...use English. Working for a firm that did medical education for Saudi Arabian doctors and nurses, everything was written in English - the default for the medical community. We had to be careful not to write above a 6th grade level, though, to reach the widest audience.
On most sailboats (and this car is an extension of the principle), the fastest point of sail is a beam reach--directly crosswind. Running the course in the opposite direction would just mean that the crosswind is from the other direction; there would be no advantage.
Sailing downwind can't produce a speed greater than the wind speed. Unless he had a 125mph wind, he wasn't operating downwind.
Then some nimrod put GPS sensors in their cars and started busting them for these behaviors and expecting 8 hours a day work without changing the salary. Effectively cutting the pay for the job by 25% to 33%. Very oppressive- and it will result over time in either higher turnover or higher salaries.
I'm sorry, but expecting people to work while they're on the clock is "very oppressive?" Do me a favor--tell me your name and where you work. I want to make sure I'm not a shareholder, and if I am, I want to talk to your boss.
If I were president, I would put transparency, corruption, and a balanced budget at the top of the list of priorities, because those are like tar that slows everything else down.
Geithner, Daschle, Kirk, Richardson, Killefer...I think he's already put corruption at the top of the list.
The jury isn't the trier of law, that's the judge's job. The jury is the trier of fact.
"It is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumed that courts are the best judges of law. But still both objects are within your power of decision... you [juries] have a right to take it upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy." State Of Georgia v. Brailsford, 3 U.S. 1,4 (1794), written by Chief Justice John Jay (emphasis added).
Seems to me that a contempt-of-court charge and a bill for the costs of the new trial (including the parties' legal bills, of course) for Mr. Powell ought to be plenty of schooling for all of us.
Yes, but I am the paranoid type that has to know EXACTLY where the hook echo is that they are talking about not that by worrying about it will I change anything but still.
And you want to force me to subsidize your neurosis. How cute.
No company does anything out of the goodness of their heart unless it will lead to greater profits and/or market dominance. This is doubly so with the drug industry.
Remind me again where they get the money to do research and development?
What's that? You say the profit on sales of existing drugs funds research into future drugs? And that if companies stopped profiting from previous developments, future advances would stagnate?
If I pay the price of an American made product, will that extra expense make it back to my pocket on my paycheck? Or will it end up in the CEO's pocket?
The owners' pockets, actually. And, with a great many companies, you're perfectly free to become an owner, at least in part.
No, merely reestablish the rights of the employers. The employees are free to associate with whomever they please; in return, the employers are free to not associate with whomever they please.
There is one thing that doesn't seem to be discussed about the Top Gear bit. I agree that emphasizing what happens when you run out of charge--when they didn't kill the battery--isn't entirely fair, but there is a difference between running out of charge and running out of gas.
I can easily walk to a gas station and carry a couple of gallons of gas back to the car, which is enough fuel to carry me at least a couple dozen miles in even a heavy SUV.
How many miles worth of charge can you carry back?
There should be a law requiring providers to advertise the exact amount you will be billed every month. No giving you rate A, then charging you rate A + Taxes B.
I'll meet you halfway: taxes should still be separated out--because I want to know how much the government is taking from me--but all fees and such ought to be rolled into the total price. That includes things like the "Line Number Portability Fee," which the government allows the carriers to collect, but does not mandate (and the revenue goes to the carrier, not the government).
On the other hand, sales tax, the Universal Service Fee, etc. all go to the government. It's important that we be able to see just how much tax is being assessed if we're to keep control of our government.
The eula literally says "NO BENCHMARKING ALLOWED" so this means that this guy isn't even allowed to benchmark. It doesn't say "no posting of a benchmark", it says no benchmarking period. Therefore, he hasn't even done benchmarking. See how this works?
By the same logic, Windows has never been pirated.
Depends on the state. In some states, those signs have no legal force whatsoever. In some states, ignoring them constitutes trespass (though frequently only after being asked to leave). In a few states, carrying past the sign is an offense unto itself.
