That should have happened when the US government required better CAFE numbers back in the day. It didn't really pan out that well because a lot of people stopped driving sedans and station wagons and started driving SUVs, pickups, and Quad-cab pickups. Driving heaver vehicles that can accelerate faster because then engines are higher horsepower negates a lot of the efficiency gains made to IC engines over the past couple of decades.
We'll have to see how the vehicles meeting the new CAFE standards start to mix with what's already on the road.
Let them climb in through the side window like NASCAR drivers.~ Of course, you'd either need to keep the window down when you're not in your car, or you'd have to rig up a remote power window control.
On the subject of deportation, the last time I looked, a significant number of illegal immigrants are coming from the countries South of Mexico. Mexico obviously is not going to take in any illegal immigrants that we want to deport, which means that we'd have to send the back, typically using commercial aircraft. That gets expensive. So, yes, it's cheaper to turn them out on the streets. Go figure.
There's a HUGE number of traffic light controllers that can't be modified remotely. Too many people have been watching movies like the Italian Job, where changing the programming can be done remotely.
No, the companies making the RTCs didn't modify the chip with the new standard, or make it programmable. PCs, of course, stopped using the RTC to adjust for daylight saving time long ago, but that same RTC, due to its popularity, went into a lot of controllers that run from firmware and relied on the RTC for DST adjustments. I remember at least one traffic signal controller company did change their firmware to handle the time change, and disable the DST function on the RTC. They didn't like it, but that's all that they could do.
In 2005 when DST was changed, a lot of traffic signals were affected. Many of them used a clock (The same RTC used in the IBM AT) that had the DST start and end times 'hard-wired' into the IC. The clock is used to set the traffic timing for rush hour. It was a major PIA to switch and add the DST function into firmware. It would still be a PIA to change them all again.
I'm not sure that most ad blocking will reduce the data. I remember some years back that I blocked ads coming from one particular service at the firewall--I couldn't even use the website that was using that ad service. I was under the impression that software ad blocking usually just diverted the ads into a bit bucket. But that wouldn't keep the data from passing through the modem, which would count against your cap. I'm just waiting for the day that ads add a considerable amount to limited phone data plans.
I caught an episode of Undercover Boss awhile back, where the CEO of Great Wolf Lodge was the principle character. She started at the front desk, and was appalled that it took 20-25 minutes to check in each family. Apparently, over time the tasks required to check in customers had increased so that it was impossible, even for competent help, to check in people quickly. I suspect it's much quicker now. Don't underestimate stupidity at the top level as the cause of poor customer service.
Then why did you choose the cheaper hotel for the one trip? Some people will complain that the more expensive hotel is wasting its money on expensive help. Why pay people a living wage when there's plenty of people looking for work? Then we complain when we get poor service. I don't know how many times a friend complained about the incompetent help at MacDonalds, but he clearly loves the $1 value menu for his 4 kids. You get what you pay for. Usually.
I don't mind IVR when things go right, and if that saves money, fine. It's when things go wrong and you need to talk to a person that you'll find out if the company cares about customer service, or if they're just cheap.
Except that any law passed in these states will not include police/military in the prohibition. My OP was really half-jest. As much as these asshats claim they want minimal laws, they really mean minimal laws restricting businesses.
Government itself is a cooperative formed by it's citizens. So if I'm farmer X, I'll say, gee, farmer Y is closer to the origination point of the fiber we're running than me, but farmer Z is further away. We're all paying the same amount. Unfair! I should pay less. That's what all of the complaints about subsidizing is all about, on an urban/rural scale.
What they're really trying to prevent is someone from taking videos of them in their backyards sunbathing in the nude or doing something with the neighbor's daughter.
Out in the country, you generally use well water, which you pay for yourself. Electricity and telephone service was already there by the time non-farmers started moving out into "the country" anyway.
Most people in rural areas when this all happened were farmers. Back then, people tended to look at farmers as being an important part of the country. You know, feeding everybody. So such things as electric and telephone service were considered the right thing to do. How much of that played into people moving out of cities, I don't know. As far as movement into the suburbs is concerned, I think they pretty much paid their way in getting those services.
...because ultimately, you're taking that money from some other freeloader.
That's a key point. I can pretty much guarantee that anyone who tries to play the "no one else can play with my stuff" card can be shown to be getting some tax break that others of us don't get. They're the ones saying tax somebody else, all the while ignoring the preferences they receive. My point is that everyone nowadays gripes about how others are benefiting at their expense, while ignoring or denying how they benefit at the expense of others.
