Saipan is tecnically a Commonwealth, which is slightly different from a Trust Territory like Guam or Puerto Rico. Foreign nationals do not need a US visa to visit Saipan, just a visa to Saipan from the government of Saipan. Foreign nationals need a US Visa and go through US immigrations to visit Guam. You still have to go through immigration again in Hawaii when you arrive from Guam. People used to travel to Guam and become residents to fast track a US citizenship, but that's more difficult now. A lot of Asians now use Saipan as a stepping stone to US citizenship.
A territory is an insular area protected and adminstered by the United States. They have have non-voting members in congress. A commonwealth is a self-governing insular area that elects to be part of the United States. They have their own government and are more independent. Commonwealths, territories, and protectorates are insular areas whose people are citizens of the United States, with the exception of American Samoa. The Samoans are nationals--free to go anywhere in the United States--but they are not citizens.
I also have a CFX-9850 that my son is now using along with a TI-89. The colors on the casio have faded so much that the green and blue have become difficult to tell apart.
In some places, their whole u-verse crap is only DSL2, limited to the same original speeds as was available on their older DSL1. I've asked them when real fiber is coming, and they still don't know. It's their way of forcing you to pay for a new DSL2 device if you want to stick with them.
At which time, you should still leave, because staying generally causes animosity from management. They become annoyed that you were uppity enough to think about leaving and had to offer you a huge raise to stay. I've seen that happen to a few people already, and they still end up leaving afterwards. I have yet to see any success stories happen when you are offered a raise just to stay, so I'm generally inclined to believe that I should always leave, even if I'm offered a raise to stay.
You might want to tell them why you're moving to a new host. Explain that their security is insufficient for your needs which is why you're moving. You don't have to give them more detail than that.
Number of security features does not result in more security.
Exactly.
Windows NT may have been designed secure, but the programmers just didn't make use of the feature. They were still programming for single user DOS and Windows 95 systems. NT was just too expensive for the average programmer to own, so they never had the experience writing for a multiuser system until Windows 2000 came out. I remember having to shoehorn permissions to let the old programs run on 2k. By the time XP came out, they finally did come out with programs that worked properly permission wise, but there were still single user programs that you could not run in multiuser Remote Desktop environments. It took until Win 2003, that enough programmers were finally getting the hang of programming for multiuser Windows. We were finally able to offer multiuser Remote Desktop service to the masses.
Prior to that time, Linux/Unix were just easier to configure as a multiuser operating system, which was why we used it for that purpose. It was also more "secure" because you couldn't be a point and click Admin. I remember that the early SAMBA GUI tool would wipe the configuration file and I had to delete it so the users wouldn't keep trying to use it and break SAMBA.
Nowadays, Windows isn't secure because they made simple to use GUI tools that anyone can learn to use. You didn't have to read man pages and actually learn how things work in detail, so anyone who found the GUI box to click on or off some service became the defacto "admin", which could easily be the same people who might click on Phishing or Spam links.
I realize that you're joking, but you're supposed to automatically rotate your logs. If you're constantly purging the those attempts, you're doing it wrong. Run fail2ban or denyhosts and turn on your firewall.
Linux/Unix is only as secure as the security minded sysadmin can manage. Windows has actually become more secure in the last 4-5 years. They had to because of all the attacks on them. Linux has to play catch up now. The whole network advantage someone else mentioned is now long gone.
I will say that I like the easy to use command line tools in Unix/Linux, but those exists in Windows as well, you just have to download them. If you know how to script in Windows, you can manage an equivalent number of computers as you would on Linux. The only reason you have a lower computer to Windows Admin ratio is because we have so many fly-by-night MSCEs who only really know the GUI tools and don't know how to remotely script the same thing to apply to hundreds of systems rather than visit them at the console.
The longer term solution is to build out of concrete and put power lines underground, but we Americans like to buy cheap products that are made in China from their nearest Walmart. Wooden homes are just too cheap. There's no way we're going to spend the extra money now to save money years down the line.