That said, I--and most people I know--don't do business with anti-gun bigots. Save for the government, of course, but they won't allow me not to do business with them. Yes, DMV, I'm talking about you.
What's the downside? It's not like people are going to consume less gas if the tax goes up.
Gas is not that inelastic. When the price of gas hit $4/gal., I got a bus pass. There's a park-and-ride right by my house, and the express goes straight downtown to where I work. And I now spend 25 minutes each way on leisure reading rather than fighting traffic. Now that gas is cheap, I still ride the bus. Basically, whoever decided to put on the squeeze made a permanent convert. I probably won't ever go back to driving myself. Between gas and parking, I save $200 to $300 a month and I save myself lots of trouble.
And deprive the State of revenue they could be using to buy votes.
Close. It's a means for recovering revenue lost to the success of their old tax scheme.
They argued that gas taxes would encourage fuel efficiency. It did. Now the State needs to make up the lost money, so you get to grab your ankles.
Same way most states continually raise tobacco taxes: they point out that the increased costs will have health benefits, then when it works they raise taxes to recover the lost revenue.
New York is about to do the same on non-diet sodas. DC's mayor admitted that their red-light cameras were working in that there were fewer people running lights, and this was a problem because now they were going to have to find a new source of revenue (no mention of the lives saved, of course).
Government is a ravenous beast that will continue to grow and consume all productivity in sight if left unchecked.
Slashdot Mirror
If this were used to power a glucose meter and microprocessor, and throttled appropriately, could it be used to manage blood sugar for diabetics?
...use English. Working for a firm that did medical education for Saudi Arabian doctors and nurses, everything was written in English - the default for the medical community. We had to be careful not to write above a 6th grade level, though, to reach the widest audience.
That's not English, it's American.
On most sailboats (and this car is an extension of the principle), the fastest point of sail is a beam reach--directly crosswind. Running the course in the opposite direction would just mean that the crosswind is from the other direction; there would be no advantage.
Sailing downwind can't produce a speed greater than the wind speed. Unless he had a 125mph wind, he wasn't operating downwind.
It's a new spin off!
CSI: You're Doing It Wrong
Isn't that all of them?
Then some nimrod put GPS sensors in their cars and started busting them for these behaviors and expecting 8 hours a day work without changing the salary. Effectively cutting the pay for the job by 25% to 33%. Very oppressive- and it will result over time in either higher turnover or higher salaries.
I'm sorry, but expecting people to work while they're on the clock is "very oppressive?" Do me a favor--tell me your name and where you work. I want to make sure I'm not a shareholder, and if I am, I want to talk to your boss.
If I were president, I would put transparency, corruption, and a balanced budget at the top of the list of priorities, because those are like tar that slows everything else down.
Geithner, Daschle, Kirk, Richardson, Killefer...I think he's already put corruption at the top of the list.
You are aware that you can land and put more gas in, right?
The jury isn't the trier of law, that's the judge's job. The jury is the trier of fact.
"It is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumed that courts are the best judges of law. But still both objects are within your power of decision... you [juries] have a right to take it upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy."
State Of Georgia v. Brailsford, 3 U.S. 1,4 (1794), written by Chief Justice John Jay (emphasis added).
The BATFE is the most redundant element of the US government. The FBI covers the B, the F and the E. The FDA covers the A and the T. What's left?
Chips and dip?
Seems to me that a contempt-of-court charge and a bill for the costs of the new trial (including the parties' legal bills, of course) for Mr. Powell ought to be plenty of schooling for all of us.
Play with fire, get burnt.
Yes, but I am the paranoid type that has to know EXACTLY where the hook echo is that they are talking about not that by worrying about it will I change anything but still.
And you want to force me to subsidize your neurosis. How cute.
No company does anything out of the goodness of their heart unless it will lead to greater profits and/or market dominance. This is doubly so with the drug industry.
Remind me again where they get the money to do research and development?
What's that? You say the profit on sales of existing drugs funds research into future drugs? And that if companies stopped profiting from previous developments, future advances would stagnate?
