It's the God's honest mate. Registered address was central London. Lowest quote I could get was £3,800 and that was only by being economical with the truth (i.e. any insurance company would drop my ass if they found out). The bizarre thing is that the quote dropped to £1,300 when I used my old address.
Tried this on a number of comparison websites and I couldn't get below £4,000 for my London address without being totally upfront and honest.
It's not about sob stories. If the government genuinely wants to stop the amount of uninsured drivers on the road, it should cap ludicrous insurance premiums. If you want to get people into public transport, make it less shit. If you want to stop uninsured drivers, don't force them into a game of chicken with exorbitant premiums. It's not rocket science, it's commonsense, which sadly appears not to be common enough.
My premiums have actually been rising over the last 2 years despite having a totally clean license, never had an accident and never been convicted of a motoring offence. £800 went up to £850 the following year and that became £1,000 the year after when I moved house to an area with *lower* car crime rates.
The whole system is corrupt as can be. Insurance is mandatory (fair enough), but they charge so much that it is out of reach for people who genuinely *need* it, so they drive uninsured. Insurance companies then raise prices, blaming uninsured drivers, forcing yet more people who want to abide the law out of the market.
And what's even worse? People who would struggle with the exorbitant rates are shafted YET AGAIN because paying monthly is A LOT more expensive than paying annually.
And then what happens if you do have an accident? The insurance company goes out of its way to make sure it doesn't have to pay you a penny. The whole thing makes me feel physically and violently ill. (apologies for the rant!)
Fucking A. However, I'd be more excited if this initiative resulted in falling car insurance premiums, which I doubt it will. Just yesterday I was quoted between £4,000 and £12,000 for car insurance for a 7 year old Honda S2000, despite having over 5 years NCB, never having had a speeding ticket, never having had any motoring convictions AND agreeing to have a tracker box fitted to the car.
People who drive uninsured don't do it just because they're all dicks (admittedly, many of them are), but because they're priced out of the freaking market by companies with a license to print money.
On an unrelated note, fuel prices are ~70% tax ffs. And these government shitheads honestly cannot work out why people break the law?
Yeah... I'd say it can go the other way too. Having used Xbox Live, I'm quite sure I game much better when I don't have Timmy Powergamer screaming at me from his mother's basement about how I'm definitely using hax to achieve a positive K:D ratio. The study is a total waste of time because it proves the freaking obvious. It's why the best teams in ALL gaming leagues are not random pugs from IRC recruiting, it's why pugs in MMOs have a much higher failure rate than guild groups.
Which was kind of my point, though admittedly not conveyed clearly enough (d'oh). Electoral fraud already exists by mail, so Internet elections simply replicate the problem through a different medium. And the thing is, until Internet access is 100% accessible to all, mail remains a better standard for proxy voting.
Unless, of course, you use the Internet as a means of taking the population ever closer to that 100% adoption/access rate, in which case there are probably better ways of achieving this than through elections which do not occur regularly enough.
Why is Internet-based voting required anyway? Surely this is a great idea to get those basement dwellers out of the house at least once every four years. There are already systems in place to allow those confined to their homes due to medical circumstances to participate in their democracy. Whether it's done tomorrow or in 30 years time, people will still find ways to break the system. Net result? A colossal waste of money over something that is already in place and works as well as can be expected.
Dammit, I forgot... Well, on the plus side at least Stone Cold Steve Austin isn't getting the Republican Party Nomination this time around...
Re:That's why I like the basic Kindle
on
The eBook Backlash
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Can't say I've ever had a problem reading books on my iPad. But then, I don't have the attention span of a Ritalin-addled toddler.
If the book is any good, distractions shouldn't be an issue. People getting distracted from reading your book? Perhaps that's more a reflection on the quality of your writing, rather than any other convenient excuse...
Actually, the 50MB package still has some throttling in place - but only on upstream, not downstream (but I guess that isn't a problem for you as you've already researched). Only their 100MB package is totally unthrottled with no bandwidth caps. Seriously considering upgrading because a 75% throttle is intense butthurt at weekends (the only time I actually seriously use the 30Mb speeds to let BBC iPlayer download series links, Steam games etc).
to many early employees that sold all or part of them. As soon as too many people own shares, you must legally do an IPO and go public
No, you must legally disclose your corporate financials. If you're going to be forced to divulge that level of information, it only makes sense to have an IPO and raise some capital for investment. Unless of course you are hell bent on controlling the company. You cannot force a company to IPO, only to go public with its books.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the God's honest mate. Registered address was central London. Lowest quote I could get was £3,800 and that was only by being economical with the truth (i.e. any insurance company would drop my ass if they found out). The bizarre thing is that the quote dropped to £1,300 when I used my old address.
Tried this on a number of comparison websites and I couldn't get below £4,000 for my London address without being totally upfront and honest.
Whoosh?
