Does anyone have the numbers- are you more likely to have money stolen from your wallet or your virtual wallet. For each $1 value in each- which is more vulnerable?
Seems to be a lot of big money heists from virtual wallets, but does that in %wise add up to more thefts per mano?
The car horn is probably the worst invention of all time. It's supposed to be used in emergencies-
This is somewhat state dependent. I just did some looking. In Virginia, New Jersey, and Rhode Island legally you are supposed to honk your horn before passing someone.
Anyone who uses a horn to shoo people out of the way should be shot. Or hung. Any form of public execution really.
The car horn is probably the worst invention of all time. It's supposed to be used in emergencies- but what it's really used for is a way to make your car say expletives. I suspect the car horn has killed more people (by startling them and making them crash) than it has saved lives.
Can't we do away with all the pretense in this modern day? Instead of a car horn, can't we have a button that plays a recording of "f you asshole" out of a loud speaker?
It does what the current car horn does in expressing opinion, but is less likely to startle a driver into running off the road.
So that's why America doesn't use the metric system.
It took me a few seconds to get that, but that gave me a good chuckle. Thanks!
Metricide was developed as a sterilizing fluid- but nowadays it is actually used more by fish keepers than it is for sterilizing things. It turns out that plants use it as a carbon source when it's in the water column and in low doses it doesn't hurt fish or inverts. (it has the added benefit of killing algae though).
Rather than killing the metric system... I actually add it in mL - I add 15mL of it to my main planted aquarium each morning just before the lights come on. Seachem sell a version of Metricide called Florin Excel- only they jack up the price about 10 times the rate.
I'm interested to see how this technology develops but I do suspect it has certain limitations. For example, I just ordered a gallon of metricide, I somehow suspect your average delivery drone couldn't deliver that; it would have been too heavy. Only lighter weight deliveries I suspect are practical to deliver this way.
It would be interesting to see, just how much can be carried by drone; and if deliveries become more common by drone, does that mean delivery of heavy items becomes more expensive? If there are fewer packages going on a certain route price per package goes up. So if drones are delivering all the light-weight items, items which are above the drone's threshold will therefore be more expensive to deliver.
You're in the wrong demographic. The Amazon Fire 7 is available for under $50 (as low as $29.99 last Thanksgiving) and the Fire HD 8 is discounted to $69.99 several times a year. They don't require data plans or monthly subscriptions, which makes them ideal for people on an extremely limited budget -- just head down to McDonald's or the local library for free wi-fi.
To be fair, I own one of those Fire tablets. And an Asus. I guess I personally own more tablets than desktops... I just never use any of them and I never see anyone else using them. I see more notebooks than tablets in public too.
I guess the key is, everyone probably owns tablet(s) but that doesn't mean they use them.
I would love it if every one of the Top 5 (Apple, Microsoft, Google/Alphabet, Facebook, Amazon) said "You know what? Fuck it. We're out" and just left Europe entirely. Just leave it to its own devices.
The EU is larger economically than the US. Sure, they could leave, but they'd be losing a huge % of their profits. They don't want to do that. They also know if they left the EU it would give other countries free roam to fill in the gap and create their own companies doing the same thing. Those companies could then operate in the US.
It would be a death knell to those companies to leave the EU.
Is EU paying google to run search service? Why they are treated like a public sponsored company or utility company? They are private business and they return results anyway they want to.
Because the EU has sovereignty over the EU and has the right to tell any country that operates within their jurisdiction what to do. Google has the right to not do business in the EU if it doesn't like the laws there.
The US does similar things all the time with companies from other countries.
If you operate in the US you follow US rules there. If you operate in the EU you follow EU rules there.
To be fair, I've sat next to many people on American Airlines who could have benefitted from an in-flight shower. I'd sacrifice getting wet in exchange for them bathing.
Tablets? What is this 2010; I thought that fad was more or less over; I don't know anyone who uses tablets besides kids. Cell phones... yes. Almost everyone I know is glued to a cell phone... but tablets seriously? This article is from 2018 not 2010 right?
