It's sad in that same way as the family member who's sitting by the TV but searching desperately for the remote.
Many tvs have functions that can't be accessed with a remote. My STB has 1200 channels, selecting channel 503 when I'm on channel 141, without a remote (and thus limited to ch+) is a right pain.
I wear a watch, it's handy to be aware of what the time is, as my body clock is usually screwed from 1 or 2 long haul trips a month. If that watch also showed me who was ringing, allowing me to ignore my phone (which may be in my pocket, or on the other side of the office), that would be useful.
America is the home of capitalism, which means competition, which drives down prices and raises standards. The rest of the world is a socialist hellhole.
It's similar to what the North Koreans believe, with a touch of stockholm syndrome.
The suit, originally brought forth by five software engineers in 2011, alleges that the anti-poaching agreements served to lessen their employment opportunities, thereby weakening their negotiating power and ultimately affecting the salaries they were able to command.
Wait, what?
I've been told for years that the only way employees can ever fight their employer is if a union represents them and does all the negotiations. Now you mean to tell me that even non-union employees have rights, too?
Yes, it's possible. If you have the money and the time you can even get it to court. Then it's you, and maybe a few others, against the combined experience and cash of the justice a multi billion dollar company can buy.
300 people marching is not news. It happens every day.
Get a million people to march on Washington and that's news (that news will be underplayed, and the corporations will spin up their machine to stop it if they can't see profit in it, but it will make the front page)
Americans have the government, and the country, that they deserve.
As a whole, you're a bunch of pussies who get wound up over irrelevant things like football games, american idol, and elections, but as soon as someone shouts boo you're celebrating the army out in force declaring martial law.
Nice tactic of the feds, give us too much to hate at once and we have to divide our forces.
As I understand it, 80% of the U.S. are more interested in dancing with the stars than Obamacare, drone killings, guns, or the NSA
Why not team up with the 20% that agree with you about NSA and drone killings, and leave the anti-obamacare and anti-gun stuff out of it until you've established a new political system.
No - its that the American government does not care. The way the govenernment is set up, the American people can do nothing to prevent it. Congress is guarenteed a salery for life. Why do what people want - get in, be there long enough to get your salery for life, pass whatever laws you want - you are exempt, and accept all the bribes you want. People don't like you? Who cares, you are set for life - who cares if you win reelection.
Oh, someone is actually going to try to make a difference and run under a third party ticket? Good luck with that happening - even if you get in (which does happen from time to time) you got 400 or so other Congressmen and 99 other Senetors and a corrupt President who wants to be the dictator of a Socialist government.
The American system is broke.
Well he's had 5 years to try to be socialist and hasn't got anywhere near.
not so fast...that 'safety' they measure has very rapidly decreasing marginal utility...after awhile a.0000000000000001% gain in 'safety' is not work the extra 20 minutes to your commute b/c the Google control software won't let your car ever get any closer than 2 car lengths...so turning left on that busy intersection takes 3x as long in the morning....
When was the last time you took a driving class? They recommend you keep at least 4 seconds between you and the car in front of you as the minimum safe distance you need to stop if an emergency happens.
If you're regularly driving with less than 2 seconds between you and the car in front of you, congratulations, you're part of the problem that automated cars are trying to solve, and I can't wait until you're no longer behind the wheel on a highway.
In the UK it's 2 seconds in normal conditions, 4 in rain.
Fortunately that's ignored. A 4 second gap between cars means a maximum 900 cars per hour (actually less than that due to car lengths), so the M1 would have 2700 cars an hour, on a road that is used by more than twice that during rush hour.
Of course a 4 second gap, or even a 2 second gap, means you'll be cut up. So you have to brake to reintroduce the gap, then someone pulls in, then you brake. Before you know it, you are doing 20, with the other traffic doing 70, and you're still braking. Hopefully by then the cops will have arrested you and taken your license.
I want an automatic chef cook. Because when I go home from work, I still have to sit in the car for 1 hour, and I still have to prepare my food for 45 minutes.
Now, without a driverless car, but having a chef cook, I'd have to sit in the car for 1 hour, and have a meal waiting for me. A net reduction of 45 minutes.
Already invented, it's called a wife.
I'd rather spend that hour in the car reading a book, or surfing slashdot.
