Using your analogy of utility usage, should someone be prosecuted for using the light of your porch lamp to read by? If they are not trespassing on your property?
Um, remember the SHORT RANGE TRANSMITTER part? They would only begin to slow to 25 (from their normal speed) as you approached them, then you get to play dodge-em.
Seriously tho, where the hell is my flying car? Hell, MY FATHER was promised a flying car. Progress indeed.
No, because if you let them push you up close to the guy in front of you and suddenly, for whatever reasen, he slams on the brakes and you rear-end him YOU'RE at fault.
You just threatened to inturrupt the flow of traffic in the left lane in a dangerous and irresponsible manner to change their driving habbits. If you do it, you are and asshat and a danger to those around your. If you don't then you are just another self rightous prick on slashdot threatening to do harm to others but never following through.
Probably not the best way to put what I said, but I find I difficult to explain to a lot of you folks in the more spacious parts of the country that in many places the concept of a passing lane is moot since there is more traffic than they are meant to handle, and those who don't understand that are going nuts because they can't have their private speeding lane because the rest of us need it to spread out.
In such a situation, wouldn't you be passing people in the other two lanes? Also, the left lane rule is most applicable to two lane road outside of the cities. Inside most cities there are too many clowns that just don't know the rules.
Not necessarily, or perhaps very gradually, with the pace of traffic. And I agree with the cities, drive the DC beltway once or twice, you'll think Houston is a cakewalk.
I consider safety to be far above the law in terms of importance.
Agreed whole heartedly.
It is unsafe to get in the left lane to piss off a speeder, no matter how lawful it is. Just don't do it.
I will agree with you there, BUT I must reiterate that my statement was made based on me being in the lane to begin with, no matter which on, when someone flys up on me. Not me ACTIVELY changing lanes to block someone.
Lovely driving out in Texas tho btw, I'll say that, all so very spread out.
You misunderstand me completely. Most highways I travel are too small for the amount of traffic they carry as it is, so the concept of having an entire lane free for passing is idiotic when both or all other lanes are crowded, it simply doesn't happen. There really is no passing lane. Traffic spreads out evenly for the most part. But there are still these idiots who've seen "Fast and the Furious" too many times or who seem to think that because their SUV is twice the cost of your vehicle that they can fly like a bat out of hell. Whats worse is they aren't limited to the left lane, they are all over the road and very dangerous. Doesn't matter what lane you're in eventually they come flying up all over your ass and there is simply nothing you can do but try to get them to slow down, especially since they are only about one car length behind you and doing more than 65. These people are gonna kill someone on day, and yeah I will slow down in front of them, but I'm extremely careful about it, since I don't need any accidents myself. But you can't let them to force you to speed up and close the safe distance between you and the car in front of you.
I love people who call me self-rightous for wanting to defend myself from the idiots I have to share the highway with, considering I will put in about 25k miles per year highway driving, and their SUVs never leave pavement. Polite behavior while driving is a good thing but still remember that if you are on a 3 lane highway and the right and center lanes are crowded the safest place for your vehicle is the unoccupied left lane. Its just logical. And if you want to insist that no one be there unless passing because it is against the law, then I insist that you also obey the law and not exceed the speed limit for the very same reason. Can't just pick what rules you want to obey.
First off I've driven in Texas and most of you would get killed on the east coast. Secondly, you assume a great many things. In many states it is illegal to PASS on the right, not BE passed on the right. Plus a lot of states have a fun new "aggressive driving" citation, defined as 3 moving violations in one incident, so exceeding the speed limit while passing on the right and changing lanes without signaling can earn you a hefty fine and many points on your license in several places. And who said I was in the left lane, I've had plenty of idiots fly up on me while I'm over the limit in the center lane. Furthermore, while you correctly state that speed doesn't kill, you fail to note that DIFFERENCES in speed cause collisions, and if the rate of traffic is about 85 and you are doing 100, you present the risk by not following the flow of traffic.
Speed didn't kill anyone, impact damage did. Speed is simply one of many factors that combine to create a fatal accident. Most notably safety equipment. Would you suggest we all get outfitted like NASCAR drivers? Five point harnesses, helmets, etc? Given those precautions, pretty much no one would die in the accidents that happen these days.
Sorry thanks for playing. 85 in a 70 isn't too unreasonable, but if I'm doing 85 in a 70 and you roll up on me doing 100??? You'd better be able to drop that speed fast because YOU are at 100 are a clear and present threat to everyone around you, and I will drop to the limit in front of you. 30mph over the limit? Turn in your license, asshat.
Nevermind the fact that your normal 1-hour commute at 75mph is going to be 1 hour and 20 minutes if all you are doing is the limit, provided you aren't shot or run off the road by some looneytoon who's sick of being stuck behind you.