Power and telephone service to rural areas were subsidized in the US, back before everyone got the "no one else can play with my stuff" attitude that permeates this country today. Internet access could be done the same way, and probably would have been if it had been developed in the '50s. For that matter, nationalized healthcare probably could have been done too. Yes, I'm sure some people didn't like the power/telephone subsidizes back then, but there were enough people who thought it was the right thing to do.
Even worse than using a lossy format, and the fact that mp3s when encoded have lost some of the accuracy of the original data, is that most mainstream music is compressed to within an inch of its life. Ideally, we'd be able to pay a premium for lossless, properly mixed recordings.
You are right, except that if lossless could be marketed correctly, everyone would jump on the bandwagon, even if the majority couldn't tell the difference. And the industry would get to sell the lossless, 'remastered' music for a premium, while the audiophiles get what they want.
When CDs first came out, They were priced at $18 to about $25. This was at Soundwarehouse, an old chain record store back in the day. North Texas area anyway.
That was when their entire stock of CDs could be held in two 6 or 8' store gondolas--one held classical music CDs, the other had R&R CDs on one side and every other genre fit on the other side. That was back when you could buy popular, but not new release, vinyl albums for as little as $5. It was a bit painful paying that much for a CD back then, but otherwise your CD player was just a dust collector.
It's actually a little more complicated; the search results I just looked at shows "mtm special ops" with mtm lined out, with several items listed below that, and then "mtm special ops" with ops lined out, and several items listed below that. In each case, you can click a link to "see all X results"
So the top of the page shows watches and doesn't specifically indicated that the search didn't match exactly. You have to look for the 'modified' searches, and even then it doesn't really tell you that the original search term didn't get an exact match.
Slashdot Mirror
That should have happened when the US government required better CAFE numbers back in the day. It didn't really pan out that well because a lot of people stopped driving sedans and station wagons and started driving SUVs, pickups, and Quad-cab pickups. Driving heaver vehicles that can accelerate faster because then engines are higher horsepower negates a lot of the efficiency gains made to IC engines over the past couple of decades.
We'll have to see how the vehicles meeting the new CAFE standards start to mix with what's already on the road.
This sounds similar to the old days of horsepower ratings, where the engines were stripped of a accessory components, exhaust system, and so on.
Let them climb in through the side window like NASCAR drivers.~ Of course, you'd either need to keep the window down when you're not in your car, or you'd have to rig up a remote power window control.
On the subject of deportation, the last time I looked, a significant number of illegal immigrants are coming from the countries South of Mexico. Mexico obviously is not going to take in any illegal immigrants that we want to deport, which means that we'd have to send the back, typically using commercial aircraft. That gets expensive. So, yes, it's cheaper to turn them out on the streets. Go figure.
There's a HUGE number of traffic light controllers that can't be modified remotely. Too many people have been watching movies like the Italian Job, where changing the programming can be done remotely.
No, the companies making the RTCs didn't modify the chip with the new standard, or make it programmable. PCs, of course, stopped using the RTC to adjust for daylight saving time long ago, but that same RTC, due to its popularity, went into a lot of controllers that run from firmware and relied on the RTC for DST adjustments. I remember at least one traffic signal controller company did change their firmware to handle the time change, and disable the DST function on the RTC. They didn't like it, but that's all that they could do.
So you think that non-profits can't make a profit, nor benefit from the power they have in the community and government that comes with having a lot of money? http://healthland.time.com/2013/02/20/bitter-pill-why-medical-bills-are-killing-us/
In 2005 when DST was changed, a lot of traffic signals were affected. Many of them used a clock (The same RTC used in the IBM AT) that had the DST start and end times 'hard-wired' into the IC. The clock is used to set the traffic timing for rush hour. It was a major PIA to switch and add the DST function into firmware. It would still be a PIA to change them all again.
What do ya know--you can actually sometimes learn something worthwhile on ./
Thx.
I'm not sure that most ad blocking will reduce the data. I remember some years back that I blocked ads coming from one particular service at the firewall--I couldn't even use the website that was using that ad service. I was under the impression that software ad blocking usually just diverted the ads into a bit bucket. But that wouldn't keep the data from passing through the modem, which would count against your cap. I'm just waiting for the day that ads add a considerable amount to limited phone data plans.
