My prime suspect: Random correlation. My second guess: the study was faulty in some way and can't be reproduced. My third guess: people who regularly drink sugary sodas are less healthy in general, so measurements of poor health correlate to sugary soda consumption.
The government shouldn't use force based on the pretense it will somehow make things fair. The answer to injustice caused by happenstance isn't another unnecessary, purposefully-committed injustice. Save government force for use against murderers and rapists rather than calling out the stormtroopers when your Netflix is fuzzy.
Why not? Some people have bad credit because of a divorce or some other one-time event. Why shouldn't they be able to get a car loan? What if they need a presentable car for work -- because they're a real estate agent or a delivery driver?
Despite the whining in the article, these devices give both the car buyer and the lender exactly what each of them wants. The car buyer wants to buy a car that she would otherwise not be able to buy. The lender wants to make a loan that would otherwise be too risky. Add the device, and both problems are solved.
Why did the people in the news story expect their cars to continue working when they weren't making their loan payments? Isn't there somewhere on the continuum of repeatedly making bad choices where we take a short break from endless sympathy and just tell people to grow up and do what an adult might do?
They're the ones who have the guns -- the ones who can use those guns and threaten people without worrying about getting arrested. They should only do it when it's necessary.
Because they are spending tax money to threaten people based on the meaningless distinction between recreational drone use and drone use for a commercial purpose. They shouldn't waste the money and they shouldn't threaten people needlessly.
This should help. For really incriminating behavior, I would expect the cameras to "malfunction" most of the time. But for ordinary, day-to-day contact with the public, it will be a lot easier to just not act like a complete asshole than to hide the evidence later.
'RESTART! RESTART! RESTART!' would have been a lot better. Clear instructions are useful. Screenfulls of BS just confuse people. All they can do is restart anyway.
Smaller vehicles, logistics, and the knowledge of local couriers.
Want to get a package to the balcony of a 60-story high-rise in Hong Kong?
Deliver it to the front door and take it up on the elevator.
Want to deliver packages to the houseboats of Amsterdam but can't afford the local wages?
Driverless vehicles. Or just charge enough to cover the cost of delivery.
Want to deliver medicine in Australia or Mongolia, where it's already economical to fly the doctor to the patient?
Doctors' time may be worth enough money to make flying worthwhile. Is a truck driver's time worth that much? Also, a bottle of medicine doesn't care if it takes an extra 12 hours to get where it's going.
And any drone that can carry a package a long distance will also have to carry a lot of heavy fuel.
Drones are an obvious win.
There will probably be some extremely rare cases where they make sense. Delivery to boats offshore, for example.
What's wrong with driver-less 1-wheeled vehicles ?
They tip over? I don't know. Lets see a prototype.
Now, what's wrong with zero-wheeled vehicles, ah, wait, that would be too similar to a drone to fit into your world view.
They waste too much energy staying airborne and they are less efficient and harder to build and more risky to operate and less resilient to weather than wheeled vehicles.
Slashdot Mirror
Exercise delays that. Plus it makes you feel better every day until then.
Agree. Correct for body fat percentage and get back to us.
My prime suspect: Random correlation.
My second guess: the study was faulty in some way and can't be reproduced.
My third guess: people who regularly drink sugary sodas are less healthy in general, so measurements of poor health correlate to sugary soda consumption.
In experiments, male adolescent monkeys also prefer to play with wheeled vehicles while the females prefer dolls — and their societies say nothing on the matter.
Everyone who works and earns a paycheck deserves to be treated well.
The government shouldn't use force based on the pretense it will somehow make things fair. The answer to injustice caused by happenstance isn't another unnecessary, purposefully-committed injustice. Save government force for use against murderers and rapists rather than calling out the stormtroopers when your Netflix is fuzzy.
It doesn't work anyway. Regulatory capture is common. The regulators end up working hand-in-hand with the people they're supposed to be regulating, big companies and lawyers benefit while the public suffers. Look no further than Uber vs. the taxi companies and their government friends.
Did that help?
No. Too late.
Why not? Some people have bad credit because of a divorce or some other one-time event. Why shouldn't they be able to get a car loan? What if they need a presentable car for work -- because they're a real estate agent or a delivery driver?
Despite the whining in the article, these devices give both the car buyer and the lender exactly what each of them wants. The car buyer wants to buy a car that she would otherwise not be able to buy. The lender wants to make a loan that would otherwise be too risky. Add the device, and both problems are solved.
Why did the people in the news story expect their cars to continue working when they weren't making their loan payments? Isn't there somewhere on the continuum of repeatedly making bad choices where we take a short break from endless sympathy and just tell people to grow up and do what an adult might do?
What if a "sucker" has a more enjoyable life than a cynic? What if this is true even if his passion for his work is exploited for "profit"?
Societies where most people die before they get old have a lower incidence of age-related diseases.
Salt does not cause weight gain.
They're the ones who have the guns -- the ones who can use those guns and threaten people without worrying about getting arrested. They should only do it when it's necessary.
You sound evil.
Evil. Not the the worst evil. But more evil than leaving me alone.
Threatening people unnecessarily is evil -- law or no law.
Because they are spending tax money to threaten people based on the meaningless distinction between recreational drone use and drone use for a commercial purpose. They shouldn't waste the money and they shouldn't threaten people needlessly.
He should stick to curing diseases like malaria. Schools are too mixed up with politics, money, and government control of peoples' lives.
If he wants to help with education, he should fund scholarships so more parents could send their kids to a school of their choice.
It's time for an end to one-size-fits-all government education schemes.
This should help. For really incriminating behavior, I would expect the cameras to "malfunction" most of the time. But for ordinary, day-to-day contact with the public, it will be a lot easier to just not act like a complete asshole than to hide the evidence later.
'RESTART! RESTART! RESTART!' would have been a lot better. Clear instructions are useful. Screenfulls of BS just confuse people. All they can do is restart anyway.
Cucumber factory only has stem-removal jobs.
Are you saying you drive a Karma?
I agree. Say NO to those linguogogues and their linguomorphic practices!!!
Want to get a package through Mumbai traffic?
Smaller vehicles, logistics, and the knowledge of local couriers.
Want to get a package to the balcony of a 60-story high-rise in Hong Kong?
Deliver it to the front door and take it up on the elevator.
Want to deliver packages to the houseboats of Amsterdam but can't afford the local wages?
Driverless vehicles. Or just charge enough to cover the cost of delivery.
Want to deliver medicine in Australia or Mongolia, where it's already economical to fly the doctor to the patient?
Doctors' time may be worth enough money to make flying worthwhile. Is a truck driver's time worth that much? Also, a bottle of medicine doesn't care if it takes an extra 12 hours to get where it's going.
And any drone that can carry a package a long distance will also have to carry a lot of heavy fuel.
Drones are an obvious win.
There will probably be some extremely rare cases where they make sense. Delivery to boats offshore, for example.
What's wrong with driver-less 1-wheeled vehicles ?
They tip over? I don't know. Lets see a prototype.
Now, what's wrong with zero-wheeled vehicles, ah, wait, that would be too similar to a drone to fit into your world view.
They waste too much energy staying airborne and they are less efficient and harder to build and more risky to operate and less resilient to weather than wheeled vehicles.