(Fortunately my commute is under 45 seconds most of the time to the study, or it's a taxi + flight, which means I can work/read all the way. A robotic car wouldn't really help me much.)
You CAN buy 10 Mbps dedicated. It costs about $500 / month. The standard model for residential is that you load a page, using the bandwidth for one second, then your neighbor uses it for a second or two, etc. An hour later, you're watching TV and a different neighbor is using the bandwidth. Since you're sharing the bandwidth, you share the cost.
I have dedicated bandwidth that I don't share. I pay over $1,200 / month. You can do the same.
Dedicated to where?
I have a 10mbit uncontended connection to an ISP in Sydney. Still get hit by packetloss when I send even 5mbit to Singapore.
I do have uncontended links to some offices, but they cost a hell of a lot more than $1200/month.
I did mention AAISP in the final paragraph, but I suppose their approach is so correct that it's worth mentioning twice (or thrice, right here!).
Yeah, sorry, stupid me! Since slashdot started going downhil (1999, hoho), I've taken to reading it on my phone using google web toolkit, but you only get the start of the posts.
In my country, 20% of my income goes to health care, and everyone finds it normal. It's the Americans that are weird.
17.9% of American GDP goes on health care, or an average $7,960 per person per year
Compare to Canada, which is 11.4% and $4,314 per person per year
You don't understand... 20% of the guy's salary goes to fund public healthcare directly. And then the state also gets money out of people's income tax (which is separate) and other income (VAT for instance). And that doesn't even factor in people who pay for private healthcare insurance. Wonder why Europe is on the brink of bankruptcy?
No, it's you that doesn't understand. Europe spends the following as part of it's economic output on health. It doesn't make any difference as a whole if it is spent as part of income tax, or as part of insurance, or in cash.
Now taxing everyone and paying centrally is unfair to rich people, who end up paying the health care costs of poor people, but it doesn't change the efficiency of the system.
Here is the percentage of the total economic output for each country spent on Health. Now you can argue that U.S. health care is 46% better than that in the Netherlands, but I'm not sure how you can objectively measure that. Life expectency (the U.S is below, Germany, UK, France, Italy etc, but for other reasons), infant mortality (US is higher than the EU as an average, including Italy, France, Spain, Germany, UK). Perhaps a measure of life expectancy of rich people may put the US in the lead, but http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002726.html implies that Forbes found it didn't make much difference (original article offline)
Here's those figures, amount of economic output spent on healthcare.
Oh, what bullshit. ISPs have bent over backwards so they don't lose out on delicious government contracts, which in the UK require satisfactory filtering methods in place.
There are maybe one or two ISPs which have had a backbone in all this - such as Andrews&Arnold. You can tell the difference because their Internet service is 100% unfiltered. They even ask you if you want filtering and refuse to provide you with service if you say "yes".
Not all ISPs
Not only is Andrews & ArnoldXKCD 806 compliant, but they meet all of mumsnet^W David Cameron's censorship requirements.
The government wants us to offer filtering as an option, so we offer an active choice when you sign up, you choose one of two options:-
Unfiltered Internet access - no filtering of any content within the A&A network - you are responsible for any filtering in your own network, or Censored Internet access - restricted access to unpublished government mandated filter list (plus Daily Mail web site) - but still cannot guarantee kids don't access porn. If you choose censored you are advised: Sorry, for a censored internet you will have to pick a different ISP or move to North Korea. Our services are all unfiltered.
Is that a good enough active choice for you Mr Cameron?
Wasting money is literally pissing away potential to make the world a better place.
One, and only one, of the following is true:
1. When money is spent on a project that you don't approve of, that money magically vanishes into nothingness, therefore the quoted statement is valid. 2. You are retarded.
If I paid 100 cancer researchers to break rocks in the hot sun, this would be a massive waste. Sure, they can spend the money on someone else doing something worthwhile, but you're removing their potential productivity from the economy. That's bad for the economy, and bad for the world. Far better to pay them to research cancer cures, they pass the same cash back into the economy, but they are adding value.
if you expect everyone else to pay for it that's a very socialist viewpoint
You say that as if it is a BAD thing. As America's system runs now, it is privatize the profits and socialize the losses. You guys always screaming "socialism" always seem to forget that.
I'll accept the argument (whether I agree or not) that certain things should be socialised. Roads, police, fire, health, military, food production (which happens in the usa via farm subsidies), space exploration, national power grid, water, etc.