Yes, I love how he had never used the software before, and had never used a keyboard and mouse before; but he was able to type at 160 wpm and use the software to create the blueprints for transparent aluminium in seconds flat.
This is Emirates Airlines we're talking about. The people who charge $15,000 a ticket and give you a bed seat and an in-flight shower.
I'm glad Delta doesn't have in flight showers. I'm sure I'd be crammed next to some jackass taking a shower and there's no way I'm not getting sprayed in those cramped quarters.
They want to take away the ONE THING I love about flying?
They might want to but it is very unlikely that they will, or that it will work if they ever get as far as doing it. The London Underground used to have windowless carriages in Victorian times because, as the reasoning went, there was nothing to look at going through a tunnel all the time. Despite this, they were massively unpopular, caused motion sickness etc. and were rapidly replaced with windows. I suspect that this will turn out to be true for aeroplanes as well.
LCD screens weren't very good in the Victorian days though.
Unlikely anything is going away due to passenger preferences and US FAA rules. In an emergency, windows are useful -- nice to know if there's any damage to the wings/engines and if there's fire/water/etc on the side you're planning to evac from. Cameras don't work without power.
Cameras don't use much power and an individual backup power supply could be provided to each camera. As long as there is also backup power in the cockpit, they can see any camera from the cockpit to judge what is safe.
Actually the rest of the plane does need windows. In an emergency, flight attendants are supposed to look through them to see whether there's anything wrong with the wings and engines (and more importantly, which one), since the cockpit windows don't extend far enough back to allow that. Cameras are great and all, but they tend to fail in lightning strikes or when the plane has issues with electrical power.
I'm not an expert and I don't even play one on TV; however, I would suspect there needs to be a balancing act done here. Someone needs to crunch some numbers.
Will the number of lives saved by having a fuselage outweigh the number of lives lost because of every camera being taken out at the same time trying to view the engine/wing. (and all sensors failing to work too). How often are those cameras going to go out?
What I think would be a smart middle step would be to run cameras on some planes that HAVE windows and see how reliable those cameras are. Try that for a few years first. If the cameras tend to work in all conditions... Hey, maybe give windowless a go. If the cameras have problems, aren't you glad you didn't go windowless without a trial run first on a windowed plane?
There might be some advantages to cameras over windows. The lighting can be adjusted so you get better visibility in the dark. Perhaps they can detect infra-red so you can see if the engine is running hot if you doubt the temperature gauge is accurate for some reason. Heck, the pilot can look out the side of the plane himself whilst remaining in the cockpit.
Aesthetically, being in an aeroplane without windows would suck... but I'm all for them looking into whether it really is safer. Just test the camera BEFORE you remove the windows.
More damage where they hit, but doesn't that also mean you have more time to evacuate people to get out of the path. In theory a slower moving hurricane may mean more damage but should it not mean less human fatalities? At least in places that have the financial ability to move people out the path.
Barring extinction by some event before then, I have little doubt we will be a fully interstellar species before the next turn of the millennium.
It would be a pretty depressing thing if we weren't interplanetary by 2118. Interstellar? That's a different order of magnitude and impossible to guess when we might even come close to that.
How does the expansion of the Sun factor into this?
If the total mass of the sun isn't increasing, and the distance from the center of the sun isn't increasing; I wouldn't expect it does make a difference... at least not whilst it isn't expanded enough to engulf us.
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone have the numbers- are you more likely to have money stolen from your wallet or your virtual wallet. For each $1 value in each- which is more vulnerable?
Seems to be a lot of big money heists from virtual wallets, but does that in %wise add up to more thefts per mano?
The car horn is probably the worst invention of all time. It's supposed to be used in emergencies-
This is somewhat state dependent. I just did some looking. In Virginia, New Jersey, and Rhode Island legally you are supposed to honk your horn before passing someone.
That must make for a very musical interstate.
Soylent green is 'Smartphone Zombies'... IT'S PEOPLE!
Anyone who uses a horn to shoo people out of the way should be shot. Or hung. Any form of public execution really.