Also, Americans seem to be wholly unprepared for disasters even though they happen every year and we live in rickety wooden homes. We're a first world country, yet we don't seem to want to fix that. We have annual hurricanes, but we keep rebuilding out of wood. I've lived in both quake and hurricane zones and have always had my supplies ready and rotated. You don't have to do much to keep your supplies fresh. Just buy food before your fridge and pantry get below half empty. Same goes with candles, lanterns and batteries. If you have a bathtub, it's quick enough to fill them just before a hurricane. In a quake zone, you should have extra jugs of water ready.
Tornado alley --> Should have homes remade of concrete after the disaster, so they don't have to keep losing their homes.
East coast --> Hurricanes annually. If you're above sea level, you should rebuild homes out of concrete so you don't have to worry each year. If you're below sea level, the homes should also be on stilts and have stairs up to them.
Earthquakes on the West coast. --> should build homes out of concrete so they will withstand quakes.
Contrast this to:
Japan -- > Gets both Typhoons and Earthquakes, yet they generally don't have their homes blown away and aren't quite as unprepared as we are.
Guam --> US Trust Territory. Gets quakes and typhoons just like Japan and they've rebuilt homes with concrete as the wooden ones blew away. Only the occasional super typhoons really cause major problems there now. They just ride out the storms and get back to work the very next day, unless it was a super typhoon or 8.5 quake. In "ancient times", along the low lying coastal areas, their homes were raised up on Latte Stones so they wouldn't get flooded or washed away.
In the west coast, people are more prepared for quakes, but if the winds pick up to even just gale force levels, some people are out of power for up to a week or two. If a big quake ever hit the East coast or the Mississippi basin, we'd pay for it for years. There's something just missing in the psyche of the American people.
Why the fuck do we have both a State Senate AND a State House?
It's so that we can delay laws from being enacted. There are enough laws on the books now that you're guilty of some offense. We have enough stupid laws on the books already and any slowdown in making all of us any guiltier is welcome by me. We should be repealing old laws that do not pertain to the modern society.
I would 2nd this. It's a good, easy way to start off. My kids started leaning by modifying several existing games that other people had uploaded and now create their own. The older one went on to learn Java with his friend over the summer.
You're not a troll, you're obviously just visiting the wrong sites with firefox;) Actually, it's the javascript and flash at fault for the RAM usage. Turn that crap off completely whenever you're not using it and you'll be able to keep firefox open for months, or until the 2nd Tuesday denial of service. Some sites just have very buggy code.
You've also obviously never run opera with 50 tabs. With that many, you have to turn off javascript and plugins or it will crash constantly and suck up RAM like there's no tomorrow. As for firefox, you should have noscript, adblock and flashblock installed. I also have 50 tabs open in firefox right now and memory usage is under 300 MB. 100 tabs in Opera uses 300 MB, with scripting and plugins off. Even after about a month of keeping firefox open, I might reach 500MB of RAM usage. Ditto with Opera. Since Palemoon is based off firefox code, you'll have exactly the same problems if you enable scripting and flash.
I would never have used firefox if it weren't for the plugins to block unnecessary scripts and flash elements that suck up RAM like there's no tomorrow. I leave scripting and flash off unless I really need it. In those cases, I turn it on when I need it and immediately turn it off when I'm done to kill of any lingering scripts. Besides, many sites just don't need it and are still surfable without it.
