Another 'for-profit businesses always have our best interests in mind' sucker?
Guess you didn't RTFA this slashdot story regarding an actual, effective cancer cure:
Both the National Cancer Institute and several pharmaceutical companies declined to pay for the research. Neither applicants nor funders discuss the reasons an application is turned down.
And I'm supposed to be the nut... riiiiiiiiight...
"illnesses" that magically popped into existence in the past 20 years
?
ADD and Fibromyalgia come immediately to mind...
Another big part of the problem is that "doctors" (i.e. pharmaceutical salesmen) have developed this nasty habit of treating symptoms (using expensive drugs), instead of trying to find the actual disease causing the symptoms. Thus, the condition never gets cured, and the patient spends their life taking expensive drugs they probably don't need.
They rob pharmaceutical companies of revenue streams that are rightfully theirs.
Well, if cancer is found during the screening, chances are all kinds of products made by pharmaceutical companies will be unleashed onto the patient full-force.
Knowingly or not, you've just touched upon my issue with privatized medical treatment: the industry has incentive to "diagnose" any number of "maladies," real or imagined, in order to drum up business and boost profits. I wonder how many of these "illnesses" that magically popped into existence in the past 20 years are actual, physical conditions.
... and don't even get me started on the incentives to "treat" illness as opposed to curing it...
You! The Google car team is clear about that, I am not sure why this keeps coming up again and again. Its you driving the car with aids, what ever they may be.
People such as you and me are the exception to the rule. *Most* drivers are only as familiar with their vehicles as they have to be to operate it.
FWIW, I'm speaking from the angle of a long-time gearhead and trained automotive technician, and in my experience, most people don't know nor care about the technical aspects we've been discussing; therefore, again based on my experience as a "car guy," I focus on methods that are the most effective means of safely stopping an out-of-control vehicle for laymen.
Personally, I think earning a driving license should require more than a trip around the town square, but that is a discussion for another thread.
It actually varies a lot by the make of car. You should know the best procedure for your car. Advising people to do something that may blow up the engine is a good way to make people too hesitant to take the necessary step. Not to mention, a blown engine may cause sudden loss of visibility and result in an accident.
Well, personally, I'd rather have a blown engine than be a corpse, but YMMV...
In many cars with steering lock, the key will NOT go to the lock position unless the car is in park. It's easy enough to find out if that applies to your car or not in the safety of your driveway.
Definitely good advice.
Newer cars often have rev limiters.
Newer, premium cars often do; most lower end vehicles (the type a majority of the population drive) do not come with such features standard. Consult your manual/VIN number to be sure.
If so, the engine will not be damaged if you put it in neutral (press the clutch) and floor it. Don't test this one, consult the manual!
More sound advice.
Pushbutton start cars generally require you to press and hold the button for a few seconds to turn the engine off while at speed.
Will have to take your word on that, I stopped working on cars professionally shortly before push-buttons came back into vogue.
The brakes are generally stronger than the engine. You can come to a stop even if the cruise control is fighting you. Do not use the brakes to slow down a bit, that will cause them to overheat and become useless. Stand on them to come to a stop as quickly as possible, then shut off the engine.
Tell that to an out-of-control Toyota owner, Lolz.
Seriously, though, I'd still rather have a toasted engine than risk becoming a corpse, but that's a personal choice.
Every car I've ever driven has a key position between 'on' and 'wheel lock'. On most cars it's the accessories position, on my current car it seems to be 'off but wheel unlocked'. I haven't driven a Jag before but I doubt turning off the engine puts you right into the wheel lock state.
Nowadays, we pay a premium for the old-fashioned gearbox, which I (as a gearhead) find particularly odd and disturbing...
Why "odd"?
For starters... 'cause I'm old skool, dammit!
Seriously, though, I fully comprehend the economic theory that increasing production of a certain product decreases costs, but automatic transmissions are far more complex than standard gearboxes, and thus cost more to manufacture regardless of output rates.
If the fault occurs, cruise control can only be disabled by turning of the ignition while driving — which would mean a loss of some control and in many cars also disables power steering.
Obviously stub writer knows approximately jack about how cars function... shutting off the ignition will "disable," i.e. shutdown, the power steering in all cars, as the power steering pump is driven by the belt assembly. However, that's hardly a safety concern at speed; many modern autos automatically shut down the power steering system when traveling at highway speeds, as it is only a useful system at low speeds.
