Obviously not driving is not a real option in our society. Many of the jobs in our cities have zero available housing nearby.
And now that we're forced into driving, the majority apparently wants the speed limit where it is. After all, if the majority favored a higher speed limit, you would think that would be an easy and popular platform to get elected on.
It prints a bunch of stuff to the console. It's kind of pretty. But it seems pretty meaningless. Maybe you have to set up a specific sized console window to make it look right?
I know, I didn't really mean to tar all EU countries with the french name, it's just that the article suggested greater cowardice among europeans than americans, and the french are just the most obvious potential cause of such a differential.
The problem is just that: it makes potential accidents more fatal. Maybe I don't want to take that risk, and maybe a majority agrees with me. It's just a societal decision about risk preference. I'm just against pretending that there's no difference between 70 and 60. If that were the case, why not just raise the limit to 200 or so and see what happens? We restrict speed to prevent others from making stupid decisions that endanger our lives.
Severity of injuries and likelyhood of fatality in event of an accident both rise with speed. How fast you want to trust other people to drive is mostly a matter of personal risk preference. As a society, we agree on some magic number where the death rate is acceptable.
I'm just against pretending there's no consequence to 70 vs 60.
Arguing that 70 is as safe as 60 doesn't display much common sense, nor much understanding of science, and also indicates a poor knowledge of accident statistics.
You might argue about whether or not it is a reasonable, worthwhile increase in risk to allow driving at 70 rather than 60, but if someone is actually trying to claim that there is not an increased risk that's just ignorance or disinformation.
It may be harder to read for a few people. Perhaps it takes a bit of training. But I think there can be little doubt that the possibility of longer variable and method names enables potential improvements in code clarity, and reduce the need for redundant documentation. Mixed case helps to support this, while still supporting coding efficiency via CamelCase (CC) short cut typing.
Mixed case is great. With a good editor it can clarify class and variable names enormously, without creating a typing burden. Then you don't need as many comments to clarify what is going on.
The real challenge of course is playing the piece in a pressure suit in a vacuum so that the key depressions don't make noise, without ever hitting a wrong key, or depressing two keys at once.
Even if congress didn't steal the money for other purposes, that alone would be enough to make it not a trust fund, because the key problem is that someone else will make a decision about whether or not to fund my retirement (and frankly, I'm putting every penny I can into private retirement accounts with the full expectation of never receiving any money from social security).
The problem is the notion that you can own a chunk of land in a fair way. You can't. There's no reasonable way for a community to calculate in advance the long-run value of a chunk of property. So we charge you an initial move in fee (purchase price) plus a variable yearly use fee (property tax) which helps to maintain fair access to the land.
Indeed, if a community must choose between providing land to you (who lost your job) and me, who is working hard for the benefit of the community, it's not clear to me at all where the societal value of letting you rather than me have that land comes from.
Again, the key problem is the notion of completely paid off. In the long run, all land has essentially infinite value (or at least some productivity rating multiplied by a time term in the billions of years.). There's not even a fair way to evaluate such a price over your lifetime because your lifetime is variable. If you happen to prove to be long lived (lets say 1000 years) then selling the land to you at virtually any fixed price will turn out to be an unfair deal for society.
So we maintain property taxes to make sure that the land we're allowing you to use is bringing benefit to those of us who deeded you access to it.
And that's why property taxes are among the fairest and most socially beneficial around.
The problem is that it isn't actually a trust fund, in case you weren't trolling and didn't know.
If money you paid in was held to pay for your own retirement, that would be great, but that's not how the system was designed nor is it how the system in fact works.
My $50 WalMart Apex 1100W (I think that's the model) will do it. There are a number that will, but I believe they can't advertise it as a feature (part of their DVD consortium agreement). So you have to find models that do it via word of mouth.
The really important problem here is that people are free to screw me over, just by voting for stuff that screws us all. I'm ruled by the 90+% of this country which seems to be filled with idiots. I've attempted to get people interested in their rights, but there's only so much time I can devote to this and retain a job.
Slashdot Mirror
Here are some counter examples:
c id ent%20statistics.html
t _4 .htm
a ff ic/crash/final.htm
http://www.new-hampshire-attorneys.com/pages/ac
http://www.state.ia.us/government/dps/gtsb/gtsf
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/drivers/drivers/tr
There are lots more.
Obviously not driving is not a real option in our society. Many of the jobs in our cities have zero available housing nearby.
And now that we're forced into driving, the majority apparently wants the speed limit where it is. After all, if the majority favored a higher speed limit, you would think that would be an easy and popular platform to get elected on.
It prints a bunch of stuff to the console. It's kind of pretty. But it seems pretty meaningless. Maybe you have to set up a specific sized console window to make it look right?
