Okay, we'll make a deal. If you can stop your government trying to apply your broken laws to the rest of the world, I'll stop complaining about the US population not fixing them whilst at the same time bragging about how gun ownership means their government can never get out of control.
Nobody ever solved anything with a run-on sentence.
Anyway... Something tells me that you have about as much control over what your government does, that I do. Yea, I know The US government likes to sell the whole "Democracy OMGWTFBBQ!" angle abroad, but the reality of the US political situation is... well, best summed up by a cartoon, as sad as it sounds.
Basically, we get to choose either: the bought-and-paid-for mouthpiece who pretends to be your buddy while ramming you in the tookus, or the bought-and-paid-for mouthpiece who pretends to be the other guy's buddy... while ramming you in the tookus. Thanks to rampant corruption in election politics, it is nigh impossible for a non-millionaire to successfully run for federal office. And yes, the world suffers for it - so, if you, a citizen of the Earth, want to bitch about the US's fucked-up election process and its influence on your culture, by all means do so; but what we keep in our own borders - i.e., the 'gun debate,' driving laws, domestic drone usage - that's none of your damn business, and we thank you to stay out of it.
As for solutions, I would think you would have far more success getting the US government out of your country's business by imploring your own leaders to stop toeing the line every time Uncle Sam says 'jump,' then complaining to American citizens (who really can't do shit about it). My government wouldn't be able to exert so much control over the citizens of other nations, if the leaders of those nations were not complicit accomplices.
Regardless, you can be assured that you will never see me, a US citizen, attempting to influence the politics of any other nation, and I would appreciate the citizens of other nations affording us the same courtesy.
In the absense of laws stating precisely what is not legal, your wristwatch example would be reality.
Take it from someone who, as a teenager, caused a 3 car pileup because he was looking at his watch: There's a very good reason not looking at the road while you're driving is illegal, regardless of what caused the distraction.
And if I want to use the GPS feature only while driving? I think the best solution would be for Google to add a "lockout" feature, where GPS is the only feature accessible when the speed of the glasses is in excess of some reasonable number. Users could enable or disable this mode, as I can with my normal GPS unit, for the cases where the device is being used by the passenger instead of the driver. Then it falls under a blanket "distracted driving" laws when used inappropriately but is still allowable when used appropriately.
For some reason, your post has inspired my mind to create this advert for the near future:
Thanks to Google Glass' "always-on" recording feature and "HUD" Youtube app, users will be able to access the live-stream of your 'death-by-GPS' incident, without so much as taking their hands off the wheel!
Funny stuff, or ominous vision of tomorrow? You be the judge.
Nobody was worried about cell phones when they were so expensive as to only be business tools for certain well paid professions. It's only when young and less well off people adopted them that the Chicken Little screaming began.
Yea, obviously it's because the young and "poor people" use them now, and has nothing to do with the effects of mass adoption.... kriminy...
Meanwhile, we don't ban putting on makeup, shaving, reading printed material, and, worst of all, undisciplined children from cars. The latter, btw, being the direct cause of an accident which caused damage to my car while I was sitting still once. I didn't decide to make it my life's mission to do something about distractions caused by kids in cars, as some of these anti tech crusaders with too much time and too small brains seem to.
Driving like an idiot while looking at a paper map? That's ok. Do the same thing using a piece of tech to find your way? You need to be arrested or fined because you're a hazard. Please note the hazard is the same either way, it's just what some fools feel about the cause that's different. Yes, I meant "feel" and not "think" because clearly there's no thinking going on.
Uh, those things are illegal, you know. It's called either Careless and Imprudent or Reckless Driving, depending on where you live. Thing is, all forms of distracted driving are covered by one or both of the aforementioned laws - including distractions based on technology.
BTW, not a young person with an axe to grind.
Yes, your insistence that young people using cell phones is why we have laws that pertain to them, and your blatant ignorance of existing traffic laws prove that quite succinctly./sarcasm
Although it was before just about anybody's time here, I'm told this same stupid debate came up when they first started putting radios in cars.
I think any Slashdotter over the age of about 50 would argue that point with you (also, kinda belies the whole, "not a youth" angle, you know?)
Then ponder the notion that we do absolutely nothing about training and teaching people how to deal with the stuff in their cars.
Well gee, Wally, I didn't realize it was society's responsibility to teach selfish idiots like you how to not be a selfish idiot.
