bad idea, stripes as you describe is not a solution much like banning talking on cell phones while driving is not a solution much like back-up cameras and blind-spot detectors are not solutions. The solution is more strict driver education and drive tests, where we ensure drivers are much more competent than they currently are.
I've been driving for over 10 years, and have never seen a traffic accident at a stop light, so I wonder if it is even worth changing; are the statistics really that bad?
Your second line: "Countdown timers on lights to indicate how long the driver has before the light changes to yellow." makes way more sense. There's some traffic lights on state highways up here in Washington (outside Moses Lake, north of Wenatchee on 97, and more I'm sure) that have additional signs in front of the lights. They warn about the light beginning to turn, and are timed for the speed limit. If it's not flashing when you pass at the speed limit, you're good. If they're flashing, then even a heavy haul (>100,000lbs) has time to stop. Those are cheap and effective.
...is that so hard for teachers to actually take attendance?...
When I was a network administrator for a school district, we implemented a new computer attendance system during the summer break. The next fall, after a few weeks the network went down due to a virus (damn students; I don't know what the virus was, I was still a student, but had full network admin rights/responsibilities, it was something my boss overlooked I think), and the teachers couldn't send their attendance via the computer. They pretty much panicked and didn't know what to do (nevermind they were doing it by paper just months before). They had to be told, because they couldn't figure it out, that they had to do the attendance on paper and send a runner to take it to the office. The system they had before was doing it on paper and the office sent a runner around to pick it up on clips outside every classroom door.
So yes, it is so hard for teachers to actually take attendance.
Washington was like that. We voted, and after three times (not sure why it took three votes, but I'm happy it did finally pass) and got rid of it. Now I can buy Liquor at Wal*Mart and the corner pharmacy!
Nothing like curing a headache with a fifth of Jack! I think it ultimately costs more due to new taxes and whatnot, but it's worth it for me to be able to buy it wherever (and state stores (around me) weren't open on Sunday! Now I can buy 7 days a week) and whenever.
This I would like to see. To the increases stack? Do we get a 70000% increase? Do they even work together at all? It sounds like it would. Does anyone know or have the resources to find out?
so the 100,000 tons, times 2000 pounds per ton, divided by 13 (as per article only half the yield of dry corns 26 lbs. per gallon ethanol), gives 15 million gallons of ethanol. the USA uses 380 million gallons of gasoline per day.
Ya? and that means 15 Million less gallons of gas that would be used.
It's a start, combined with other things, would help make a dent in the usage of gas/oil.
I guess you want to wait till gas is $20 a gallon before we start using other fuels? Maybe you do. I don't drive, so I don't buy gas, so really, I don't care much, but it's this attitude that everything has to be big to be effective that is annoying.
Much like no one is going to make a WoW beater, no on is going to come up with a solution that can totally get rid of the use of gas/oil. But we can find a bunch of renewable resources that together can help a lot.
I'd like to know where you got your conversion from gallons of ethanol:gallons of gasoline. Because last time I checked, ethanol contained less energy per gallon than gasoline, equating to less efficiency; thus 15 million gallons of ethanol does less than 15 million gallons of gasoline
The problem is that most people quit thinking like kids; they get afraid to try new things.
When you were a kid, you didn't know how to ride a bicycle, or stand or walk, or use a computer; but you didn't let not knowing stop you. As an adult, people will see the new interface and immediately hit a brick wall because it's unfamiliar and they don't know about it: they let not knowing stop them; they're afraid to try to figure something out. Perhaps because they don't know how to figure it out, perhaps because our education system has ingrained in them a pattern of actively NOT figuring things out...
So while most people will have a hard time grasping the new interface, it likely isn't due to poor interface design, but due to them basically being afraid to try something new (apologies for using tired cliche's). The 3 year old, however, isn't afraid to try something he doesn't know about.
Also, arguments can be made all day about the interface being designed to be easier, but it's not what we're used to; it's a shallower learning curve for new users, but all our new users are kids, and learning the new interface for existing users is a waste of what could otherwise be productive time blah blah blah MS Office Ribbon blah blah...
Personally, I tweak Win7 to act more like Win2k; which is what I tweaked WinXP to do as well. I'm a fan of the classic interface and don't much care for all the changes; but people I support love many of them (although the Office Ribbon is almost universally disliked), so I figure them out and adapt.
And by "leader of Man" I meant "leader of Mankind" as in a leader of The People...no religious connotation. That you saw that as a religious thing goes on to demonstrate your idiocy. But I'll take your misinterpretation into consideration next time I write stuff; I try to be as clear as possible whenever I write anything; so in that I must thank you for your assistance.