It's not about sob stories. If the government genuinely wants to stop the amount of uninsured drivers on the road, it should cap ludicrous insurance premiums. If you want to get people into public transport, make it less shit. If you want to stop uninsured drivers, don't force them into a game of chicken with exorbitant premiums. It's not rocket science, it's commonsense, which sadly appears not to be common enough.
I wouldn't bank on it :(
My premiums have actually been rising over the last 2 years despite having a totally clean license, never had an accident and never been convicted of a motoring offence. £800 went up to £850 the following year and that became £1,000 the year after when I moved house to an area with *lower* car crime rates.
The whole system is corrupt as can be. Insurance is mandatory (fair enough), but they charge so much that it is out of reach for people who genuinely *need* it, so they drive uninsured. Insurance companies then raise prices, blaming uninsured drivers, forcing yet more people who want to abide the law out of the market.
And what's even worse? People who would struggle with the exorbitant rates are shafted YET AGAIN because paying monthly is A LOT more expensive than paying annually.
And then what happens if you do have an accident? The insurance company goes out of its way to make sure it doesn't have to pay you a penny. The whole thing makes me feel physically and violently ill. (apologies for the rant!)
Fucking A. However, I'd be more excited if this initiative resulted in falling car insurance premiums, which I doubt it will. Just yesterday I was quoted between £4,000 and £12,000 for car insurance for a 7 year old Honda S2000, despite having over 5 years NCB, never having had a speeding ticket, never having had any motoring convictions AND agreeing to have a tracker box fitted to the car.
People who drive uninsured don't do it just because they're all dicks (admittedly, many of them are), but because they're priced out of the freaking market by companies with a license to print money.
On an unrelated note, fuel prices are ~70% tax ffs. And these government shitheads honestly cannot work out why people break the law?
I thought they were the rule rather than the exception for most popular online games... :(
Yeah... I'd say it can go the other way too. Having used Xbox Live, I'm quite sure I game much better when I don't have Timmy Powergamer screaming at me from his mother's basement about how I'm definitely using hax to achieve a positive K:D ratio.
The study is a total waste of time because it proves the freaking obvious. It's why the best teams in ALL gaming leagues are not random pugs from IRC recruiting, it's why pugs in MMOs have a much higher failure rate than guild groups.
Which would be fine, though that's not why they're threatening to cut him off.
New iPad theft awareness campaign?
The expiry date is irrelevant, you'll be sick of the damn thing before that day arrives.
I think you mean ME was a crock, not a tock.
Which was kind of my point, though admittedly not conveyed clearly enough (d'oh). Electoral fraud already exists by mail, so Internet elections simply replicate the problem through a different medium. And the thing is, until Internet access is 100% accessible to all, mail remains a better standard for proxy voting.
Unless, of course, you use the Internet as a means of taking the population ever closer to that 100% adoption/access rate, in which case there are probably better ways of achieving this than through elections which do not occur regularly enough.
Why is Internet-based voting required anyway? Surely this is a great idea to get those basement dwellers out of the house at least once every four years. There are already systems in place to allow those confined to their homes due to medical circumstances to participate in their democracy. Whether it's done tomorrow or in 30 years time, people will still find ways to break the system. Net result? A colossal waste of money over something that is already in place and works as well as can be expected.
The FBI "virtually ignore" them because it's the SECs job. That's like bemoaning the LAPD because it spends no time solving homicides in NYC.
I'm guessing 'renders' after an autocorrect/faceroll attempt at spelling to get a first comment...
Seems more like deja vu. Wasn't Symantec given a pasting in the courts recently for distributing scareware?
This is, by a country mile, the best comment I have read on /. for an awful long time.
I'm being serious, I don't troll... :/
Dammit, I forgot... Well, on the plus side at least Stone Cold Steve Austin isn't getting the Republican Party Nomination this time around...
Can't say I've ever had a problem reading books on my iPad. But then, I don't have the attention span of a Ritalin-addled toddler.
If the book is any good, distractions shouldn't be an issue. People getting distracted from reading your book? Perhaps that's more a reflection on the quality of your writing, rather than any other convenient excuse...
"Gatorade - it's got what plants crave!"
I guess the other bonus is the free upgrade to 100Mb you'd get at some point over the next 9 months that VM are currently implementing. :)
Actually, the 50MB package still has some throttling in place - but only on upstream, not downstream (but I guess that isn't a problem for you as you've already researched). Only their 100MB package is totally unthrottled with no bandwidth caps. Seriously considering upgrading because a 75% throttle is intense butthurt at weekends (the only time I actually seriously use the 30Mb speeds to let BBC iPlayer download series links, Steam games etc).
to many early employees that sold all or part of them. As soon as too many people own shares, you must legally do an IPO and go public
No, you must legally disclose your corporate financials. If you're going to be forced to divulge that level of information, it only makes sense to have an IPO and raise some capital for investment. Unless of course you are hell bent on controlling the company. You cannot force a company to IPO, only to go public with its books.
Everybody knows more cores = more bitches. Nobody wants to be 'that single (core) guy' who is forever alone at the bar.
Ask Anonymous, they were listening in on the call.