Airline travel doesn't fit into any category I can think of.
I'm 6'7". I do my best not to fly (don't really want to be sexually abused) but when I have to, I am fucking miserable.
Fly in business class. Or don't fly. Or be miserable. It's a free country, your choice.
Most airlines seem to now only give you preferred seating if you're part of some kind of high-mileage club, so I usually don't get to pick the bulkhead. I'll regularly see short people seated there but they never seem to want to swap me;
Funny that. People that spend a good portion of their lives in planes get a little bit more comfort on their 100+ flights a year. You have to suffer one flight a year. Cry me a river.
If the person tries I will shove the seat forward, and hard;
I had someone do that to me once on an SQ flight from DEL. The captain came out and dealt with them.
it should take to figure out that I don't fit in the seat,
And therefore should have been offloaded before takeoff.
On a flight from the US to Brazil, I was stuck in the back of the plane and my legs physically wouldn't fit in the seat. The flight attendant told me that I would have to get my legs in there or the flight couldn't take off. I had her call another flight attendant over and then I said "I will get in here, but something is going to break. It will be the seat in front, my seat, or my legs."
I then jammed myself into the seat which broke the rivets/screws of the seat in front of me which slammed the seat forward (with someone in it) making the seat unusable. I foresee this happening again and more often if the airlines continue this stuff.
It sucks, but tall people, and fat people, need more room than 5' people. It's not your fault, but if you expect everyone else to pay for it that's a very socialist viewpoint.
Buy a seat appropriate to your size. I find it hard to believe that a US-Brazil flight didn't have a business class option.
And the flight would have left if you didn't fit in. You wouldn't.
All this will do is piss off more people and turn them off to flying unless absolutely necessary.
I doubt if most people will notice. When making flying decisions, most passengers care about three things: 1. cost of the tickets 2. fares 3. ticket prices Discount airlines that have cut amenities to reduce costs, have thrived. Speaking for myself, I have a family to support, and renting a comfortable seat for a few hours is not a priority. If a thinner seat allows the airline to cut $20 off the price, that is fine with me.
It's a right shame. I care about 1. schedule 2. comfort 3. price
Although 1 and 2 can swap. Schedule is important when it's a small destination like Amman, with 2 flights a day. For somewhere like London to New York with buses every 40 minutes comfort is more important.
When you spend 5% of your life in a plane (17 days a year), comfort, and minimising the time on the plane, become the priority.
Already said a million times or more but *this* is why I am not on Facebook.
Oh wait, I probably am and just don't know it thanks to my "friends". So I guess what I should have said is "this is why I hate Facebook"!
Precisely, you're probably better being on facebook with a locked down profile that you never add, perhaps with some fake photos, than you are ignoring it completely.
Or you can go with the herd. In nature a lone deer is often killed, while the herd remains safe. Are you sure you're a wolf?
In fact, the chance it will glide safely past us is 99.99998%
Since the odds of any asteroid of a city-destroying size or larger only hit the Earth every 5,000 years or so... this particular asteroid's odds are 36.5 times better than the average one's.
We've had cities for 5,000 years. How many have been destroyed by asteroids?
If they could do that without long (or short) term complications, I'd be all for sedated flying.
That's a shame. I flew to Washington last monday, a da6y flight, about 8 hours.
I put the seat into bed mode for the first couple of hours for a nap, then broke out the laptop. Managed to get 5 hours solid development done, with no distractions. First time for 4 months.
Last nights flight home was a "sedated" flight. Couple of glasses of Tattinger before boarding, one while on the ground, then a quick glenfiddich for a nightcap before a solid 5 hours.
Slashdot Mirror
You said, of Snowden ...
Technically he is a traitor ...
Would you be so kindly tell us how would you define your term of " Technically " ?
What Mr. Edward Snowden did was not treacherous to the country of the United States of America.
No.
Just because the Obama Administration that called Edward Snowden a "traitor" doesn't make it so.
The OP never said he was betraying the U.S.A.
a person who betrays a country or group of people by helping or supporting an enemy
He is a traitor to those who employed him (the U.S. government), by helping their enemy (the U.S. public)
...reaching in your pocket to get your phone.
It's sad in that same way as the family member who's sitting by the TV but searching desperately for the remote.