The car horn is probably the worst invention of all time. It's supposed to be used in emergencies- but what it's really used for is a way to make your car say expletives. I suspect the car horn has killed more people (by startling them and making them crash) than it has saved lives.
Can't we do away with all the pretense in this modern day? Instead of a car horn, can't we have a button that plays a recording of "f you asshole" out of a loud speaker?
It does what the current car horn does in expressing opinion, but is less likely to startle a driver into running off the road.
I just ordered a gallon of metricide
So that's why America doesn't use the metric system.
It took me a few seconds to get that, but that gave me a good chuckle. Thanks!
Metricide was developed as a sterilizing fluid- but nowadays it is actually used more by fish keepers than it is for sterilizing things. It turns out that plants use it as a carbon source when it's in the water column and in low doses it doesn't hurt fish or inverts. (it has the added benefit of killing algae though).
Rather than killing the metric system... I actually add it in mL - I add 15mL of it to my main planted aquarium each morning just before the lights come on. Seachem sell a version of Metricide called Florin Excel- only they jack up the price about 10 times the rate.
My claim to fame is, I have an @gmail.com first name. Yeah... and everyone uses it as their fake throw-away e-mail address.
The upshot of that is, I keep cancelling one fool's haircut appointments because the reminders for it keep coming to my inbox.
I'm interested to see how this technology develops but I do suspect it has certain limitations. For example, I just ordered a gallon of metricide, I somehow suspect your average delivery drone couldn't deliver that; it would have been too heavy. Only lighter weight deliveries I suspect are practical to deliver this way.
It would be interesting to see, just how much can be carried by drone; and if deliveries become more common by drone, does that mean delivery of heavy items becomes more expensive? If there are fewer packages going on a certain route price per package goes up. So if drones are delivering all the light-weight items, items which are above the drone's threshold will therefore be more expensive to deliver.
lol. Yeah, I missed out the word "stronger" there. Yes, I wouldn't want to be in a traditional aircraft without a fuselage either.
You're in the wrong demographic. The Amazon Fire 7 is available for under $50 (as low as $29.99 last Thanksgiving) and the Fire HD 8 is discounted to $69.99 several times a year. They don't require data plans or monthly subscriptions, which makes them ideal for people on an extremely limited budget -- just head down to McDonald's or the local library for free wi-fi.
To be fair, I own one of those Fire tablets. And an Asus. I guess I personally own more tablets than desktops... I just never use any of them and I never see anyone else using them. I see more notebooks than tablets in public too.
I guess the key is, everyone probably owns tablet(s) but that doesn't mean they use them.
I would love it if every one of the Top 5 (Apple, Microsoft, Google/Alphabet, Facebook, Amazon) said "You know what? Fuck it. We're out" and just left Europe entirely. Just leave it to its own devices.
The EU is larger economically than the US. Sure, they could leave, but they'd be losing a huge % of their profits. They don't want to do that. They also know if they left the EU it would give other countries free roam to fill in the gap and create their own companies doing the same thing. Those companies could then operate in the US.
It would be a death knell to those companies to leave the EU.
Is EU paying google to run search service? Why they are treated like a public sponsored company or utility company?
They are private business and they return results anyway they want to.
Because the EU has sovereignty over the EU and has the right to tell any country that operates within their jurisdiction what to do.
Google has the right to not do business in the EU if it doesn't like the laws there.
The US does similar things all the time with companies from other countries.
If you operate in the US you follow US rules there. If you operate in the EU you follow EU rules there.
... Esp when your own system is currenty partially out of order due to being ruled by certain somebody with a dog instead of hair on his head. ;)
That's no dog. Dog is man's best friend; dog's wouldn't have anything to do with Trump.
It's more likely a rat.
To be fair, I've sat next to many people on American Airlines who could have benefitted from an in-flight shower. I'd sacrifice getting wet in exchange for them bathing.
Tablets? What is this 2010; I thought that fad was more or less over; I don't know anyone who uses tablets besides kids. Cell phones... yes. Almost everyone I know is glued to a cell phone... but tablets seriously? This article is from 2018 not 2010 right?
