App or no app, traffic in cities and suburbs is something that is going to need to be dealt with somehow. Cities like Boston or New York at least have a workable public transit system to keep some cars off the roads. LA is totally different -- it was built around cars and is only now getting a very small set of public transit choices. Buses do nothing when they're stuck in the same traffic everyone else is. Whenever I go to California for work (either northern or southern,) it amazes me how much people put up with to live there. I would go nuts spending 2 hours doing a 10 mile trip each direction every day.
Some trends are encouraging from a traffic perspective, but maybe not from a demographic one. Younger people aren't buying suburban houses and having big families the way they used to, so it's possible cities will become denser like they are in Europe. The big thing that has to stop, especially in mid-size cities, is the suburban sprawl. The ability to expand for miles in every direction directly contributes to messy traffic problems. Urban planners need to look into reclaiming hollowed-out cities and first ring suburbs, and getting people to move back into them.
Add dedicated bus lanes and dedicated bike lanes and motivate people to stop being so fucking lazy.
+1 insightful. People aren't running over pedestrians due to nefarious overly-wide A pillars; they're running over pedestrians because they're not paying attention and are talking on their phones and are more concerned with looking for a break in traffic so they can gun it through the intersection so they just run over people. it's ultimately because people are selfish. that's why when I'm a pedestrian I carry a "deterrent".
No - I work with someone who is very serious about life and work and he recently had a significant (his car totaled) accident at an intersection because the car arriving from his right was hidden by the right front A-pillar until they were too close for him to stop.
In this country (France), if there are no signs to the contrary one must yield to traffic coming from the right. Regardless of how idiotic this may be, it is the law here and my colleague was held to be responsible for the accident.
When people get their panties in a twist about how much "wealth" the Walton family has it just shows they don't understand what wealth is.
Their "wealth" is paper. They could be worth X millions one day and X - a butt load of money the next. It has no impact on how much they can spend at lunch or whether they get the premium cable package or the standard. It's not cash. They'd have to sell or take out loans against their shares if they wanted to go buy a Private Jet or something like that.
So the fact they are worth a few billion in paper doesn't diminish your pay check at all.
Cash is also 'paper' and wealth doesn't need to be cash anyway.
That being said, they probably also have more cash on hand than the lower half of Americans combined as well.
That's what they would do if they had a functioning police department or legal system in France, but they haven't had that for many years. You might remember that they had a plague of thugs setting cars on fire a year or so ago, and the cops didn't even try to arrest any of them.
It is like you don't even know France... Obstructing traffic is against the law, but also a thing that happens routinely as a part of demonstations. Usually it is farmers though.
The reason it is common, is that the French government routinely caves in to the demands of whomever throws the biggest tantrum, and the French voters routinely support the appeasement. In America, causing disruption and chaos is the best way to lose public sympathy for your cause. In France it is the best way to get it.
I know that sometimes on Slashdot, we get 'stuff that matters,' but can't we at least talk about the police drones involved in the situation? Or even that Uber is reportedly charging users a minimum $100 to get out of Sydney CBD. At least attempt to make it seem relevant please?
Uber is probably going to be irrelevant before long as they're being banned in more an more countries. France just announced that Uber will be banned starting in the new year.
The interesting thing is that, if they are using outsourced servers strategically located in Asia to avoid the long arm of the law, that people should be able attack those same servers and do pretty much anything they want to them without fear of consequences. Being beyond the law is a double edged sword, and I personally would not bet against all the hackers on the Internet in that fight...
Yes Japan and Singapore are so well known for being lawless.
One of the religious prohibitions in Islam is making war with fire.
If this is used it will be interesting to see the effects on recruiting by the Islamic State and other anti-US organizations among those Muslims who are currently either opposed to them or unaligned.
Also: How do you keep a 30 kW laser, at any frequency, from blinding everybody in the general direction of the target? The last I heard, weapons that blind are banned by the current "laws of war" as recognized by the western powers - and that's been the major impeidment so far to deploying laser (and other directed energy) weapons. Has something changed? Or did the current administration just decide to play with the new toy despite past promises to the other kids?
There's fire in exploding gunpowder or explosives already so I doubt this would be any more forbidden.