Many tvs have functions that can't be accessed with a remote. My STB has 1200 channels, selecting channel 503 when I'm on channel 141, without a remote (and thus limited to ch+) is a right pain.
I wear a watch, it's handy to be aware of what the time is, as my body clock is usually screwed from 1 or 2 long haul trips a month. If that watch also showed me who was ringing, allowing me to ignore my phone (which may be in my pocket, or on the other side of the office), that would be useful.
America is the home of capitalism, which means competition, which drives down prices and raises standards. The rest of the world is a socialist hellhole.
It's similar to what the North Koreans believe, with a touch of stockholm syndrome.
The suit, originally brought forth by five software engineers in 2011, alleges that the anti-poaching agreements served to lessen their employment opportunities, thereby weakening their negotiating power and ultimately affecting the salaries they were able to command.
Wait, what?
I've been told for years that the only way employees can ever fight their employer is if a union represents them and does all the negotiations. Now you mean to tell me that even non-union employees have rights, too?
Yes, it's possible. If you have the money and the time you can even get it to court. Then it's you, and maybe a few others, against the combined experience and cash of the justice a multi billion dollar company can buy.
Oh my God! My entire world view is shattered. I have to kill myself!
Have a look on google, I'm sure it will help you
If it doesn't make the front page, it's not news.
I skim the sites, not dig through them.
300 people marching is not news. It happens every day.
Get a million people to march on Washington and that's news (that news will be underplayed, and the corporations will spin up their machine to stop it if they can't see profit in it, but it will make the front page)
What the FUCK has happened to the USA?
Americans have the government, and the country, that they deserve.
As a whole, you're a bunch of pussies who get wound up over irrelevant things like football games, american idol, and elections, but as soon as someone shouts boo you're celebrating the army out in force declaring martial law.
Nice tactic of the feds, give us too much to hate at once and we have to divide our forces.
As I understand it, 80% of the U.S. are more interested in dancing with the stars than Obamacare, drone killings, guns, or the NSA
Why not team up with the 20% that agree with you about NSA and drone killings, and leave the anti-obamacare and anti-gun stuff out of it until you've established a new political system.
No - its that the American government does not care. The way the govenernment is set up, the American people can do nothing to prevent it. Congress is guarenteed a salery for life. Why do what people want - get in, be there long enough to get your salery for life, pass whatever laws you want - you are exempt, and accept all the bribes you want. People don't like you? Who cares, you are set for life - who cares if you win reelection.
Oh, someone is actually going to try to make a difference and run under a third party ticket? Good luck with that happening - even if you get in (which does happen from time to time) you got 400 or so other Congressmen and 99 other Senetors and a corrupt President who wants to be the dictator of a Socialist government.
The American system is broke.
Well he's had 5 years to try to be socialist and hasn't got anywhere near.
not so fast...that 'safety' they measure has very rapidly decreasing marginal utility...after awhile a .0000000000000001% gain in 'safety' is not work the extra 20 minutes to your commute b/c the Google control software won't let your car ever get any closer than 2 car lengths...so turning left on that busy intersection takes 3x as long in the morning....
When was the last time you took a driving class? They recommend you keep at least 4 seconds between you and the car in front of you as the minimum safe distance you need to stop if an emergency happens.
If you're regularly driving with less than 2 seconds between you and the car in front of you, congratulations, you're part of the problem that automated cars are trying to solve, and I can't wait until you're no longer behind the wheel on a highway.
In the UK it's 2 seconds in normal conditions, 4 in rain.
Fortunately that's ignored. A 4 second gap between cars means a maximum 900 cars per hour (actually less than that due to car lengths), so the M1 would have 2700 cars an hour, on a road that is used by more than twice that during rush hour.
Of course a 4 second gap, or even a 2 second gap, means you'll be cut up. So you have to brake to reintroduce the gap, then someone pulls in, then you brake. Before you know it, you are doing 20, with the other traffic doing 70, and you're still braking. Hopefully by then the cops will have arrested you and taken your license.
I don't want a driverless car.
I want an automatic chef cook. Because when I go home from work, I still have to sit in the car for 1 hour, and I still have to prepare my food for 45 minutes.
Now, without a driverless car, but having a chef cook, I'd have to sit in the car for 1 hour, and have a meal waiting for me. A net reduction of 45 minutes.
Already invented, it's called a wife.