In case you aren't aware; that isn't actually a Voltaire quote. It's perhaps something he would have said had he thought of it, and he certainly seems to have held that particular belief (a good one, methinks).
Your lack of spelling and grammar exacerbates your arrogance and your arrogance exacerbates your ignorance. It is painful to read what you write. There's a reason you're not a leader of Man.
As far as I know, GC PUD owns Wanapum and Grand Coulee. Or at least the lease on Grand Coulee. So the power likely comes from a combination of the two.
In either case, you're right that GP post is misinformed.
And I'd be surprised if Bonneville provided a significant amount of electricity to Washington (though I don't care enough to check on this). Bonneville does provide a significant amount of power to the PNW region, but so do all our other dams; Rock Island, Priest Rapids, Wanapum, Grand Coulee, Rocky Reach...we do like our dams.
Slashdot Mirror
It's just like speeding, or having insurance, or seat belts, or having a driver's license; you agree to these terms to be able to use public roads.
So you won't mind another black box that records your location and speed continuously, then uploads that information automatically to the various governments that have jurisdictions over the roads you traveled?
Emphasis mine.
That, I would mind, and it is a separate issue. The issue of a device that records the cars data and keeps it there is acceptable, but one that transmits data to other parties is completely unacceptable. My mistake if I was unclear in that.
I really haven't used a desktop client for email in years. Where's the gain for the user?
Multiple E-mail accounts, for multiple purposes all in the same application window. Personal and professional separate, and switch between them seamlessly. Literally check my E-mail at one click of the mouse.
I want my mail and calendar wherever I am. So why keep multiple copies of gigabytes of mail on multiple machines. I just don't see the gain for the average user.
That's what IMAP is for. If I'm somewhere other than my home computer or laptop, all have web interfaces that suffice, but I have to then log into each account separately.
Personally, I use Postbox; it was the first client I ran across that integrates GMail's Archive (without creating a separate "Archive" directory). It's got some issues with my account on Live.com (issued by my college) via Outlook services (not synching sent/outgoing, not authenticating properly) but every client I've used has the same issues with that account)
Those rules will change. For safety. Always for safety.
Also to fight terrorists.
Compare it to a flight data recorder. The pilots surrender that specific freedom to be able to fly and earn their wage for their chosen profession. They know about it, and they willingly accept it.
The only thing wrong here is that the public isn't generally "in the know" about these, but the premise is the same: you are using a federally funded system of roads, there are requirements for its use, public safety is involved, so it is not unreasonable to add on a requirement that a car data recorder be in place so long as the driver is aware it is there. If you don't like it, don't drive.
It's just like speeding, or having insurance, or seat belts, or having a driver's license; you agree to these terms to be able to use public roads.
Consider gun ranges. Everyone is armed, yet no one is killed.
The problem is the image guns have; (my opinion respectfully disagrees with yours, unlike many gun nuts who get pissed off at statements such as yours) many people see them only as dangerous and tools to destroy. I see them as dangerous and tools to protect as well. Guns are so entrenched in American culture (what little culture we have) that they are quite ubiquitous. Gun control efforts simply remove guns from law-abiding citizens, and those who would do harm with them don't care, because now those whom they would harm are disarmed.
Cite? No sources. Just my opinion. What's overall gun ownership in Newark like?
Google found this: http://www.city-data.com/forum/new-jersey/1141975-crazy-nj-gun-laws-these-laws.html It appears they have somewhat strict laws, which can tend to "scare" law-abiding citizens into now owning/carrying guns. This, however, has no effect on the criminals, and now they know their targets are not armed.
Now if guns were much easier to get, criminals would get more, definitely, and crime would probably spike, but as responsible citizens got armed as well, crime rates would probably settle down to lower than what they began at as criminals start getting shot back at.
All conjecture. I'd like to see someone with the resources study this more thoroughly and properly, but there is so much bias in gun control that it'd likely be done by gun nuts like the NRA (I'm a part of, I believe they are a necessary evil in our times, but they are hugely sensationalist) or anti-gun nuts like the Brady Campaign.
Guns are enablers. As authority (from whomever) increases due to increased weapons (guns), then our ability to say "no" decreases unless we similarly escalate. Some other countries don't have such problems, I think, because it is SO much more difficult to get guns into the country, so very few criminals are even able to get guns.
But...all 13 year olds have small penises...
Serious, here we go again with the same "we don't need no education" bullshit. In America, we are the land of the dumbasses looking for the miracle pill indeed.