"Blinding as an incidental or collateral effect of the legitimate military employment of laser systems, including laser systems used against optical equipment, is not covered by the prohibition of this Protocol." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
when you've done your time, you've done your time. that should be the end of it and, aside from some very limited cases like not letting pedos work with kids, discrimination against former criminals should be illegal....even a fuckwit yank should be able to figure out that if ex-crims can't get jobs and have no choice but crime to support themselves then that's what they'll do.
The irony of you calling anyone else a judgmental prick is kind of funny, which is good because the rest of your post is just idiotic.
Maybe you've heard the phrase 'repeat offender'. Complicated, I know, but I'm sure you'll figure it out if you think about it for awhile.
North Korea is already sanctioned pretty hard. I'm curious what happens when a nation state attacks a multinational company. Do the nations that said company is registered in team up to respond? Do they elect a body to deal with it? And if so, how large does a multinational have to be to elicit such a response?
NK can do whatever they want because they're stuck to China.
Wasn't long ago that they were threatening to nuke American interests and they got away with that cold.
... a bird. And airplanes hit birds on approach almost every day. Certainly every week.
N417SW SKYWEST AIRLINES FLIGHT SKW2608 BOMBARDIER CL600 AIRCRAFT ON FINAL, STRUCK BIRDS, LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT, DAMAGE TO AIRCRAFT IS MINOR, SACRAMENTO, CA http://www.asias.faa.gov/pls/a...
UAVs (sometimes called "drones") shouldn't be operating around airports but the likelihood of one downing a transport category aircraft is just about zero.
Might depend on if it's got a couple of sticks of dynamite (or whatever) stuck to it when it gets sucked into an engine.
The police are under civil law, therefore they are "civilians" by the definition of the word.
No, they stop being civilians when they arm up as soldiers.
We have two systems of law in this country: civil and military. Unless they're bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice - which applies only to those in the uniformed services of the US. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U... for more details.
Short version: they're "civilians" whether they like it or not.
You're talking about law and politics where I'm talking about reality.
When you take a bunch of people, arm them and train them to kill then they are an army. Law, no law, whatever. They're still an army by the definition of the word 'army'.
People in an army are soldiers, by the definition of the word 'soldier'.
Whether or not those people are governed by a specific law has nothing to do with the reality of what they are. Them liking it or not has even less than nothing to do with it.
I employ people in the USA in small IT and EE/IC specialty design shops. Most expert-level employees seem to come with white or grey hair. One of my IT geeks is a "MT Dew Diabetic." Avoiding the maintenance of medical records is simply not an option in the USA, given our laws and court rulings. We have to comply with ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), keep records of workman's comp medical restrictions, including very specific information, on what an employee may and may not do as well as provide emergency information to first responders. While often inconvenient, these are requirements I cannot avoid. Some of my employees have medical conditions (heart conditions, organ replacement, severe allergies, diabetes, unusual prescriptions of controlled sumstances, etc.) that they want known and available to first responders showing up at the office if they collapse clutching their heart or go into a sugar coma. Complicating this, if one of your customers is a Federal agency or Defense, you must, by law, have a "zero tolerance policy" for controlled substances. All this requires records to prove or excuse. For government accusations, corporations are "effectively guilty" until they prove themselves innocent with appropriate record keeping. Making this even more difficult, USA court rulings say we're also not allowed to store this information in their personal files, but must keep it in a separate, access controlled file, otherwise we could get sued if that person missed a pay raise or promotion because it was available to anyone reviewing their service and discipline records. The separate files seem silly when the teams are small enough that everyone knows each other very well anyway. Also, what if the employee who first greets the medics from the ambulance don't have easy access the secured medical files? Isn't that an even worse problem? Sued if you do. Sued if you don't. Sued if you didn't do it the nuanced way a team of $300/hr attorneys thinks you should have half-way done it. Nuisance suits are common in the USA.
As a practical matter, a lot of valuable talent is not healthy. Many experts are experts because they have been at a speciality for 30-60yrs. If you have an employee that has an epileptic seizure, you don't want the rest of the team to stand there confused and gawking. You want them to recognize it and intervening to protect that individual's head and spine from injury. I had an employee with mental health issues under the care of a psychiatrist. While she was physically 100% capable (she was young and athletic) yet she was restricted from certain emotionally triggering situations. You want their supervisor trained know what those are and how to avoid it. You want a written record, periodically refreshed, that her supervisor knows and understands. You could say "I don't want to deal with that" but then you lose out on some great talent. Imagine a physics institute that didn't want to deal with maintaining medical records for Stephan Hawking.