You don't have the same problem with IE, Chrome or Srware Iron, because each site is encapsulated in a separate instance. When you close the window for the site, it's closed for good. They did this because some javascript flash is just buggy, and this was the way to kill them without having to kill all those other sites you like to keep open. If you open 50 chrome windows, you'll have 50+ chrome instances, and without flashblock or adblock, those 50 instances will add up to just as much RAM as a single firefox with scripts on. In my case, about 15-20 windows would take up the same amount of RAM as firefox with 50. (I just tested opening a few windows with Iron & IE)
Bottom line == keep javascript and flash off and you won't suck up RAM so you'll be able to leave firefox on longer. OR just stop visiting your porn sites with firefox -- use IE, chrome or srware iron instead.:)
They only like the idea of owing a powerful car, not making use of them. The car's just a status symbol. I see lots of people here with fast cars with powerful engines, but they still drive like they have a beater sub-compact when they get on the freeway. For some reason, they like to gun it in the 25 mph zones. It's like they're stuck in one gear, unable to change. They're really only using it to project their image or just compensating. They like to force people to brake for them when they enter the freeway and force people to fear them when they race up behind them in the 25 mph zones.
Electric power plants operate at up to nearly 40% efficiency. With transmission losses and electric engine efficiency, you would be operating an electric car anywhere between 30% to 35% efficiency.
ICEs in cars only run between 8% - 15% efficiency, but can currently reach 20% efficiency with a well tuned engine with turbochargers and other enhancement. Overall, the amount of pollution caused by running an electric car is half that of a gas powered car.
Hybrids help boost efficiency by keeping the ICE running at its peak efficiency, so it never idles the engine at inefficiently low RPMs. However, this still isn't quite as efficient as a well tuned, well controlled electric generation plant. They run close to the thermodynamic efficiency.
I actually come to a full and complete stop at the stop signs and notice that when I do that, people behind me generally (70%-90%, depending on the intersection) will come to a complete stop after I've set the example. It would continue to propagate for several cars after that. You have to stop at least a second, or it won't work as well, so I usually do a one Missisippi count before I go. A second is enough to be noticeable, but not too long to piss people off. I don't know why it works, but I can only guess most people don't pay attention to the road until something changes to bring them out of their lull. The people just before me would all roll through.
I would see the people ahead of me all bunch up at the next stop sign and hit their brakes 4-5 time each, because they're right on the tail of the car in front. I would roll behind the car just as he leaves and only need to hit my brakes once. If the person behind does a full stop they also reach me just as I leave the next sign. When they don't, they're on my tail hitting their brakes an extra time.
We don't really need a separated cycling infrastructure. We need people who obey the rules of the road. A bicycle is a vehicle and according to law, they must obey the vehicular traffic laws. If you don't feel safe on the road and don't want to wear a helmet, then it's better that you don't ride. I don't want my health insurance to keep rising to pay for head injuries that could have easily been prevented or lessened by a helmet.
Around the age of twelve you start to get bigger and ride bigger and faster bicycles. This would have been a disaster on foot paths where grandmas and grandpas and 3 year olds might be, especially with all the testosterone that you start getting at that age.
The reality is that there are more people bicycling and walking these days than there used to be. The growing numbers of people bicycling also meant growing numbers of accidents and head injuries, which is why helmet laws became necessary. Back then, with so few bicyclists, the ones who bicycled everywhere paid attention to the traffic rules and traffic to protect ourselves.
As more of the general public started riding, they ignored the rules, which is why a helmet law was created. If it deters people from riding, then good. Because those people that don't care about general personal safety, won't care about other peoples' general safety. I rather they not ride, because they cause accidents or near accidents and raise driver stress levels and induce road rage. These days I wear a helmet even though I'm not legally required, because of all the road rage that I may experience from people who have been pissed off by idiot bicyclist.
Then you're doing it wrong because you're following them too closely. Bicycles can also zip up behind a person so quietly that nobody notices that you're there until you say something or make a noise. Last I checked, people don't have eyes on the back of their heads.
Being somewhat courteous can help. If you did it right, then you would be able to slow down enough to extend a courtesy and say "pardom me" or "excuse me" "may I get by". Then you could extend a friendly "thank you" when they move. Bicycles are relatively quiet and sometimes people just don't realize you're behind them. If you're always out of breath, you could also but a bell on your bicycle and use it as a gentle warning.