The real problem with turning the ignition (key) to the OFF position is that the steering lock will engage, making it impossible to change trajectory until you turn the ignition back on.
FYI, the best thing to do in an "out of control cruise" situation would be to put the transmission in neutral, get to the shoulder, and stop, THEN shut the ignition off; doing so may grenade the engine, but it will also save your life.
"Back in the Day," Automatics were an option on American cars, too. Nowadays, we pay a premium for the old-fashioned gearbox, which I (as a gearhead) find particularly odd and disturbing...
Hardware doesn't matter when all the games are SHIT.
Excellent point, one that Yahtzee Croshaw has been making quite a bit recently; AAA game publishers have, for years, been laser-focused on graphics, while game content has steadily declined.
Think of it this way: How many hours of content did Final Fantasy VII contain? I remember playing that game for 20, 30, even 50 hours, and still not doing everything (Damn Ruby Weapon...); which is why it required 3 disks.
RAGE is also a 3-disk game, but it doesn't even come close to FFVII in regards to content, or replay value...
Here's hoping the next generation of game consoles (and by extension, game development) can keep their framerate boners in check, at least enough to deliver games that are worth playing.
I haven't read it, but did it not also require her to shop any other project to them first while they're working on this one?
Not according to TFA.
First off, the works published in the collection had been published previously, and one of the collections in question was published before the author submitted The Chinese Soldier's Daughter was ever submitted to Penguin.
Slashdot Mirror
Any sort of EM radiation can be beamed; the term is not exclusive to visible light.
Ever heard of a radio?
True that.
Violent thugs only respond to one thing (two if you include money), and it's not empty threats from kids living in their parents' basements.
It Slices!
It Dices!
It Makes Julian (into) Fries!
Anyone else hear a loud sucking noise?
Both the National Cancer Institute and several pharmaceutical companies declined to pay for the research. Neither applicants nor funders discuss the reasons an application is turned down.
And I'm supposed to be the nut... riiiiiiiiight...
You might have a point, but what are those
"illnesses" that magically popped into existence in the past 20 years
?
ADD and Fibromyalgia come immediately to mind...
Another big part of the problem is that "doctors" (i.e. pharmaceutical salesmen) have developed this nasty habit of treating symptoms (using expensive drugs), instead of trying to find the actual disease causing the symptoms. Thus, the condition never gets cured, and the patient spends their life taking expensive drugs they probably don't need.
They rob pharmaceutical companies of revenue streams that are rightfully theirs.
Well, if cancer is found during the screening, chances are all kinds of products made by pharmaceutical companies will be unleashed onto the patient full-force.
Knowingly or not, you've just touched upon my issue with privatized medical treatment: the industry has incentive to "diagnose" any number of "maladies," real or imagined, in order to drum up business and boost profits. I wonder how many of these "illnesses" that magically popped into existence in the past 20 years are actual, physical conditions.
... and don't even get me started on the incentives to "treat" illness as opposed to curing it...
You! The Google car team is clear about that, I am not sure why this keeps coming up again and again. Its you driving the car with aids, what ever they may be.
What if I'm just driving it with HIV?
Want privacy? Write your own encryption and scramble everything you share with your mates.
Makes sense for the 99.999% of the global population who aren't cryptophiles...
Not really skepticism, just curiosity.
Plenty of really cool ideas never got off the ground, because they lacked marketability.
Very cool stuff, but... How is this useful information for those of us who aren't chemical engineers?
I'm still waiting for quantum processors and biological hard drives to hit the market.
People such as you and me are the exception to the rule. *Most* drivers are only as familiar with their vehicles as they have to be to operate it.
FWIW, I'm speaking from the angle of a long-time gearhead and trained automotive technician, and in my experience, most people don't know nor care about the technical aspects we've been discussing; therefore, again based on my experience as a "car guy," I focus on methods that are the most effective means of safely stopping an out-of-control vehicle for laymen.
Personally, I think earning a driving license should require more than a trip around the town square, but that is a discussion for another thread.
It actually varies a lot by the make of car. You should know the best procedure for your car. Advising people to do something that may blow up the engine is a good way to make people too hesitant to take the necessary step. Not to mention, a blown engine may cause sudden loss of visibility and result in an accident.
Well, personally, I'd rather have a blown engine than be a corpse, but YMMV...