Or, the government could put this information on an encrypted card the person keeps on them thus removing the need for companies to keep (and lose) private medical information on hand.
The ugly truth about NYC is that it would be ungovernable without a very large and powerful police force because it's an extremely diverse and class stratified city. Studies have repeatedly shown that trust people between strangers deteriorates as a function of the increased diversity of a population. Does this mean minorities and such are "bad?" Of course not. What it means is that a city which is basically a miniature United Nations is going to be likely held together by an iron fist in a velvet glove, not shared customs and values which often lead to conflict resolution without getting the state involved.
No because a most diverse environment with one person per ethnicity would result in a balance of (dis)trust.
It's when groups of people get together and want the same limited resources that conflict results.
Every night from 9pm-5am turn off the electricty. Better yet, random rolling blackouts. Let them know what it's like to live somewhere where energy has to be rationed. Kids take it for granted
What happens if the investments in fossil fuel companies turn out the be the most profitable and the school loses money?
As Harvard's president said "the endowment is a resource, not an instrument to impel social or political change"
On that basis the school may as well invest in prostitution, gambling, drug smuggling, money laundering and arming terrorists.
At some point a judgement call has to be made about what is acceptable for a school to do with charitable contributions. It's not like Harvard is going to notice anything at all financially if they dump these stocks.
Slashdot Mirror
App or no app, traffic in cities and suburbs is something that is going to need to be dealt with somehow. Cities like Boston or New York at least have a workable public transit system to keep some cars off the roads. LA is totally different -- it was built around cars and is only now getting a very small set of public transit choices. Buses do nothing when they're stuck in the same traffic everyone else is. Whenever I go to California for work (either northern or southern,) it amazes me how much people put up with to live there. I would go nuts spending 2 hours doing a 10 mile trip each direction every day.
Some trends are encouraging from a traffic perspective, but maybe not from a demographic one. Younger people aren't buying suburban houses and having big families the way they used to, so it's possible cities will become denser like they are in Europe. The big thing that has to stop, especially in mid-size cities, is the suburban sprawl. The ability to expand for miles in every direction directly contributes to messy traffic problems. Urban planners need to look into reclaiming hollowed-out cities and first ring suburbs, and getting people to move back into them.
Add dedicated bus lanes and dedicated bike lanes and motivate people to stop being so fucking lazy.
+1 insightful. People aren't running over pedestrians due to nefarious overly-wide A pillars; they're running over pedestrians because they're not paying attention and are talking on their phones and are more concerned with looking for a break in traffic so they can gun it through the intersection so they just run over people. it's ultimately because people are selfish. that's why when I'm a pedestrian I carry a "deterrent".
No - I work with someone who is very serious about life and work and he recently had a significant (his car totaled) accident at an intersection because the car arriving from his right was hidden by the right front A-pillar until they were too close for him to stop.
In this country (France), if there are no signs to the contrary one must yield to traffic coming from the right. Regardless of how idiotic this may be, it is the law here and my colleague was held to be responsible for the accident.
When people get their panties in a twist about how much "wealth" the Walton family has it just shows they don't understand what wealth is.
Their "wealth" is paper. They could be worth X millions one day and X - a butt load of money the next. It has no impact on how much they can spend at lunch or whether they get the premium cable package or the standard. It's not cash. They'd have to sell or take out loans against their shares if they wanted to go buy a Private Jet or something like that.
So the fact they are worth a few billion in paper doesn't diminish your pay check at all.
Cash is also 'paper' and wealth doesn't need to be cash anyway.
That being said, they probably also have more cash on hand than the lower half of Americans combined as well.
That's what they would do if they had a functioning police department or legal system in France, but they haven't had that for many years. You might remember that they had a plague of thugs setting cars on fire a year or so ago, and the cops didn't even try to arrest any of them.
-jcr
2888 people arrested over the 20 nights:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2...
It is like you don't even know France... Obstructing traffic is against the law, but also a thing that happens routinely as a part of demonstations. Usually it is farmers though.
The reason it is common, is that the French government routinely caves in to the demands of whomever throws the biggest tantrum, and the French voters routinely support the appeasement. In America, causing disruption and chaos is the best way to lose public sympathy for your cause. In France it is the best way to get it.
You mean like this?
"Paris bans UberPOP as taxi drivers stage protest"
http://www.france24.com/en/201...