Not saying you are, but honestly, I find a lot of bicyclist can be quite rude and will even cut off other bicyclists at the intersections too. I always stop at stop signs when I bicycle and have had encounters with other bicyclist running the sign when I've already started my turn to go.
If you were in rush hour traffic and everything started to slow to a crawl in an adjacent lane, you're supposed to slow down and not be more than 10 mph above them.
On those trails, you're supposed to slow down around the pedestrian. It's generally understood that you're supposed travel at a speed safe for other people on the road. The same goes with residential roads, where kids might be playing. They put up a speed limit of 25, not because your car can't handle the road at a faster speed, but because you can't stop in a safe distance if some kid ran into the street to grab the ball that got away from him.
The same goes for those 15 mph blind intersections. They put that limit there because someone or something might be around that corner, and you wouldn't be able to stop quite as safely if you were going faster. The limit is not for you. It's for the other people.
As for the interstates, that 55 mph limit was initially implemented to save gas. The side effect was that we had fewer accidents back then because of the older cars. Newer cars can handle faster speeds safely, which is why they've raised the limit. While the sports car may be able to safely to 110, the little compact probably couldn't, so it's set lower so that the majority of drivers don't try to go that fast.
You neglected to continue the highlight of a part of section 21656.
...at the nearest place designated as a turnout by signs erected by the authority having jurisdiction over the highway, or wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the vehicles following it to proceed....
They have the right to continue on the road until the designated point if there isn't sufficient area for a safe turnout, which can happen on some stretches of 45 mph road. Once they reach a safe spot, they should turn out. While they're not in the safe spot, you need to slow down and not steam about it. They have the right to be on the public road. If there is a safe spot for them to turn out and they don't turn out, I would honk my horn briefly. Sometimes they don't realize you're behind them.
It's not just the bicyclists that don't follow that rule. It's Americans in general. I wish people would follow section 21656 about pulling over when there's more than 5 or more vehicles are behind them. Part of my commute home daily involves traversing a windy hill road with multiple turnouts that people don't take. I generally put up with it when they are within 5 mph of the speed limit, but when some stupid trucker occasionally goes 5-10 mph with 10 cars following, I would start honking, which sometimes gets another person to start honking. Sometimes it takes 3 or 4 turnouts before he gets a clue, sometimes they're just retarded and don't ever turn out. I wish the other people would start honking, because they all zoom past if the guy pulls over. There's some mental retardation going on here. Maybe it's from too many drugs. Maybe they should raise registration fees and force more driver testing like they do in other countries. It's far too easy to get a driver's license in the US.
Your statement makes you sound the arrogant one, because bicyclists are legally entitled to take the lane for safety reasons.
That said, I don't like the spandex weekend warrior crowd either, because they don't follow the rules of the road or they're testosterone freaks that think they own the road. Bicycles are vehicles and must legally follow the same rules of the road as a car. Then again, most drivers don't follow the rules of the road. The problem is, that most Americans lack courtesy, especially on the road and do their little mini road rage like you do. Jerks all around.
BTW. Fuel taxes didn't exist when the majority of Californian's roads were first laid down. These taxes are a relatively recent phenomenon and they're mainly for maintenance now, which is much less than laying brand new right of ways and roadbed to support the top layer asphalt. Also, bicycles, being very lightweight, cause negligible wear on the roads, so really don't need to pay those same taxes. Semi Trucks pay more, based on their weight, because they can easily tear a road not designed for their load.
People in the US seem angrier in general. They all seem to think that where they're going is more important than where you're going. Courtesy is sorely lacking and parents don't seem to be teaching it. It's not just drivers, many bicyclist ride like this also and run red lights and stop signs, cut off vehicles and nearly run over pedestrians.
I hate those people with the bumper stickers that say "Practice Random Acts of Kindness". Why Random? Are you going to be unkind the rest of the time? Why don't you just try to do it all or at least most of the time?
