Part of this problem can be helped if people stop driving so close to the car in front. That way you can slow down a lot more gracefully and nobody needs to hit the brakes. This probably reduces overall speed but it does mean a more consistent slightly slower speed than fast sections between jams.
It's not that simple. The stoping distance increases with speed, so therefore the space taken up by a car will increase. Secondly, unless you drive at a constant speed at all times, the algorithm to calculate your time on the road is not correct. It is possible that when speeding your journey will take exactly the same time.
There's never an age where a child suddenly becomes an adult either... does that mean we should eliminate statutory rape laws,
Yes. They need to be seriously reformed. I think it's ludicrous that someone can be presecuted for having sex with someone 2 days younger than themselves.
Laws are about reasonable compromise; there are always cases where the line seems wrong, but overall you just have to pick a reasonably good place. Likewise, something doesn't have to be the "be-all end-all of road safety" to regulate it. That's why we havea variety of traffic laws.
That's fine. But it's important to be reasonably flexible with these laws as well. A hard and fast 30mph limit makes no sense. Driving slightly below the speed limit in snow is more dangerous than slightly above on a clear day with an empty road. However, only speeding is punished. No consideration of just how dangerous speeding was is taken into account.
Yes, but the point is the same difference in speed makes the same difference. slwing from 35 to 30 has a similar effect to slowing from 30 to 25. Which in turn has a similar effect to slowing from 25 to 20.
What does one have to do with the other? Anyone who can speed in Central London during congestion charge is pretty fortunate.
I really don't like this sort of thing. can we lose the attitude that driving past the speed limit is the be all and end all of road safety. There is never a speed at which driving abruptly changes from "safe" to "dangerous".
Well, yes. They're off the radar, because the only people they do business with in the US are their victims. And they do work on the basis that they're criminals.
Adware makers need to do some business in the US with other US companies. You can't prosecute the adware companies if they do anything wrong, but you can prosecute anyone who buys services from them if they re based in the US. Most companies who want to work with Adware companies are US based.
If it's a bad anology, say so, but don't try to correct it. It's tedious. You end up with such a heavily patched analogy that it's more complicated than the situation it's trying to illustrate.
They could always prosecute the users, but that's probably not considered to be in the public interest. It would be punishing the victim after all. If a corporation is buying services from a company that's doing something known to be illegal, then the corporation is also committing an offence.
It's not happening on their website though. It's happening on your computer. Once you buy a BK takeaway, McDonalds are perfectly entitled to put their flyers in the bag after you leave the building (as long as they have your permission).
Their tactics are underhand, especially because they don't ask permission to install their software, but given the court was obliged to assume that the software was their at the user's request, I agree with the decision. Otherwise websites owners are legally entitled to bar you from running certain software on your own machine.
Pissing people off seems to generate sales. There's some very annoying phone ringtones at the moment, and part of the advertising seems to be noisy web ads.
If you do business in the US then you are obliged to abide by US law. Since they are selling advertising to US companies, they are doing business in the US.
Sure, I quite like the idea of sharing mp3s and downloading TV shows, but I realise that the arguments against doing that do have at least some merit. What does annoy me is that it's impossible to get access to a lot of media.
The market for classic video games is small-to non-existant. Occasionally these are relicenced, but mostly people are not making money from these games. The TV Pilot "Global Frequency" would not have been seen by anyone except people downloaded it. This caused complaints from WB. Not for any good reason. They weren't losing any money from it because there was no way to buy a copy, but The WB want to hoard their IP.
Society does better from these when people are breaching copyright. It's better that a show is watched than a show is buried in a vault, but copyright hasn't caught up with this possibility.
Yes, there's several bits and pieces of BSD code in Windows, but that's not the point. They never decided to simply extend BSD for their own OS. Presumably they wouldn't have done the same with Linux even without the GPL. The difference between the two operating systems isn't that great.
Apple did simply embrace and extend BSD. Nobody seemed to mind, and Apple ended up with a rather good OS.
An open standard from MMORPG clients would be a nice idea. Then we could have a single game that wil work with multiple clients, ports for different platforms will be available for free, and commercial games will be able to save a bit of time through not having to develop their own protocols. Difficulty would be preventing people from cheating though.
Or perhaps they have a really twisted sense of humor...
Welcome to British politics.
Just because the issues are important doesn't mean we can't have a little levity. Mockery and satire are essential parts of British politics. Not having a sense of humour would be fatal to a british politician.
Slashdot Mirror
I have standard answers
You've not noticed my new haircut so I'm going to sulk.
Well, you made no comment when I shaved this morning.
It was some obscure anniversary like when we first met today and you forgot so I'm not going to talk to you.
Oh, dammit! That means my car's due for a service.
Why did you hesitate when I asked if I look fat?
Because you're fat and I didn't want to insult you.
It's that time of the month and I'm not in the mood for games
I'll disappear for a couple of days and come back when you're feeling better, then.
Which dress should I wear for the party? (And make sure you pick the one I want to wear)
Go naked. All eyes will be on you.
I have a headache, you can't have a blow job
Is the headache in your tongue then?
Although for some reason I have trouble making relationships last. Women don't seem to like intelligent sensitive guys like me.
Is this significantly more substantial than the difference between statistics on injuries/deaths sustained at 30mph and 20mph, or 40mph and 50mph?
What's more dangerous? 25mph on a crowded icy road, or 35mph on a clear road in broad daylight with nobody around?