You jest... but in Texas, we have over 800,000 concealed carry permit holders... and gun battles don't break out, well, ever between them...
Really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
http://www.stoptheshootings.or...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2...
etc
I know that sometimes on Slashdot, we get 'stuff that matters,' but can't we at least talk about the police drones involved in the situation? Or even that Uber is reportedly charging users a minimum $100 to get out of Sydney CBD. At least attempt to make it seem relevant please?
Uber is probably going to be irrelevant before long as they're being banned in more an more countries. France just announced that Uber will be banned starting in the new year.
The interesting thing is that, if they are using outsourced servers strategically located in Asia to avoid the long arm of the law, that people should be able attack those same servers and do pretty much anything they want to them without fear of consequences. Being beyond the law is a double edged sword, and I personally would not bet against all the hackers on the Internet in that fight...
Yes Japan and Singapore are so well known for being lawless.
Of all the email front ends that I have ever used, I have nothing but slowness and crashes from Yahoo no matter what platform I'm on.
Anyone else having this experience?
One of the religious prohibitions in Islam is making war with fire.
If this is used it will be interesting to see the effects on recruiting by the Islamic State and other anti-US organizations among those Muslims who are currently either opposed to them or unaligned.
Also: How do you keep a 30 kW laser, at any frequency, from blinding everybody in the general direction of the target? The last I heard, weapons that blind are banned by the current "laws of war" as recognized by the western powers - and that's been the major impeidment so far to deploying laser (and other directed energy) weapons. Has something changed? Or did the current administration just decide to play with the new toy despite past promises to the other kids?
There's fire in exploding gunpowder or explosives already so I doubt this would be any more forbidden.
"Blinding as an incidental or collateral effect of the legitimate military employment of laser systems, including laser systems used against optical equipment, is not covered by the prohibition of this Protocol."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
why are americans such judgemental pricks?
when you've done your time, you've done your time. that should be the end of it and, aside from some very limited cases like not letting pedos work with kids, discrimination against former criminals should be illegal....even a fuckwit yank should be able to figure out that if ex-crims can't get jobs and have no choice but crime to support themselves then that's what they'll do.
The irony of you calling anyone else a judgmental prick is kind of funny, which is good because the rest of your post is just idiotic.
Maybe you've heard the phrase 'repeat offender'. Complicated, I know, but I'm sure you'll figure it out if you think about it for awhile.
Start your own company. Customers aren't going to check your background unless you're trying to sell them security services - and maybe not even then.
North Korea is already sanctioned pretty hard. I'm curious what happens when a nation state attacks a multinational company. Do the nations that said company is registered in team up to respond? Do they elect a body to deal with it? And if so, how large does a multinational have to be to elicit such a response?
NK can do whatever they want because they're stuck to China.
Wasn't long ago that they were threatening to nuke American interests and they got away with that cold.
N417SW SKYWEST AIRLINES FLIGHT SKW2608 BOMBARDIER CL600 AIRCRAFT ON FINAL, STRUCK BIRDS, LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT, DAMAGE TO AIRCRAFT IS MINOR, SACRAMENTO, CA
http://www.asias.faa.gov/pls/a...
UAVs (sometimes called "drones") shouldn't be operating around airports but the likelihood of one downing a transport category aircraft is just about zero.
Might depend on if it's got a couple of sticks of dynamite (or whatever) stuck to it when it gets sucked into an engine.
The police are under civil law, therefore they are "civilians" by the definition of the word.
No, they stop being civilians when they arm up as soldiers.
We have two systems of law in this country: civil and military. Unless they're bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice - which applies only to those in the uniformed services of the US. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U... for more details.
Short version: they're "civilians" whether they like it or not.
You're talking about law and politics where I'm talking about reality.
When you take a bunch of people, arm them and train them to kill then they are an army. Law, no law, whatever. They're still an army by the definition of the word 'army'.
People in an army are soldiers, by the definition of the word 'soldier'.
Whether or not those people are governed by a specific law has nothing to do with the reality of what they are. Them liking it or not has even less than nothing to do with it.
The police are under civil law, therefore they are "civilians" by the definition of the word.