Slashdot Mirror
Half the people still hunt & peck anyway. Being able to type isn't a hindrance for them.
Saipan is tecnically a Commonwealth, which is slightly different from a Trust Territory like Guam or Puerto Rico. Foreign nationals do not need a US visa to visit Saipan, just a visa to Saipan from the government of Saipan. Foreign nationals need a US Visa and go through US immigrations to visit Guam. You still have to go through immigration again in Hawaii when you arrive from Guam. People used to travel to Guam and become residents to fast track a US citizenship, but that's more difficult now. A lot of Asians now use Saipan as a stepping stone to US citizenship.
A territory is an insular area protected and adminstered by the United States. They have have non-voting members in congress.
A commonwealth is a self-governing insular area that elects to be part of the United States. They have their own government and are more independent.
Commonwealths, territories, and protectorates are insular areas whose people are citizens of the United States, with the exception of American Samoa. The Samoans are nationals--free to go anywhere in the United States--but they are not citizens.
I also have a CFX-9850 that my son is now using along with a TI-89. The colors on the casio have faded so much that the green and blue have become difficult to tell apart.
In some places, their whole u-verse crap is only DSL2, limited to the same original speeds as was available on their older DSL1. I've asked them when real fiber is coming, and they still don't know. It's their way of forcing you to pay for a new DSL2 device if you want to stick with them.
At which time, you should still leave, because staying generally causes animosity from management. They become annoyed that you were uppity enough to think about leaving and had to offer you a huge raise to stay. I've seen that happen to a few people already, and they still end up leaving afterwards. I have yet to see any success stories happen when you are offered a raise just to stay, so I'm generally inclined to believe that I should always leave, even if I'm offered a raise to stay.
You might want to tell them why you're moving to a new host. Explain that their security is insufficient for your needs which is why you're moving. You don't have to give them more detail than that.
Exactly.
Windows NT may have been designed secure, but the programmers just didn't make use of the feature. They were still programming for single user DOS and Windows 95 systems. NT was just too expensive for the average programmer to own, so they never had the experience writing for a multiuser system until Windows 2000 came out. I remember having to shoehorn permissions to let the old programs run on 2k. By the time XP came out, they finally did come out with programs that worked properly permission wise, but there were still single user programs that you could not run in multiuser Remote Desktop environments. It took until Win 2003, that enough programmers were finally getting the hang of programming for multiuser Windows. We were finally able to offer multiuser Remote Desktop service to the masses.
Prior to that time, Linux/Unix were just easier to configure as a multiuser operating system, which was why we used it for that purpose. It was also more "secure" because you couldn't be a point and click Admin. I remember that the early SAMBA GUI tool would wipe the configuration file and I had to delete it so the users wouldn't keep trying to use it and break SAMBA.
Nowadays, Windows isn't secure because they made simple to use GUI tools that anyone can learn to use. You didn't have to read man pages and actually learn how things work in detail, so anyone who found the GUI box to click on or off some service became the defacto "admin", which could easily be the same people who might click on Phishing or Spam links.
I realize that you're joking, but you're supposed to automatically rotate your logs. If you're constantly purging the those attempts, you're doing it wrong. Run fail2ban or denyhosts and turn on your firewall.
Linux/Unix is only as secure as the security minded sysadmin can manage. Windows has actually become more secure in the last 4-5 years. They had to because of all the attacks on them. Linux has to play catch up now. The whole network advantage someone else mentioned is now long gone.
I will say that I like the easy to use command line tools in Unix/Linux, but those exists in Windows as well, you just have to download them. If you know how to script in Windows, you can manage an equivalent number of computers as you would on Linux. The only reason you have a lower computer to Windows Admin ratio is because we have so many fly-by-night MSCEs who only really know the GUI tools and don't know how to remotely script the same thing to apply to hundreds of systems rather than visit them at the console.