Nah, we're the land of the "I deserve that because."
Yea, just because. No reason, just because someone thinks they deserve that. We're the land of entitlement without earning anything.
Students who want to avoid $200,000 in student-loan debt might consider enrolling in a technology boot camp, where you can learn to write code in 8 to 10 weeks for about $10,000.
I don't understand how students rack up so much debt. This semester, I brought in more in financial aid (no loans) than my tuition is (over $1000 more, off-campus living expenses considered), so did several of my buddies. I'm a white male, so most scholarships I run across I don't even qualify for for those exact reasons. So I suppose I do understand; they're being lazy and not going for the financial aid that's available.
And it seems to me that if a student would be racking up student loan debt, that same person wouldn't be able to outright pay for that $10,000 2 month camp, and would have to take a loan to get it (or other financial aid), resulting in debt that's a) NOT subsidized interest and b) higher interest rate and c) not deferred payments until you graduate.
My sister was looking at new cars. To get built-in Sirius it was going to be an extra $1200; to just add her own deck that mounted with a suction cup to the windshield was only a couple hundred. AND she had more features (stop, rewind, 1 hour recording, bigger display == more information) available in the dash-mounted unit vs the built in.
Ridiculous. So she had a brand new car, and then immediately mounted stuff on the dash...automakers just don't get it.
Roundabouts are great.
Drivers are not. I recently drove past a guy in a truck that stopped in the right lane (I was in the left, each direction had two lanes coming into the roundabout) to wait for a vehicle that was 90 degrees out...at least in America, too many drivers don't know how to use roundabouts. I don't know how many times I've almost been run over on my motorcycle in a roundabout...
Stripes on the pavement to indicate that at the speed limit, you should not stop if you are past this point. This reduces the guesswork that currently makes it difficult to assess whether to enter a light or not.
Can you expand on this? Are the stripes for a 3000lb car with 4 wheel anti-lock brakes in ideal conditions (dry pavement)?
Maybe they're for a 3500lb car with drum brakes all around and potentially locking up tires in slippery conditions.
Am I liable, then, if I miss the light because in my 6500lb truck with 2000lbs of cargo I began braking at the line and didn't stop until the intersection (assuming I don't know about such things as increased stopping distances with increased weight).
What if it's raining and I stop at the line but cannot stop in time, and slide into the intersection, causing an accident? Is it my fault? I started stopping where I was supposed to. It is my fault? Then why have the lines if they cannot be relied upon?
While not a bad idea, stripes as you describe is not a solution much like banning talking on cell phones while driving is not a solution much like back-up cameras and blind-spot detectors are not solutions. The solution is more strict driver education and drive tests, where we ensure drivers are much more competent than they currently are.
I've been driving for over 10 years, and have never seen a traffic accident at a stop light, so I wonder if it is even worth changing; are the statistics really that bad?
Your second line: "Countdown timers on lights to indicate how long the driver has before the light changes to yellow." makes way more sense. There's some traffic lights on state highways up here in Washington (outside Moses Lake, north of Wenatchee on 97, and more I'm sure) that have additional signs in front of the lights. They warn about the light beginning to turn, and are timed for the speed limit. If it's not flashing when you pass at the speed limit, you're good. If they're flashing, then even a heavy haul (>100,000lbs) has time to stop. Those are cheap and effective.
...is that so hard for teachers to actually take attendance?...
When I was a network administrator for a school district, we implemented a new computer attendance system during the summer break. The next fall, after a few weeks the network went down due to a virus (damn students; I don't know what the virus was, I was still a student, but had full network admin rights/responsibilities, it was something my boss overlooked I think), and the teachers couldn't send their attendance via the computer. They pretty much panicked and didn't know what to do (nevermind they were doing it by paper just months before). They had to be told, because they couldn't figure it out, that they had to do the attendance on paper and send a runner to take it to the office. The system they had before was doing it on paper and the office sent a runner around to pick it up on clips outside every classroom door.
So yes, it is so hard for teachers to actually take attendance.
Washington was like that. We voted, and after three times (not sure why it took three votes, but I'm happy it did finally pass) and got rid of it. Now I can buy Liquor at Wal*Mart and the corner pharmacy!
Nothing like curing a headache with a fifth of Jack! I think it ultimately costs more due to new taxes and whatnot, but it's worth it for me to be able to buy it wherever (and state stores (around me) weren't open on Sunday! Now I can buy 7 days a week) and whenever.