No, they stop being civilians when they arm up as soldiers.
soldier
sld/
noun
noun: soldier; plural noun: soldiers
1.
a person who serves in an army.
and recursively:
army
mi/
noun
noun: army; plural noun: armies
1.
an organized military force equipped for fighting on land.
source: www.google.com
I employ people in the USA in small IT and EE/IC specialty design shops. Most expert-level employees seem to come with white or grey hair. One of my IT geeks is a "MT Dew Diabetic." Avoiding the maintenance of medical records is simply not an option in the USA, given our laws and court rulings. We have to comply with ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), keep records of workman's comp medical restrictions, including very specific information, on what an employee may and may not do as well as provide emergency information to first responders. While often inconvenient, these are requirements I cannot avoid. Some of my employees have medical conditions (heart conditions, organ replacement, severe allergies, diabetes, unusual prescriptions of controlled sumstances, etc.) that they want known and available to first responders showing up at the office if they collapse clutching their heart or go into a sugar coma. Complicating this, if one of your customers is a Federal agency or Defense, you must, by law, have a "zero tolerance policy" for controlled substances. All this requires records to prove or excuse. For government accusations, corporations are "effectively guilty" until they prove themselves innocent with appropriate record keeping. Making this even more difficult, USA court rulings say we're also not allowed to store this information in their personal files, but must keep it in a separate, access controlled file, otherwise we could get sued if that person missed a pay raise or promotion because it was available to anyone reviewing their service and discipline records. The separate files seem silly when the teams are small enough that everyone knows each other very well anyway. Also, what if the employee who first greets the medics from the ambulance don't have easy access the secured medical files? Isn't that an even worse problem? Sued if you do. Sued if you don't. Sued if you didn't do it the nuanced way a team of $300/hr attorneys thinks you should have half-way done it. Nuisance suits are common in the USA.
As a practical matter, a lot of valuable talent is not healthy. Many experts are experts because they have been at a speciality for 30-60yrs. If you have an employee that has an epileptic seizure, you don't want the rest of the team to stand there confused and gawking. You want them to recognize it and intervening to protect that individual's head and spine from injury. I had an employee with mental health issues under the care of a psychiatrist. While she was physically 100% capable (she was young and athletic) yet she was restricted from certain emotionally triggering situations. You want their supervisor trained know what those are and how to avoid it. You want a written record, periodically refreshed, that her supervisor knows and understands. You could say "I don't want to deal with that" but then you lose out on some great talent. Imagine a physics institute that didn't want to deal with maintaining medical records for Stephan Hawking.
Or, the government could put this information on an encrypted card the person keeps on them thus removing the need for companies to keep (and lose) private medical information on hand.
How far will 50,000 cameras go, nationwide, when the NYPD alone has some 34,500 troops?
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/h...
The ugly truth about NYC is that it would be ungovernable without a very large and powerful police force because it's an extremely diverse and class stratified city. Studies have repeatedly shown that trust people between strangers deteriorates as a function of the increased diversity of a population. Does this mean minorities and such are "bad?" Of course not. What it means is that a city which is basically a miniature United Nations is going to be likely held together by an iron fist in a velvet glove, not shared customs and values which often lead to conflict resolution without getting the state involved.
No because a most diverse environment with one person per ethnicity would result in a balance of (dis)trust.
It's when groups of people get together and want the same limited resources that conflict results.
If you choose to piss off the powers that be then you have to be prepared to accept the consequences.
FTFY
Does the National Weather Service need that computing power all the time, or could they buy it during major hurricanes from cloud services?
Duh. It's the national weather service of course they use clouds.
Simply put the US population (or at least the portion that politicians pay attention to) seem unwilling to fund being first.
As likely much of the US population believes they are first in everything, regardless of the reality. Why invest when the perception is already there?
Every night from 9pm-5am turn off the electricty. Better yet, random rolling blackouts. Let them know what it's like to live somewhere where energy has to be rationed. Kids take it for granted
Or maybe you need to learn something from the kids and move forward :
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11...
What happens if the investments in fossil fuel companies turn out the be the most profitable and the school loses money?
As Harvard's president said "the endowment is a resource, not an instrument to impel social or political change"
On that basis the school may as well invest in prostitution, gambling, drug smuggling, money laundering and arming terrorists.
At some point a judgement call has to be made about what is acceptable for a school to do with charitable contributions. It's not like Harvard is going to notice anything at all financially if they dump these stocks.
And they'd be justified.
On what basis?
Do you really think that the school would get away lightly with expelling these students for exercising their right to free speech?