Scotty gave you the formula in 1986 where is it!
Yes, I love how he had never used the software before, and had never used a keyboard and mouse before; but he was able to type at 160 wpm and use the software to create the blueprints for transparent aluminium in seconds flat.
This is Emirates Airlines we're talking about. The people who charge $15,000 a ticket and give you a bed seat and an in-flight shower.
I'm glad Delta doesn't have in flight showers. I'm sure I'd be crammed next to some jackass taking a shower and there's no way I'm not getting sprayed in those cramped quarters.
They want to take away the ONE THING I love about flying?
They might want to but it is very unlikely that they will, or that it will work if they ever get as far as doing it. The London Underground used to have windowless carriages in Victorian times because, as the reasoning went, there was nothing to look at going through a tunnel all the time. Despite this, they were massively unpopular, caused motion sickness etc. and were rapidly replaced with windows. I suspect that this will turn out to be true for aeroplanes as well.
LCD screens weren't very good in the Victorian days though.
Unlikely anything is going away due to passenger preferences and US FAA rules. In an emergency, windows are useful -- nice to know if there's any damage to the wings/engines and if there's fire/water/etc on the side you're planning to evac from. Cameras don't work without power.
Cameras don't use much power and an individual backup power supply could be provided to each camera. As long as there is also backup power in the cockpit, they can see any camera from the cockpit to judge what is safe.
Actually the rest of the plane does need windows. In an emergency, flight attendants are supposed to look through them to see whether there's anything wrong with the wings and engines (and more importantly, which one), since the cockpit windows don't extend far enough back to allow that. Cameras are great and all, but they tend to fail in lightning strikes or when the plane has issues with electrical power.
I'm not an expert and I don't even play one on TV; however, I would suspect there needs to be a balancing act done here. Someone needs to crunch some numbers.
Will the number of lives saved by having a fuselage outweigh the number of lives lost because of every camera being taken out at the same time trying to view the engine/wing. (and all sensors failing to work too). How often are those cameras going to go out?
What I think would be a smart middle step would be to run cameras on some planes that HAVE windows and see how reliable those cameras are. Try that for a few years first. If the cameras tend to work in all conditions... Hey, maybe give windowless a go. If the cameras have problems, aren't you glad you didn't go windowless without a trial run first on a windowed plane?
There might be some advantages to cameras over windows. The lighting can be adjusted so you get better visibility in the dark. Perhaps they can detect infra-red so you can see if the engine is running hot if you doubt the temperature gauge is accurate for some reason. Heck, the pilot can look out the side of the plane himself whilst remaining in the cockpit.
Aesthetically, being in an aeroplane without windows would suck... but I'm all for them looking into whether it really is safer. Just test the camera BEFORE you remove the windows.
p>Umm, "before the turn of the millennium" means "before 3000AD", not before 2118....
No kidding!
More damage where they hit, but doesn't that also mean you have more time to evacuate people to get out of the path. In theory a slower moving hurricane may mean more damage but should it not mean less human fatalities? At least in places that have the financial ability to move people out the path.
We will be long gone by then... there's no rush.
Barring extinction by some event before then, I have little doubt we will be a fully interstellar species before the next turn of the millennium.
It would be a pretty depressing thing if we weren't interplanetary by 2118. Interstellar? That's a different order of magnitude and impossible to guess when we might even come close to that.
So I just have to wait a few hundred million years for those extra hours each day I have been wanting? Sweet.
When days are 8 hours longer than they are today, you're just going to have to put with 16hr long work days.
How does the expansion of the Sun factor into this?
If the total mass of the sun isn't increasing, and the distance from the center of the sun isn't increasing; I wouldn't expect it does make a difference... at least not whilst it isn't expanded enough to engulf us.
Just what I was thinking. Seems to me I read that by 4 billion years from now the sun will be a red giant the size of the earth's orbit.
Fantastic. That's approximately when I expect to be able to finally retire.