However, I do agree somewhat- we should not be letting selfish idiots (noticing a theme?) pilot 1-2 tons of steel Death at high rates of speed without more thorough training (or, in many places, any training whatsoever). Perhaps you'd be happy if we went the German route, meaning that you have to pay a few grand for 6 months of government-mandated driving classes before you can even take your license test, and if you fail, you have to start (and pay) all over. Would that make you happy? Probably not, although it would make the roads much safer for the rest of us by removing the licenses of many of the selfish idiots.
We don't make it illegal for bosses to fire people who aren't available every second of every day.
Which has fuck-all to do with driving.
Grind, grind, grind.
We don't study the extra hazard caused by exiting and reentering the road because some law says you have to in order to make a call.
What. The. Fuck.
We don't study the "extra hazard" of entering/exiting roadways because, if you do it in a safe and legal manner, THERE IS NO FUCKING HAZARD. If answering your goddamn cell phone is important enough to you, that you would risk the lives of others to answer it, you need to re-examine your fucked-up priorities, mate. And probably surrender your drivers license, for the good of society.
I agree that we don't need specific laws to address particular technological distractions. What I don't agree with is your premise, which is based wholly on your own ignorance and selfishness.
What $50 million hit? How is France going to enforce a judgment (which they haven't even won yet, as a matter of fact)? "Pay us $50 million or we will make very angry faces at you."
Yup, nothing to worry about, at least until they start flinging barnyard animals in your general direction.
Then, arguably, for every country they're purchased that domain, promoted their software, taken any advertising revenue, employed staff, or otherwise "done business" -- then they might have to obey the local laws only as it pertains to their citizens and what they make available in that country.
Huh, and here I thought ICANN was in charge of divvying out domains, not individual nations...
Oh, yea - Plus, if some criminal breaks into my home at 3 AM, I know I can meet them with force if necessary, instead of letting them violate my home and family.
Say you own no firearms, and this scenario happens to you; what will you do? Let the criminal have their way with your loved ones? Or will you... call a man with a gun to protect you?
In the UK
We're not talking about the UK. UK citizens do not have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. US citizens do.
Right now we're living in Peru.
So, you don't live in the US, but think you have a right to dictate what Constitutional rights US citizens are afforded? Don't you see the obvious problem with that?
OMG I'll probably be moderated into oblivion again now.
Well you should, sticking your nose into other people's business. You don't see US citizens calling for changes to Peruvian law, do you?
I believe that there was an attempt to make it impossible to put the wrong fuel in by making the filler hole on diesels a sort of keyhole shape, with a corresponding ridge on the nozzle.
Huh, don't suppose I've encountered one of those. I just know that the blue car gets the green nozzle, and the red car gets the red nozzle...
Now, you'll probably say that you ought to know what fuel your car takes, and I'd be inclined to agree.
Heh, yea. Plus, you know, the bright yellow sticker around the filler spout that states, in bold text, "DIESEL FUEL ONLY!"
I just wish they'd put a sticker inside to tell me which side the filler is...
Dude - labelmakers are cheap and plentiful. DIY, bro, DIY.
Funny you should mention the gas Jetta - that's what we traded for the TDi.
Since she commutes 100+ miles each day, we did the math (she is an accountant), and it turned out that, even with the 20-40 cent difference between diesel and gas, we still spend at least 1/4 less to keep the TDi running than we did the gas one.
Gas Jetta = 2 fill-ups per week, at ~3.50/gal
TDI Jetta - 1 fill-up every week-and-a-half, at ~4.00/gal.
Caveat - the gas Jetta was a 2006, the TDi is a 2012.
Slashdot Mirror
Forgiven... this time.
Don't let it happen again.
j/k
Well, I would say that this demands further research on my end, but I'm finding myself hard-pressed to give a rats ass...
About the domain thing, anyway.
Okay, we'll make a deal. If you can stop your government trying to apply your broken laws to the rest of the world, I'll stop complaining about the US population not fixing them whilst at the same time bragging about how gun ownership means their government can never get out of control.
Nobody ever solved anything with a run-on sentence.
Anyway... Something tells me that you have about as much control over what your government does, that I do. Yea, I know The US government likes to sell the whole "Democracy OMGWTFBBQ!" angle abroad, but the reality of the US political situation is... well, best summed up by a cartoon, as sad as it sounds.