The longer term solution is to build out of concrete and put power lines underground, but we Americans like to buy cheap products that are made in China from their nearest Walmart. Wooden homes are just too cheap. There's no way we're going to spend the extra money now to save money years down the line.
Also, Americans seem to be wholly unprepared for disasters even though they happen every year and we live in rickety wooden homes. We're a first world country, yet we don't seem to want to fix that. We have annual hurricanes, but we keep rebuilding out of wood. I've lived in both quake and hurricane zones and have always had my supplies ready and rotated. You don't have to do much to keep your supplies fresh. Just buy food before your fridge and pantry get below half empty. Same goes with candles, lanterns and batteries. If you have a bathtub, it's quick enough to fill them just before a hurricane. In a quake zone, you should have extra jugs of water ready.
Tornado alley --> Should have homes remade of concrete after the disaster, so they don't have to keep losing their homes.
East coast --> Hurricanes annually. If you're above sea level, you should rebuild homes out of concrete so you don't have to worry each year. If you're below sea level, the homes should also be on stilts and have stairs up to them.
Earthquakes on the West coast. --> should build homes out of concrete so they will withstand quakes.
Contrast this to:
Japan -- > Gets both Typhoons and Earthquakes, yet they generally don't have their homes blown away and aren't quite as unprepared as we are.
Guam --> US Trust Territory. Gets quakes and typhoons just like Japan and they've rebuilt homes with concrete as the wooden ones blew away. Only the occasional super typhoons really cause major problems there now. They just ride out the storms and get back to work the very next day, unless it was a super typhoon or 8.5 quake. In "ancient times", along the low lying coastal areas, their homes were raised up on Latte Stones so they wouldn't get flooded or washed away.
In the west coast, people are more prepared for quakes, but if the winds pick up to even just gale force levels, some people are out of power for up to a week or two. If a big quake ever hit the East coast or the Mississippi basin, we'd pay for it for years. There's something just missing in the psyche of the American people.
Why the fuck do we have both a State Senate AND a State House?
It's so that we can delay laws from being enacted. There are enough laws on the books now that you're guilty of some offense. We have enough stupid laws on the books already and any slowdown in making all of us any guiltier is welcome by me. We should be repealing old laws that do not pertain to the modern society.
I would 2nd this. It's a good, easy way to start off. My kids started leaning by modifying several existing games that other people had uploaded and now create their own. The older one went on to learn Java with his friend over the summer.
You're not a troll, you're obviously just visiting the wrong sites with firefox ;) Actually, it's the javascript and flash at fault for the RAM usage. Turn that crap off completely whenever you're not using it and you'll be able to keep firefox open for months, or until the 2nd Tuesday denial of service. Some sites just have very buggy code.
You've also obviously never run opera with 50 tabs. With that many, you have to turn off javascript and plugins or it will crash constantly and suck up RAM like there's no tomorrow. As for firefox, you should have noscript, adblock and flashblock installed. I also have 50 tabs open in firefox right now and memory usage is under 300 MB. 100 tabs in Opera uses 300 MB, with scripting and plugins off. Even after about a month of keeping firefox open, I might reach 500MB of RAM usage. Ditto with Opera. Since Palemoon is based off firefox code, you'll have exactly the same problems if you enable scripting and flash.
I would never have used firefox if it weren't for the plugins to block unnecessary scripts and flash elements that suck up RAM like there's no tomorrow. I leave scripting and flash off unless I really need it. In those cases, I turn it on when I need it and immediately turn it off when I'm done to kill of any lingering scripts. Besides, many sites just don't need it and are still surfable without it.