Illuminated by Earthlight.
I caught an episode of Undercover Boss awhile back, where the CEO of Great Wolf Lodge was the principle character. She started at the front desk, and was appalled that it took 20-25 minutes to check in each family. Apparently, over time the tasks required to check in customers had increased so that it was impossible, even for competent help, to check in people quickly. I suspect it's much quicker now. Don't underestimate stupidity at the top level as the cause of poor customer service.
Apparently 3/3s also don't like paying more for a better hotel that actually pays enough to attract intelligent people to run their front desk.
Then why did you choose the cheaper hotel for the one trip? Some people will complain that the more expensive hotel is wasting its money on expensive help. Why pay people a living wage when there's plenty of people looking for work? Then we complain when we get poor service. I don't know how many times a friend complained about the incompetent help at MacDonalds, but he clearly loves the $1 value menu for his 4 kids. You get what you pay for. Usually.
I don't mind IVR when things go right, and if that saves money, fine. It's when things go wrong and you need to talk to a person that you'll find out if the company cares about customer service, or if they're just cheap.
You mean un-pass English.
Except that any law passed in these states will not include police/military in the prohibition. My OP was really half-jest. As much as these asshats claim they want minimal laws, they really mean minimal laws restricting businesses.
Government itself is a cooperative formed by it's citizens. So if I'm farmer X, I'll say, gee, farmer Y is closer to the origination point of the fiber we're running than me, but farmer Z is further away. We're all paying the same amount. Unfair! I should pay less. That's what all of the complaints about subsidizing is all about, on an urban/rural scale.
What they're really trying to prevent is someone from taking videos of them in their backyards sunbathing in the nude or doing something with the neighbor's daughter.
Out in the country, you generally use well water, which you pay for yourself. Electricity and telephone service was already there by the time non-farmers started moving out into "the country" anyway.
Most people in rural areas when this all happened were farmers. Back then, people tended to look at farmers as being an important part of the country. You know, feeding everybody. So such things as electric and telephone service were considered the right thing to do. How much of that played into people moving out of cities, I don't know. As far as movement into the suburbs is concerned, I think they pretty much paid their way in getting those services.
...because ultimately, you're taking that money from some other freeloader.
That's a key point. I can pretty much guarantee that anyone who tries to play the "no one else can play with my stuff" card can be shown to be getting some tax break that others of us don't get. They're the ones saying tax somebody else, all the while ignoring the preferences they receive. My point is that everyone nowadays gripes about how others are benefiting at their expense, while ignoring or denying how they benefit at the expense of others.
Power and telephone service to rural areas were subsidized in the US, back before everyone got the "no one else can play with my stuff" attitude that permeates this country today. Internet access could be done the same way, and probably would have been if it had been developed in the '50s. For that matter, nationalized healthcare probably could have been done too. Yes, I'm sure some people didn't like the power/telephone subsidizes back then, but there were enough people who thought it was the right thing to do.
Even worse than using a lossy format, and the fact that mp3s when encoded have lost some of the accuracy of the original data, is that most mainstream music is compressed to within an inch of its life. Ideally, we'd be able to pay a premium for lossless, properly mixed recordings.
You are right, except that if lossless could be marketed correctly, everyone would jump on the bandwagon, even if the majority couldn't tell the difference. And the industry would get to sell the lossless, 'remastered' music for a premium, while the audiophiles get what they want.
When CDs first came out, They were priced at $18 to about $25. This was at Soundwarehouse, an old chain record store back in the day. North Texas area anyway.
That was when their entire stock of CDs could be held in two 6 or 8' store gondolas--one held classical music CDs, the other had R&R CDs on one side and every other genre fit on the other side. That was back when you could buy popular, but not new release, vinyl albums for as little as $5. It was a bit painful paying that much for a CD back then, but otherwise your CD player was just a dust collector.
It's actually a little more complicated; the search results I just looked at shows "mtm special ops" with mtm lined out, with several items listed below that, and then "mtm special ops" with ops lined out, and several items listed below that. In each case, you can click a link to "see all X results"
So the top of the page shows watches and doesn't specifically indicated that the search didn't match exactly. You have to look for the 'modified' searches, and even then it doesn't really tell you that the original search term didn't get an exact match.
RIGHT!
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=mtm+special+ops
It doesn't say that if you don't include quotes, which I suspect most users won't.