Basically, we get to choose either: the bought-and-paid-for mouthpiece who pretends to be your buddy while ramming you in the tookus, or the bought-and-paid-for mouthpiece who pretends to be the other guy's buddy... while ramming you in the tookus. Thanks to rampant corruption in election politics, it is nigh impossible for a non-millionaire to successfully run for federal office. And yes, the world suffers for it - so, if you, a citizen of the Earth, want to bitch about the US's fucked-up election process and its influence on your culture, by all means do so; but what we keep in our own borders - i.e., the 'gun debate,' driving laws, domestic drone usage - that's none of your damn business, and we thank you to stay out of it.
As for solutions, I would think you would have far more success getting the US government out of your country's business by imploring your own leaders to stop toeing the line every time Uncle Sam says 'jump,' then complaining to American citizens (who really can't do shit about it). My government wouldn't be able to exert so much control over the citizens of other nations, if the leaders of those nations were not complicit accomplices.
Regardless, you can be assured that you will never see me, a US citizen, attempting to influence the politics of any other nation, and I would appreciate the citizens of other nations affording us the same courtesy.
Score sheets are prior to video games.
No shit, the last time I filled out an actual score sheet was at a golf course.
Which, obviously, means that all golfers are potential mass killers... Isn't that right, Mr. President?
Video games do not disproportionately influence people to kill each other.
How do I know, aside from my 20+ years of gaming experience, and lack of homicidal intentions?
The fact that the largest mass killing in US History predates video games by about 100 years.
Somehow I knew this was all Bill Gates' fault...
So games are the clearly the first scapegoat.
Second, after the gun.
What next?
I can tell you what won't be next - blaming the dickhead that actually committed the crime.
Done deal
No, we don't need a Glass-specific law; if we need anything, it is more intelligent drivers.
In the absense of laws stating precisely what is not legal, your wristwatch example would be reality.
Take it from someone who, as a teenager, caused a 3 car pileup because he was looking at his watch: There's a very good reason not looking at the road while you're driving is illegal, regardless of what caused the distraction.
And if I want to use the GPS feature only while driving? I think the best solution would be for Google to add a "lockout" feature, where GPS is the only feature accessible when the speed of the glasses is in excess of some reasonable number. Users could enable or disable this mode, as I can with my normal GPS unit, for the cases where the device is being used by the passenger instead of the driver. Then it falls under a blanket "distracted driving" laws when used inappropriately but is still allowable when used appropriately.
For some reason, your post has inspired my mind to create this advert for the near future:
Funny stuff, or ominous vision of tomorrow? You be the judge.
Nobody was worried about cell phones when they were so expensive as to only be business tools for certain well paid professions. It's only when young and less well off people adopted them that the Chicken Little screaming began.
Yea, obviously it's because the young and "poor people" use them now, and has nothing to do with the effects of mass adoption.... kriminy...
Meanwhile, we don't ban putting on makeup, shaving, reading printed material, and, worst of all, undisciplined children from cars. The latter, btw, being the direct cause of an accident which caused damage to my car while I was sitting still once. I didn't decide to make it my life's mission to do something about distractions caused by kids in cars, as some of these anti tech crusaders with too much time and too small brains seem to.
Driving like an idiot while looking at a paper map? That's ok. Do the same thing using a piece of tech to find your way? You need to be arrested or fined because you're a hazard. Please note the hazard is the same either way, it's just what some fools feel about the cause that's different. Yes, I meant "feel" and not "think" because clearly there's no thinking going on.
Uh, those things are illegal, you know. It's called either Careless and Imprudent or Reckless Driving, depending on where you live. Thing is, all forms of distracted driving are covered by one or both of the aforementioned laws - including distractions based on technology.
BTW, not a young person with an axe to grind.
Yes, your insistence that young people using cell phones is why we have laws that pertain to them, and your blatant ignorance of existing traffic laws prove that quite succinctly. /sarcasm
Although it was before just about anybody's time here, I'm told this same stupid debate came up when they first started putting radios in cars.
I think any Slashdotter over the age of about 50 would argue that point with you (also, kinda belies the whole, "not a youth" angle, you know?)
Then ponder the notion that we do absolutely nothing about training and teaching people how to deal with the stuff in their cars.
Well gee, Wally, I didn't realize it was society's responsibility to teach selfish idiots like you how to not be a selfish idiot.