You don't have the same problem with IE, Chrome or Srware Iron, because each site is encapsulated in a separate instance. When you close the window for the site, it's closed for good. They did this because some javascript flash is just buggy, and this was the way to kill them without having to kill all those other sites you like to keep open. If you open 50 chrome windows, you'll have 50+ chrome instances, and without flashblock or adblock, those 50 instances will add up to just as much RAM as a single firefox with scripts on. In my case, about 15-20 windows would take up the same amount of RAM as firefox with 50. (I just tested opening a few windows with Iron & IE)
Bottom line == keep javascript and flash off and you won't suck up RAM so you'll be able to leave firefox on longer. OR just stop visiting your porn sites with firefox -- use IE, chrome or srware iron instead. :)
I only started using firefox when I could add adblock, noscript, flashblock and mouse gestures, but it's still my secondary browser.
I've always had flashblock and noscript plugins turned on, so it's nothing new.
They only like the idea of owing a powerful car, not making use of them. The car's just a status symbol. I see lots of people here with fast cars with powerful engines, but they still drive like they have a beater sub-compact when they get on the freeway. For some reason, they like to gun it in the 25 mph zones. It's like they're stuck in one gear, unable to change. They're really only using it to project their image or just compensating. They like to force people to brake for them when they enter the freeway and force people to fear them when they race up behind them in the 25 mph zones.
While green is currently the most popular color high power laser to buy, it is by no means the only color available.
Electric power plants operate at up to nearly 40% efficiency. With transmission losses and electric engine efficiency, you would be operating an electric car anywhere between 30% to 35% efficiency.
ICEs in cars only run between 8% - 15% efficiency, but can currently reach 20% efficiency with a well tuned engine with turbochargers and other enhancement. Overall, the amount of pollution caused by running an electric car is half that of a gas powered car.
Hybrids help boost efficiency by keeping the ICE running at its peak efficiency, so it never idles the engine at inefficiently low RPMs. However, this still isn't quite as efficient as a well tuned, well controlled electric generation plant. They run close to the thermodynamic efficiency.
I think it's far more than 50%.
I actually come to a full and complete stop at the stop signs and notice that when I do that, people behind me generally (70%-90%, depending on the intersection) will come to a complete stop after I've set the example. It would continue to propagate for several cars after that. You have to stop at least a second, or it won't work as well, so I usually do a one Missisippi count before I go. A second is enough to be noticeable, but not too long to piss people off. I don't know why it works, but I can only guess most people don't pay attention to the road until something changes to bring them out of their lull. The people just before me would all roll through.
I would see the people ahead of me all bunch up at the next stop sign and hit their brakes 4-5 time each, because they're right on the tail of the car in front. I would roll behind the car just as he leaves and only need to hit my brakes once. If the person behind does a full stop they also reach me just as I leave the next sign. When they don't, they're on my tail hitting their brakes an extra time.
We don't really need a separated cycling infrastructure. We need people who obey the rules of the road. A bicycle is a vehicle and according to law, they must obey the vehicular traffic laws. If you don't feel safe on the road and don't want to wear a helmet, then it's better that you don't ride. I don't want my health insurance to keep rising to pay for head injuries that could have easily been prevented or lessened by a helmet.
Around the age of twelve you start to get bigger and ride bigger and faster bicycles. This would have been a disaster on foot paths where grandmas and grandpas and 3 year olds might be, especially with all the testosterone that you start getting at that age.
The reality is that there are more people bicycling and walking these days than there used to be. The growing numbers of people bicycling also meant growing numbers of accidents and head injuries, which is why helmet laws became necessary. Back then, with so few bicyclists, the ones who bicycled everywhere paid attention to the traffic rules and traffic to protect ourselves.
As more of the general public started riding, they ignored the rules, which is why a helmet law was created.
If it deters people from riding, then good. Because those people that don't care about general personal safety, won't care about other peoples' general safety. I rather they not ride, because they cause accidents or near accidents and raise driver stress levels and induce road rage. These days I wear a helmet even though I'm not legally required, because of all the road rage that I may experience from people who have been pissed off by idiot bicyclist.
Then you're doing it wrong because you're following them too closely. Bicycles can also zip up behind a person so quietly that nobody notices that you're there until you say something or make a noise. Last I checked, people don't have eyes on the back of their heads.