If I pay the price of an American made product, will that extra expense make it back to my pocket on my paycheck? Or will it end up in the CEO's pocket?
The owners' pockets, actually. And, with a great many companies, you're perfectly free to become an owner, at least in part.
Here's a thought: we get rid of the union
So, you propose to eliminate freedom of assembly?
No, merely reestablish the rights of the employers. The employees are free to associate with whomever they please; in return, the employers are free to not associate with whomever they please.
Sounds fair to me.
There is one thing that doesn't seem to be discussed about the Top Gear bit. I agree that emphasizing what happens when you run out of charge--when they didn't kill the battery--isn't entirely fair, but there is a difference between running out of charge and running out of gas.
I can easily walk to a gas station and carry a couple of gallons of gas back to the car, which is enough fuel to carry me at least a couple dozen miles in even a heavy SUV.
How many miles worth of charge can you carry back?
There should be a law requiring providers to advertise the exact amount you will be billed every month. No giving you rate A, then charging you rate A + Taxes B.
I'll meet you halfway: taxes should still be separated out--because I want to know how much the government is taking from me--but all fees and such ought to be rolled into the total price. That includes things like the "Line Number Portability Fee," which the government allows the carriers to collect, but does not mandate (and the revenue goes to the carrier, not the government).
On the other hand, sales tax, the Universal Service Fee, etc. all go to the government. It's important that we be able to see just how much tax is being assessed if we're to keep control of our government.
If you have $15000 to spend on a toy, you are a rich man.
Two words: "bass boat."
...so I am not totally talking out of my arse.
Hey! How'd you get through the door?
The eula literally says "NO BENCHMARKING ALLOWED" so this means that this guy isn't even allowed to benchmark. It doesn't say "no posting of a benchmark", it says no benchmarking period. Therefore, he hasn't even done benchmarking. See how this works?
By the same logic, Windows has never been pirated.
The court could allow the airline's judgment to stand unhindered.
Then, since the airline is now picking and choosing which passengers it will carry, it loses its common carrier status.
Sometimes, the best way to change somebody's mind is to give him exactly what he wants.
Depends on the state. In some states, those signs have no legal force whatsoever. In some states, ignoring them constitutes trespass (though frequently only after being asked to leave). In a few states, carrying past the sign is an offense unto itself.
That said, I--and most people I know--don't do business with anti-gun bigots. Save for the government, of course, but they won't allow me not to do business with them. Yes, DMV, I'm talking about you.
Gas is not that inelastic. When the price of gas hit $4/gal., I got a bus pass. There's a park-and-ride right by my house, and the express goes straight downtown to where I work. And I now spend 25 minutes each way on leisure reading rather than fighting traffic. Now that gas is cheap, I still ride the bus. Basically, whoever decided to put on the squeeze made a permanent convert. I probably won't ever go back to driving myself. Between gas and parking, I save $200 to $300 a month and I save myself lots of trouble.
And deprive the State of revenue they could be using to buy votes.
What are you, some kind of terrorist?
Taxing fuel:
And therein lies the problem: as the tax succeeds in driving people to efficient vehicles, revenue falls. The State needs that money.
Buy a Hummer! Won't somebody please think of the children^W tax collectors?
Close. It's a means for recovering revenue lost to the success of their old tax scheme.
They argued that gas taxes would encourage fuel efficiency. It did. Now the State needs to make up the lost money, so you get to grab your ankles.
Same way most states continually raise tobacco taxes: they point out that the increased costs will have health benefits, then when it works they raise taxes to recover the lost revenue.
New York is about to do the same on non-diet sodas. DC's mayor admitted that their red-light cameras were working in that there were fewer people running lights, and this was a problem because now they were going to have to find a new source of revenue (no mention of the lives saved, of course).
Government is a ravenous beast that will continue to grow and consume all productivity in sight if left unchecked.
You're asking why the government would do something that would invade privacy, and expecting an argument based on inefficacy to be meaningful?
What color is the sky on your planet?
On my planet, the courts have actually ruled that a law doesn't have to work to be valid.