I'd rather spend that hour in the car reading a book, or surfing slashdot.
(Fortunately my commute is under 45 seconds most of the time to the study, or it's a taxi + flight, which means I can work/read all the way. A robotic car wouldn't really help me much.)
Obama ordered Gitmo closed on his first day in office. Congress overruled him.
Did the democrats run the white house, senate and congress in the two years 2009/2010?
So Obama's own party stopped him from putting his main foreign policy into place?
Firing squads are effective too.
For child killers, burning works for me.
Oh there's all sorts of ways to kill child killers, Judas Cradle for example
You CAN buy 10 Mbps dedicated. It costs about $500 / month. The standard model for residential is that you load a page, using the bandwidth for one second, then your neighbor uses it for a second or two, etc. An hour later, you're watching TV and a different neighbor is using the bandwidth. Since you're sharing the bandwidth, you share the cost.
I have dedicated bandwidth that I don't share. I pay over $1,200 / month. You can do the same.
Dedicated to where?
I have a 10mbit uncontended connection to an ISP in Sydney. Still get hit by packetloss when I send even 5mbit to Singapore.
I do have uncontended links to some offices, but they cost a hell of a lot more than $1200/month.
I did mention AAISP in the final paragraph, but I suppose their approach is so correct that it's worth mentioning twice (or thrice, right here!).
Yeah, sorry, stupid me! Since slashdot started going downhil (1999, hoho), I've taken to reading it on my phone using google web toolkit, but you only get the start of the posts.
In my country, 20% of my income goes to health care, and everyone finds it normal.
It's the Americans that are weird.
17.9% of American GDP goes on health care, or an average $7,960 per person per year
Compare to Canada, which is 11.4% and $4,314 per person per year
You don't understand... 20% of the guy's salary goes to fund public healthcare directly. And then the state also gets money out of people's income tax (which is separate) and other income (VAT for instance). And that doesn't even factor in people who pay for private healthcare insurance. Wonder why Europe is on the brink of bankruptcy?
No, it's you that doesn't understand. Europe spends the following as part of it's economic output on health. It doesn't make any difference as a whole if it is spent as part of income tax, or as part of insurance, or in cash.
Now taxing everyone and paying centrally is unfair to rich people, who end up paying the health care costs of poor people, but it doesn't change the efficiency of the system.
Here is the percentage of the total economic output for each country spent on Health. Now you can argue that U.S. health care is 46% better than that in the Netherlands, but I'm not sure how you can objectively measure that. Life expectency (the U.S is below, Germany, UK, France, Italy etc, but for other reasons), infant mortality (US is higher than the EU as an average, including Italy, France, Spain, Germany, UK). Perhaps a measure of life expectancy of rich people may put the US in the lead, but http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002726.html implies that Forbes found it didn't make much difference (original article offline)
Here's those figures, amount of economic output spent on healthcare.
USA: 17.6%
Netherlands: 12%
Germany: 11.6%
France: 11.6%
Switzerland: 11.4%
Portugal: 10.7%
Greece: 10.2%
UK: 9.6%
Spain: 9.5%
"This is why ISPs..."
Oh, what bullshit. ISPs have bent over backwards so they don't lose out on delicious government contracts, which in the UK require satisfactory filtering methods in place.
There are maybe one or two ISPs which have had a backbone in all this - such as Andrews&Arnold. You can tell the difference because their Internet service is 100% unfiltered. They even ask you if you want filtering and refuse to provide you with service if you say "yes".
Not all ISPs
Not only is Andrews & Arnold XKCD 806 compliant, but they meet all of mumsnet^W David Cameron's censorship requirements.
The government wants us to offer filtering as an option, so we offer an active choice when you sign up, you choose one of two options:-
Unfiltered Internet access - no filtering of any content within the A&A network - you are responsible for any filtering in your own network, or
Censored Internet access - restricted access to unpublished government mandated filter list (plus Daily Mail web site) - but still cannot guarantee kids don't access porn.
If you choose censored you are advised: Sorry, for a censored internet you will have to pick a different ISP or move to North Korea. Our services are all unfiltered.
Is that a good enough active choice for you Mr Cameron?
One, and only one, of the following is true:
1. When money is spent on a project that you don't approve of, that money magically vanishes into nothingness, therefore the quoted statement is valid.