It was still a tremedous delay, even with traffic moving at the posted maximum speed. And other such protest attempts have resulted in the leaders being ticketed for obstructing traffic by merely following the posted speed limit. So unless this were to occur across the board thru the whole US at once in every vehicle I don't see it happening. Not to mention that there is zero interest in removing that revenue stream from to local and state governments.
Even better, disable your own limiter and build a short-range transmitter to spoof the GPS of your fellow motorists into thinking they are all on a 25mph road, even tho its an interstate highway. Make life on the freeway a lot more interesting.
Aren't you forgetting a few years back when there was a 30-some mile backup on I-95 because there were several vehicles blocking traffic by doing the speed limit?
I'm not arguing the point one way or another, but I'd tend think something like this wouldn't be feasible in the US.
Sigh, where do people get this idea that speech is free? THOUGHT is free, speech is an action and as such might have a cost or be restricted. Go try to sit it the gallery in a courtroom and go on with your free speech, or how about mouthing off to some burly biker. Sure you are free to go ahead and do it but don't complain when the consequences come back at you.
No one and nothing can restrict what you think. Your actions, including speech, are nowhere near as free, do not delude yourself.
Meaning what exactly? Free as in speech implies freedom of speech, which means (at least to USians) that your government cannot limit most of what you wish to say. I just fail to understand how software relates to this since software is not generally political, religious, or any other classification that is given specific protections by the 1st amendment. "Freedom to learn" would be much more applicable, as in you are free to learn how the software works, if you choose, as you are provided the source.
Lets not forget that the schools are considered to be acting in loco parentis and allowing kids the use of those apps might expose the school to legal liability.
Frankly I simply don't see the need for anything more advanced than a specialized dedicated-use device rather than a full fledged general purpose machine.
Slashdot Mirror
Using your analogy of utility usage, should someone be prosecuted for using the light of your porch lamp to read by? If they are not trespassing on your property?
Sure you are giving permission, if your network hands out an address to anyone who comes along you have basically given them permission to use it.
Look at it this way, if you leave your porch light on, is it illegal for someone to use it to read by if they are out on the public street?
Sadly yes now-a-days you can.
Um, remember the SHORT RANGE TRANSMITTER part? They would only begin to slow to 25 (from their normal speed) as you approached them, then you get to play dodge-em.
Seriously tho, where the hell is my flying car? Hell, MY FATHER was promised a flying car. Progress indeed.
Use African Purpleheart, you'd get a case strong enough to beat dents in a car body. Stuff is amazingly hard.
Personnally I'd at least like the option, even if it was pricey. Sort of reminds me of my biggest gripe with Star Trek, why are there no seatbelts?
Too bad everything boils down to money.
No, because if you let them push you up close to the guy in front of you and suddenly, for whatever reasen, he slams on the brakes and you rear-end him YOU'RE at fault.
Oh yeah I've driven thru Houston, much be where all the easterners settled based on the traffic.
Got a couple beers and a little time on my hands.
Excellent, I could join you there.
You just threatened to inturrupt the flow of traffic in the left lane in a dangerous and irresponsible manner to change their driving habbits. If you do it, you are and asshat and a danger to those around your. If you don't then you are just another self rightous prick on slashdot threatening to do harm to others but never following through.
Probably not the best way to put what I said, but I find I difficult to explain to a lot of you folks in the more spacious parts of the country that in many places the concept of a passing lane is moot since there is more traffic than they are meant to handle, and those who don't understand that are going nuts because they can't have their private speeding lane because the rest of us need it to spread out.
In such a situation, wouldn't you be passing people in the other two lanes? Also, the left lane rule is most applicable to two lane road outside of the cities. Inside most cities there are too many clowns that just don't know the rules.
Not necessarily, or perhaps very gradually, with the pace of traffic. And I agree with the cities, drive the DC beltway once or twice, you'll think Houston is a cakewalk.
I consider safety to be far above the law in terms of importance.
Agreed whole heartedly.
It is unsafe to get in the left lane to piss off a speeder, no matter how lawful it is. Just don't do it.
I will agree with you there, BUT I must reiterate that my statement was made based on me being in the lane to begin with, no matter which on, when someone flys up on me. Not me ACTIVELY changing lanes to block someone.
Lovely driving out in Texas tho btw, I'll say that, all so very spread out.