How about combining it with this technology from an earlier slashdot story: http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/12/10/23/1946248/increasing-wireless-network-speed-by-1000-by-replacing-packets-with-algebra
This I would like to see. To the increases stack? Do we get a 70000% increase? Do they even work together at all? It sounds like it would. Does anyone know or have the resources to find out?
so the 100,000 tons, times 2000 pounds per ton, divided by 13 (as per article only half the yield of dry corns 26 lbs. per gallon ethanol), gives 15 million gallons of ethanol. the USA uses 380 million gallons of gasoline per day.
Ya? and that means 15 Million less gallons of gas that would be used.
It's a start, combined with other things, would help make a dent in the usage of gas/oil.
I guess you want to wait till gas is $20 a gallon before we start using other fuels? Maybe you do. I don't drive, so I don't buy gas, so really, I don't care much, but it's this attitude that everything has to be big to be effective that is annoying.
Much like no one is going to make a WoW beater, no on is going to come up with a solution that can totally get rid of the use of gas/oil. But we can find a bunch of renewable resources that together can help a lot.
I'd like to know where you got your conversion from gallons of ethanol:gallons of gasoline. Because last time I checked, ethanol contained less energy per gallon than gasoline, equating to less efficiency; thus 15 million gallons of ethanol does less than 15 million gallons of gasoline
http://www.hho4free.com/gasoline_vs_ethanol.htm
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2011/01/the-great-ethanol-debate/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel#Ethanol-based_engines
I sure hope you know something I don't.
The problem is that most people quit thinking like kids; they get afraid to try new things.
When you were a kid, you didn't know how to ride a bicycle, or stand or walk, or use a computer; but you didn't let not knowing stop you. As an adult, people will see the new interface and immediately hit a brick wall because it's unfamiliar and they don't know about it: they let not knowing stop them; they're afraid to try to figure something out. Perhaps because they don't know how to figure it out, perhaps because our education system has ingrained in them a pattern of actively NOT figuring things out...
So while most people will have a hard time grasping the new interface, it likely isn't due to poor interface design, but due to them basically being afraid to try something new (apologies for using tired cliche's). The 3 year old, however, isn't afraid to try something he doesn't know about.
Also, arguments can be made all day about the interface being designed to be easier, but it's not what we're used to; it's a shallower learning curve for new users, but all our new users are kids, and learning the new interface for existing users is a waste of what could otherwise be productive time blah blah blah MS Office Ribbon blah blah...
Personally, I tweak Win7 to act more like Win2k; which is what I tweaked WinXP to do as well. I'm a fan of the classic interface and don't much care for all the changes; but people I support love many of them (although the Office Ribbon is almost universally disliked), so I figure them out and adapt.
I didn't realize I used any big words.
And by "leader of Man" I meant "leader of Mankind" as in a leader of The People...no religious connotation. That you saw that as a religious thing goes on to demonstrate your idiocy. But I'll take your misinterpretation into consideration next time I write stuff; I try to be as clear as possible whenever I write anything; so in that I must thank you for your assistance.
Invading Afghanistan to build pipeline
Cite? I don't doubt nor support your claim, but it sounds like it'd be interesting to read about.
https://www.google.com/search?q=%E2%80%9CI+disapprove+of+what+you+say%2C+but+I+will+defend+to+the+death+your+right+to+say+it.%E2%80%9D&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
In case you aren't aware; that isn't actually a Voltaire quote. It's perhaps something he would have said had he thought of it, and he certainly seems to have held that particular belief (a good one, methinks).
You missed the part where he later supported his point.
Your lack of spelling and grammar exacerbates your arrogance and your arrogance exacerbates your ignorance. It is painful to read what you write. There's a reason you're not a leader of Man.
Or maybe WE'RE the most advanced civilization.
Important questions from consumers, who are also voters and thus determine (collectively) your fate:
1. Does it stream video of Honey Boo Boo?
2. Does it have iTunes to get the latest from Nicki Minaj?
If not, we know this is relevant to our fascinating modern lives.
FTFY.
As far as I know, GC PUD owns Wanapum and Grand Coulee. Or at least the lease on Grand Coulee. So the power likely comes from a combination of the two.
In either case, you're right that GP post is misinformed.
And I'd be surprised if Bonneville provided a significant amount of electricity to Washington (though I don't care enough to check on this). Bonneville does provide a significant amount of power to the PNW region, but so do all our other dams; Rock Island, Priest Rapids, Wanapum, Grand Coulee, Rocky Reach...we do like our dams.
Your demand for "blasphemy laws" is, to us, blasphemy!
That's blasphemy and should be banned! Poster should be stoned to death for such words!