2. You are retarded.
If I paid 100 cancer researchers to break rocks in the hot sun, this would be a massive waste. Sure, they can spend the money on someone else doing something worthwhile, but you're removing their potential productivity from the economy. That's bad for the economy, and bad for the world. Far better to pay them to research cancer cures, they pass the same cash back into the economy, but they are adding value.
You say that as if it is a BAD thing. As America's system runs now, it is privatize the profits and socialize the losses. You guys always screaming "socialism" always seem to forget that.
I'll accept the argument (whether I agree or not) that certain things should be socialised. Roads, police, fire, health, military, food production (which happens in the usa via farm subsidies), space exploration, national power grid, water, etc.
Airline travel doesn't fit into any category I can think of.
I'm 6'7". I do my best not to fly (don't really want to be sexually abused) but when I have to, I am fucking miserable.
Fly in business class. Or don't fly. Or be miserable. It's a free country, your choice.
Most airlines seem to now only give you preferred seating if you're part of some kind of high-mileage club, so I usually don't get to pick the bulkhead. I'll regularly see short people seated there but they never seem to want to swap me;
Funny that. People that spend a good portion of their lives in planes get a little bit more comfort on their 100+ flights a year. You have to suffer one flight a year. Cry me a river.
If the person tries I will shove the seat forward, and hard;
I had someone do that to me once on an SQ flight from DEL. The captain came out and dealt with them.
it should take to figure out that I don't fit in the seat,
And therefore should have been offloaded before takeoff.
I'm 200cm tall.
On a flight from the US to Brazil, I was stuck in the back of the plane and my legs physically wouldn't fit in the seat. The flight attendant told me that I would have to get my legs in there or the flight couldn't take off. I had her call another flight attendant over and then I said "I will get in here, but something is going to break. It will be the seat in front, my seat, or my legs."
I then jammed myself into the seat which broke the rivets/screws of the seat in front of me which slammed the seat forward (with someone in it) making the seat unusable. I foresee this happening again and more often if the airlines continue this stuff.
It sucks, but tall people, and fat people, need more room than 5' people. It's not your fault, but if you expect everyone else to pay for it that's a very socialist viewpoint.
Buy a seat appropriate to your size. I find it hard to believe that a US-Brazil flight didn't have a business class option.
And the flight would have left if you didn't fit in. You wouldn't.
All this will do is piss off more people and turn them off to flying unless absolutely necessary.
I doubt if most people will notice. When making flying decisions, most passengers care about three things:
1. cost of the tickets
2. fares
3. ticket prices
Discount airlines that have cut amenities to reduce costs, have thrived.
Speaking for myself, I have a family to support, and renting a comfortable seat for a few hours is not a priority.
If a thinner seat allows the airline to cut $20 off the price, that is fine with me.
It's a right shame. I care about
1. schedule
2. comfort
3. price
Although 1 and 2 can swap. Schedule is important when it's a small destination like Amman, with 2 flights a day. For somewhere like London to New York with buses every 40 minutes comfort is more important.
When you spend 5% of your life in a plane (17 days a year), comfort, and minimising the time on the plane, become the priority.
Already said a million times or more but *this* is why I am not on Facebook.
Oh wait, I probably am and just don't know it thanks to my "friends". So I guess what I should have said is "this is why I hate Facebook"!
Precisely, you're probably better being on facebook with a locked down profile that you never add, perhaps with some fake photos, than you are ignoring it completely.
Or you can go with the herd. In nature a lone deer is often killed, while the herd remains safe. Are you sure you're a wolf?
In fact, the chance it will glide safely past us is 99.99998%
Since the odds of any asteroid of a city-destroying size or larger only hit the Earth every 5,000 years or so... this particular asteroid's odds are 36.5 times better than the average one's.
We've had cities for 5,000 years. How many have been destroyed by asteroids?
None. Overdue for one dont-ya-think?
If they could do that without long (or short) term complications, I'd be all for sedated flying.
That's a shame. I flew to Washington last monday, a da6y flight, about 8 hours.
I put the seat into bed mode for the first couple of hours for a nap, then broke out the laptop. Managed to get 5 hours solid development done, with no distractions. First time for 4 months.
Last nights flight home was a "sedated" flight. Couple of glasses of Tattinger before boarding, one while on the ground, then a quick glenfiddich for a nightcap before a solid 5 hours.
Flying can be very productive.