You misunderstand me completely. Most highways I travel are too small for the amount of traffic they carry as it is, so the concept of having an entire lane free for passing is idiotic when both or all other lanes are crowded, it simply doesn't happen. There really is no passing lane. Traffic spreads out evenly for the most part. But there are still these idiots who've seen "Fast and the Furious" too many times or who seem to think that because their SUV is twice the cost of your vehicle that they can fly like a bat out of hell. Whats worse is they aren't limited to the left lane, they are all over the road and very dangerous. Doesn't matter what lane you're in eventually they come flying up all over your ass and there is simply nothing you can do but try to get them to slow down, especially since they are only about one car length behind you and doing more than 65. These people are gonna kill someone on day, and yeah I will slow down in front of them, but I'm extremely careful about it, since I don't need any accidents myself. But you can't let them to force you to speed up and close the safe distance between you and the car in front of you.
I love people who call me self-rightous for wanting to defend myself from the idiots I have to share the highway with, considering I will put in about 25k miles per year highway driving, and their SUVs never leave pavement. Polite behavior while driving is a good thing but still remember that if you are on a 3 lane highway and the right and center lanes are crowded the safest place for your vehicle is the unoccupied left lane. Its just logical. And if you want to insist that no one be there unless passing because it is against the law, then I insist that you also obey the law and not exceed the speed limit for the very same reason. Can't just pick what rules you want to obey.
First off I've driven in Texas and most of you would get killed on the east coast. Secondly, you assume a great many things. In many states it is illegal to PASS on the right, not BE passed on the right. Plus a lot of states have a fun new "aggressive driving" citation, defined as 3 moving violations in one incident, so exceeding the speed limit while passing on the right and changing lanes without signaling can earn you a hefty fine and many points on your license in several places. And who said I was in the left lane, I've had plenty of idiots fly up on me while I'm over the limit in the center lane. Furthermore, while you correctly state that speed doesn't kill, you fail to note that DIFFERENCES in speed cause collisions, and if the rate of traffic is about 85 and you are doing 100, you present the risk by not following the flow of traffic.
Speed didn't kill anyone, impact damage did. Speed is simply one of many factors that combine to create a fatal accident. Most notably safety equipment. Would you suggest we all get outfitted like NASCAR drivers? Five point harnesses, helmets, etc? Given those precautions, pretty much no one would die in the accidents that happen these days.
Sorry thanks for playing. 85 in a 70 isn't too unreasonable, but if I'm doing 85 in a 70 and you roll up on me doing 100??? You'd better be able to drop that speed fast because YOU are at 100 are a clear and present threat to everyone around you, and I will drop to the limit in front of you. 30mph over the limit? Turn in your license, asshat.
Short range transmitter remember, maybe a few hunderd yards. Then you play dodge-em as the brakelights start flaring up in front of you. =P
Nevermind the fact that your normal 1-hour commute at 75mph is going to be 1 hour and 20 minutes if all you are doing is the limit, provided you aren't shot or run off the road by some looneytoon who's sick of being stuck behind you.
It was still a tremedous delay, even with traffic moving at the posted maximum speed. And other such protest attempts have resulted in the leaders being ticketed for obstructing traffic by merely following the posted speed limit. So unless this were to occur across the board thru the whole US at once in every vehicle I don't see it happening. Not to mention that there is zero interest in removing that revenue stream from to local and state governments.
Even better, disable your own limiter and build a short-range transmitter to spoof the GPS of your fellow motorists into thinking they are all on a 25mph road, even tho its an interstate highway. Make life on the freeway a lot more interesting.
Aren't you forgetting a few years back when there was a 30-some mile backup on I-95 because there were several vehicles blocking traffic by doing the speed limit?
I'm not arguing the point one way or another, but I'd tend think something like this wouldn't be feasible in the US.
Sigh, where do people get this idea that speech is free? THOUGHT is free, speech is an action and as such might have a cost or be restricted. Go try to sit it the gallery in a courtroom and go on with your free speech, or how about mouthing off to some burly biker. Sure you are free to go ahead and do it but don't complain when the consequences come back at you.
No one and nothing can restrict what you think. Your actions, including speech, are nowhere near as free, do not delude yourself.
'Free as in speech'...
Meaning what exactly? Free as in speech implies freedom of speech, which means (at least to USians) that your government cannot limit most of what you wish to say. I just fail to understand how software relates to this since software is not generally political, religious, or any other classification that is given specific protections by the 1st amendment. "Freedom to learn" would be much more applicable, as in you are free to learn how the software works, if you choose, as you are provided the source.
Conspiracy I'd imagine, if they can prove any association between the seller and the teller.
LOL! I'll need to add that to my bag of tricks, along with maybe a speelchecker....
Opera has one as well, as do many other browsers and any browser capable of using the Google toolbar.
/sarcasm
Wow, I simply have to have this great new innovation!
Lets not forget that the schools are considered to be acting in loco parentis and allowing kids the use of those apps might expose the school to legal liability.
Frankly I simply don't see the need for anything more advanced than a specialized dedicated-use device rather than a full fledged general purpose machine.