In many cars with steering lock, the key will NOT go to the lock position unless the car is in park. It's easy enough to find out if that applies to your car or not in the safety of your driveway.
Definitely good advice.
Newer cars often have rev limiters.
Newer, premium cars often do; most lower end vehicles (the type a majority of the population drive) do not come with such features standard. Consult your manual/VIN number to be sure.
If so, the engine will not be damaged if you put it in neutral (press the clutch) and floor it. Don't test this one, consult the manual!
More sound advice.
Pushbutton start cars generally require you to press and hold the button for a few seconds to turn the engine off while at speed.
Will have to take your word on that, I stopped working on cars professionally shortly before push-buttons came back into vogue.
The brakes are generally stronger than the engine. You can come to a stop even if the cruise control is fighting you. Do not use the brakes to slow down a bit, that will cause them to overheat and become useless. Stand on them to come to a stop as quickly as possible, then shut off the engine.
Tell that to an out-of-control Toyota owner, Lolz.
Seriously, though, I'd still rather have a toasted engine than risk becoming a corpse, but that's a personal choice.
Cars are replaceable, lives are not.
Every car I've ever driven has a key position between 'on' and 'wheel lock'. On most cars it's the accessories position, on my current car it seems to be 'off but wheel unlocked'. I haven't driven a Jag before but I doubt turning off the engine puts you right into the wheel lock state.
In a panic situation, ACC is hard to find.
Voice of experience here.
Nowadays, we pay a premium for the old-fashioned gearbox, which I (as a gearhead) find particularly odd and disturbing...
Why "odd"?
For starters... 'cause I'm old skool, dammit!
Seriously, though, I fully comprehend the economic theory that increasing production of a certain product decreases costs, but automatic transmissions are far more complex than standard gearboxes, and thus cost more to manufacture regardless of output rates.
If the fault occurs, cruise control can only be disabled by turning of the ignition while driving — which would mean a loss of some control and in many cars also disables power steering.
Obviously stub writer knows approximately jack about how cars function... shutting off the ignition will "disable," i.e. shutdown, the power steering in all cars, as the power steering pump is driven by the belt assembly. However, that's hardly a safety concern at speed; many modern autos automatically shut down the power steering system when traveling at highway speeds, as it is only a useful system at low speeds.
The real problem with turning the ignition (key) to the OFF position is that the steering lock will engage, making it impossible to change trajectory until you turn the ignition back on.
FYI, the best thing to do in an "out of control cruise" situation would be to put the transmission in neutral, get to the shoulder, and stop, THEN shut the ignition off; doing so may grenade the engine, but it will also save your life.
"Back in the Day," Automatics were an option on American cars, too. Nowadays, we pay a premium for the old-fashioned gearbox, which I (as a gearhead) find particularly odd and disturbing...
Inception Reference
Hardware doesn't matter when all the games are SHIT.
Excellent point, one that Yahtzee Croshaw has been making quite a bit recently; AAA game publishers have, for years, been laser-focused on graphics, while game content has steadily declined.
Think of it this way: How many hours of content did Final Fantasy VII contain? I remember playing that game for 20, 30, even 50 hours, and still not doing everything (Damn Ruby Weapon...); which is why it required 3 disks.
RAGE is also a 3-disk game, but it doesn't even come close to FFVII in regards to content, or replay value...
Here's hoping the next generation of game consoles (and by extension, game development) can keep their framerate boners in check, at least enough to deliver games that are worth playing.
We noticed you recently checked out a copy of The Anarchists Cook Book;
You May Also Be Interested In: A lengthy term as a political prisoner.
Others are Reading: The Writing on the Wall.
M.C. Hammer actually has money?
That he didn't spend on crack?
Modded +1 Fuckin' A
Good, I hope they do oust the evil old bastard.
Then maybe we can get rid of FOXs other owner, the known terrorist bankroller Saudi prince Al-Waleed bin Talal.
I haven't read it, but did it not also require her to shop any other project to them first while they're working on this one?
Not according to TFA.
First off, the works published in the collection had been published previously, and one of the collections in question was published before the author submitted The Chinese Soldier's Daughter was ever submitted to Penguin.
The contract gave Penguin exclusive rights to The Chinese Soldier's Daughter, not every single piece ever written by the author.
Assuming so is treading in dangerous waters.