However, I do agree somewhat- we should not be letting selfish idiots (noticing a theme?) pilot 1-2 tons of steel Death at high rates of speed without more thorough training (or, in many places, any training whatsoever). Perhaps you'd be happy if we went the German route, meaning that you have to pay a few grand for 6 months of government-mandated driving classes before you can even take your license test, and if you fail, you have to start (and pay) all over. Would that make you happy? Probably not, although it would make the roads much safer for the rest of us by removing the licenses of many of the selfish idiots.
We don't make it illegal for bosses to fire people who aren't available every second of every day.
Which has fuck-all to do with driving.
Grind, grind, grind.
We don't study the extra hazard caused by exiting and reentering the road because some law says you have to in order to make a call.
What. The. Fuck.
We don't study the "extra hazard" of entering/exiting roadways because, if you do it in a safe and legal manner, THERE IS NO FUCKING HAZARD. If answering your goddamn cell phone is important enough to you, that you would risk the lives of others to answer it, you need to re-examine your fucked-up priorities, mate. And probably surrender your drivers license, for the good of society.
I agree that we don't need specific laws to address particular technological distractions. What I don't agree with is your premise, which is based wholly on your own ignorance and selfishness.
Parse top line of sig for response.
Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries!
Hey, now, that's just uncalled for!
What $50 million hit? How is France going to enforce a judgment (which they haven't even won yet, as a matter of fact)? "Pay us $50 million or we will make very angry faces at you."
Yup, nothing to worry about, at least until they start flinging barnyard animals in your general direction.
Just because you don't get it, doesn't mean nobody else does, Plebe.
How is that "begging the question"?
... Circular reasoning, perhaps?
That, or OP has no idea what "begging the question" actually means.
Then, arguably, for every country they're purchased that domain, promoted their software, taken any advertising revenue, employed staff, or otherwise "done business" -- then they might have to obey the local laws only as it pertains to their citizens and what they make available in that country.
Huh, and here I thought ICANN was in charge of divvying out domains, not individual nations...
Do you say the same thing about people from Brazil and Argentina?
Sometimes, but only if they're narcissistic dickheads with no sense of humor.
Yea, because causing an international incident is really going to bode well for the French government...
Oh, yea - Plus, if some criminal breaks into my home at 3 AM, I know I can meet them with force if necessary, instead of letting them violate my home and family.
Say you own no firearms, and this scenario happens to you; what will you do? Let the criminal have their way with your loved ones? Or will you... call a man with a gun to protect you?
In the UK
We're not talking about the UK. UK citizens do not have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. US citizens do.
Right now we're living in Peru.
So, you don't live in the US, but think you have a right to dictate what Constitutional rights US citizens are afforded? Don't you see the obvious problem with that?
OMG I'll probably be moderated into oblivion again now.
Well you should, sticking your nose into other people's business. You don't see US citizens calling for changes to Peruvian law, do you?
Yes, those people are/were dicks. However, no one is responsible for you but you.
Suicide is more complex them people think.
Take it from someone who's been there, and overcame - no, it really isn't.
Yes, the answer is yes.
The detail can be tricky, but that depends on the situation. A state back group attacking our power grid? that means they have made war against us.
Yea, sure, if the hack is state-sponsored.
What about the ones that aren't?
I believe that there was an attempt to make it impossible to put the wrong fuel in by making the filler hole on diesels a sort of keyhole shape, with a corresponding ridge on the nozzle.
Huh, don't suppose I've encountered one of those. I just know that the blue car gets the green nozzle, and the red car gets the red nozzle...
Now, you'll probably say that you ought to know what fuel your car takes, and I'd be inclined to agree.
Heh, yea. Plus, you know, the bright yellow sticker around the filler spout that states, in bold text, "DIESEL FUEL ONLY!"
I just wish they'd put a sticker inside to tell me which side the filler is...
Dude - labelmakers are cheap and plentiful. DIY, bro, DIY.
Funny you should mention the gas Jetta - that's what we traded for the TDi.
Since she commutes 100+ miles each day, we did the math (she is an accountant), and it turned out that, even with the 20-40 cent difference between diesel and gas, we still spend at least 1/4 less to keep the TDi running than we did the gas one.
Gas Jetta = 2 fill-ups per week, at ~3.50/gal
TDI Jetta - 1 fill-up every week-and-a-half, at ~4.00/gal.
Caveat - the gas Jetta was a 2006, the TDi is a 2012.