But how do you measure productivity? It's not like you can do a factory style "number of widgets produced" measurement.
It's a tricky problem, which is probably why most employers have ignored it.
Part of this problem can be helped if people stop driving so close to the car in front. That way you can slow down a lot more gracefully and nobody needs to hit the brakes. This probably reduces overall speed but it does mean a more consistent slightly slower speed than fast sections between jams.
It's not that simple. The stoping distance increases with speed, so therefore the space taken up by a car will increase. Secondly, unless you drive at a constant speed at all times, the algorithm to calculate your time on the road is not correct. It is possible that when speeding your journey will take exactly the same time.
There's never an age where a child suddenly becomes an adult either... does that mean we should eliminate statutory rape laws,
Yes. They need to be seriously reformed. I think it's ludicrous that someone can be presecuted for having sex with someone 2 days younger than themselves.
Laws are about reasonable compromise; there are always cases where the line seems wrong, but overall you just have to pick a reasonably good place. Likewise, something doesn't have to be the "be-all end-all of road safety" to regulate it. That's why we havea variety of traffic laws.
That's fine. But it's important to be reasonably flexible with these laws as well. A hard and fast 30mph limit makes no sense. Driving slightly below the speed limit in snow is more dangerous than slightly above on a clear day with an empty road. However, only speeding is punished. No consideration of just how dangerous speeding was is taken into account.
Yes, but the point is the same difference in speed makes the same difference. slwing from 35 to 30 has a similar effect to slowing from 30 to 25. Which in turn has a similar effect to slowing from 25 to 20.
What does one have to do with the other? Anyone who can speed in Central London during congestion charge is pretty fortunate.
I really don't like this sort of thing. can we lose the attitude that driving past the speed limit is the be all and end all of road safety. There is never a speed at which driving abruptly changes from "safe" to "dangerous".
Just because something is obvious, doesn't mean it's right.
This is one of those cases. If traffic was a liquid flowing smoothly through a pipe, then it would be. But traffic does not behave like a liquid.
Well, yes. They're off the radar, because the only people they do business with in the US are their victims. And they do work on the basis that they're criminals.
Adware makers need to do some business in the US with other US companies. You can't prosecute the adware companies if they do anything wrong, but you can prosecute anyone who buys services from them if they re based in the US. Most companies who want to work with Adware companies are US based.
Please stop.
If it's a bad anology, say so, but don't try to correct it. It's tedious. You end up with such a heavily patched analogy that it's more complicated than the situation it's trying to illustrate.
Yes it does. Google have two choices - Abide by European law, or don't do business in Europe. I've always held this view.
I wouldn't hire a programmer who had difficulty spelling "include"
Surprising. I keep typing it as "inlcude", yet seem to be quite capable of holding down a C programming job.
They could always prosecute the users, but that's probably not considered to be in the public interest. It would be punishing the victim after all. If a corporation is buying services from a company that's doing something known to be illegal, then the corporation is also committing an offence.
It's not happening on their website though. It's happening on your computer. Once you buy a BK takeaway, McDonalds are perfectly entitled to put their flyers in the bag after you leave the building (as long as they have your permission).
Their tactics are underhand, especially because they don't ask permission to install their software, but given the court was obliged to assume that the software was their at the user's request, I agree with the decision. Otherwise websites owners are legally entitled to bar you from running certain software on your own machine.
Pissing people off seems to generate sales. There's some very annoying phone ringtones at the moment, and part of the advertising seems to be noisy web ads.
If you do business in the US then you are obliged to abide by US law. Since they are selling advertising to US companies, they are doing business in the US.
Abandonware, and deliberately restricting access.
Sure, I quite like the idea of sharing mp3s and downloading TV shows, but I realise that the arguments against doing that do have at least some merit. What does annoy me is that it's impossible to get access to a lot of media.
The market for classic video games is small-to non-existant. Occasionally these are relicenced, but mostly people are not making money from these games. The TV Pilot "Global Frequency" would not have been seen by anyone except people downloaded it. This caused complaints from WB. Not for any good reason. They weren't losing any money from it because there was no way to buy a copy, but The WB want to hoard their IP.
Society does better from these when people are breaching copyright. It's better that a show is watched than a show is buried in a vault, but copyright hasn't caught up with this possibility.
Hard to say. The GPL does have a pretty nasty bark though. Legal threats and bitching from the OS community usually makes violators back down.
Can't any of you responders recognize satire when you see it?
Of course we can't.
Yes, there's several bits and pieces of BSD code in Windows, but that's not the point. They never decided to simply extend BSD for their own OS. Presumably they wouldn't have done the same with Linux even without the GPL. The difference between the two operating systems isn't that great.
Apple did simply embrace and extend BSD. Nobody seemed to mind, and Apple ended up with a rather good OS.
An open standard from MMORPG clients would be a nice idea. Then we could have a single game that wil work with multiple clients, ports for different platforms will be available for free, and commercial games will be able to save a bit of time through not having to develop their own protocols. Difficulty would be preventing people from cheating though.
Lucas realises that this is just a bunch of geeks having fun.
How dare you mock his deeply held religious beliefs!
Or perhaps they have a really twisted sense of humor...
Welcome to British politics.
Just because the issues are important doesn't mean we can't have a little levity. Mockery and satire are essential parts of British politics. Not having a sense of humour would be fatal to a british politician.