I know, I didn't really mean to tar all EU countries with the french name, it's just that the article suggested greater cowardice among europeans than americans, and the french are just the most obvious potential cause of such a differential.
The problem is just that: it makes potential accidents more fatal. Maybe I don't want to take that risk, and maybe a majority agrees with me. It's just a societal decision about risk preference. I'm just against pretending that there's no difference between 70 and 60. If that were the case, why not just raise the limit to 200 or so and see what happens? We restrict speed to prevent others from making stupid decisions that endanger our lives.
Severity of injuries and likelyhood of fatality in event of an accident both rise with speed. How fast you want to trust other people to drive is mostly a matter of personal risk preference. As a society, we agree on some magic number where the death rate is acceptable.
I'm just against pretending there's no consequence to 70 vs 60.
Arguing that 70 is as safe as 60 doesn't display much common sense, nor much understanding of science, and also indicates a poor knowledge of accident statistics.
You might argue about whether or not it is a reasonable, worthwhile increase in risk to allow driving at 70 rather than 60, but if someone is actually trying to claim that there is not an increased risk that's just ignorance or disinformation.
The french are more cowardly than americans?
I did both this afternoon during lunch. Neither one seemed particularly difficult.
I'm pretty sure this publication used the marketing calendar, not the gregorian one.
It may be harder to read for a few people. Perhaps it takes a bit of training. But I think there can be little doubt that the possibility of longer variable and method names enables potential improvements in code clarity, and reduce the need for redundant documentation. Mixed case helps to support this, while still supporting coding efficiency via CamelCase (CC) short cut typing.
Mixed case is great. With a good editor it can clarify class and variable names enormously, without creating a typing burden. Then you don't need as many comments to clarify what is going on.
Actually, it doesn't matter which you use, either way is great with a supporting editor.
CamelCase is wonderful if you have smart type code completion that supports it. So much better than the useless hungarian notation junk.
1 seller, 10 items, 10 buyers.
Surely the first references to the impending death of slashdot were in 96 or earlier?
The real challenge of course is playing the piece in a pressure suit in a vacuum so that the key depressions don't make noise, without ever hitting a wrong key, or depressing two keys at once.
I think i'm paying for someone else's retirement.
Even if congress didn't steal the money for other purposes, that alone would be enough to make it not a trust fund, because the key problem is that someone else will make a decision about whether or not to fund my retirement (and frankly, I'm putting every penny I can into private retirement accounts with the full expectation of never receiving any money from social security).
The problem is the notion that you can own a chunk of land in a fair way. You can't. There's no reasonable way for a community to calculate in advance the long-run value of a chunk of property. So we charge you an initial move in fee (purchase price) plus a variable yearly use fee (property tax) which helps to maintain fair access to the land.
Indeed, if a community must choose between providing land to you (who lost your job) and me, who is working hard for the benefit of the community, it's not clear to me at all where the societal value of letting you rather than me have that land comes from.
Again, the key problem is the notion of completely paid off. In the long run, all land has essentially infinite value (or at least some productivity rating multiplied by a time term in the billions of years.). There's not even a fair way to evaluate such a price over your lifetime because your lifetime is variable. If you happen to prove to be long lived (lets say 1000 years) then selling the land to you at virtually any fixed price will turn out to be an unfair deal for society.
So we maintain property taxes to make sure that the land we're allowing you to use is bringing benefit to those of us who deeded you access to it.
And that's why property taxes are among the fairest and most socially beneficial around.
The problem is that it isn't actually a trust fund, in case you weren't trolling and didn't know.
If money you paid in was held to pay for your own retirement, that would be great, but that's not how the system was designed nor is it how the system in fact works.
My $50 WalMart Apex 1100W (I think that's the model) will do it. There are a number that will, but I believe they can't advertise it as a feature (part of their DVD consortium agreement). So you have to find models that do it via word of mouth.
n fo rmation/Electronics/Video/DVD_Players/
I'd start by looking here:
http://directory.google.com/Top/Home/Consumer_I
In particular when I was looking I found epinions helpful, but that was long enough ago things may have changed by now.
Buy a better dvd player. There are a lot out there that will skip any content regardless of the flags set on it by the manufacturer.
I ate a krispy kreme and then walked to work today. I'm pretty sure if I could afford a bike I could have biked.
The really important problem here is that people are free to screw me over, just by voting for stuff that screws us all. I'm ruled by the 90+% of this country which seems to be filled with idiots. I've attempted to get people interested in their rights, but there's only so much time I can devote to this and retain a job.
Of course, at this very moment, congress is working feverishly to undo inheritance taxes.
Inheritance and property taxes are probably the two fairest taxes around.