Being somewhat courteous can help. If you did it right, then you would be able to slow down enough to extend a courtesy and say "pardom me" or "excuse me" "may I get by". Then you could extend a friendly "thank you" when they move. Bicycles are relatively quiet and sometimes people just don't realize you're behind them. If you're always out of breath, you could also but a bell on your bicycle and use it as a gentle warning.
Not saying you are, but honestly, I find a lot of bicyclist can be quite rude and will even cut off other bicyclists at the intersections too. I always stop at stop signs when I bicycle and have had encounters with other bicyclist running the sign when I've already started my turn to go.
If you were in rush hour traffic and everything started to slow to a crawl in an adjacent lane, you're supposed to slow down and not be more than 10 mph above them.
On those trails, you're supposed to slow down around the pedestrian. It's generally understood that you're supposed travel at a speed safe for other people on the road. The same goes with residential roads, where kids might be playing. They put up a speed limit of 25, not because your car can't handle the road at a faster speed, but because you can't stop in a safe distance if some kid ran into the street to grab the ball that got away from him.
The same goes for those 15 mph blind intersections. They put that limit there because someone or something might be around that corner, and you wouldn't be able to stop quite as safely if you were going faster. The limit is not for you. It's for the other people.
As for the interstates, that 55 mph limit was initially implemented to save gas. The side effect was that we had fewer accidents back then because of the older cars. Newer cars can handle faster speeds safely, which is why they've raised the limit. While the sports car may be able to safely to 110, the little compact probably couldn't, so it's set lower so that the majority of drivers don't try to go that fast.
You neglected to continue the highlight of a part of section 21656.
...at the nearest place designated as a turnout by signs erected by the authority having jurisdiction over the highway, or wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the vehicles following it to proceed....
They have the right to continue on the road until the designated point if there isn't sufficient area for a safe turnout, which can happen on some stretches of 45 mph road. Once they reach a safe spot, they should turn out. While they're not in the safe spot, you need to slow down and not steam about it. They have the right to be on the public road. If there is a safe spot for them to turn out and they don't turn out, I would honk my horn briefly. Sometimes they don't realize you're behind them.
It's not just the bicyclists that don't follow that rule. It's Americans in general. I wish people would follow section 21656 about pulling over when there's more than 5 or more vehicles are behind them. Part of my commute home daily involves traversing a windy hill road with multiple turnouts that people don't take. I generally put up with it when they are within 5 mph of the speed limit, but when some stupid trucker occasionally goes 5-10 mph with 10 cars following, I would start honking, which sometimes gets another person to start honking. Sometimes it takes 3 or 4 turnouts before he gets a clue, sometimes they're just retarded and don't ever turn out. I wish the other people would start honking, because they all zoom past if the guy pulls over. There's some mental retardation going on here. Maybe it's from too many drugs. Maybe they should raise registration fees and force more driver testing like they do in other countries. It's far too easy to get a driver's license in the US.
Your statement makes you sound the arrogant one, because bicyclists are legally entitled to take the lane for safety reasons.
That said, I don't like the spandex weekend warrior crowd either, because they don't follow the rules of the road or they're testosterone freaks that think they own the road. Bicycles are vehicles and must legally follow the same rules of the road as a car. Then again, most drivers don't follow the rules of the road. The problem is, that most Americans lack courtesy, especially on the road and do their little mini road rage like you do. Jerks all around.
BTW. Fuel taxes didn't exist when the majority of Californian's roads were first laid down. These taxes are a relatively recent phenomenon and they're mainly for maintenance now, which is much less than laying brand new right of ways and roadbed to support the top layer asphalt. Also, bicycles, being very lightweight, cause negligible wear on the roads, so really don't need to pay those same taxes. Semi Trucks pay more, based on their weight, because they can easily tear a road not designed for their load.
People in the US seem angrier in general. They all seem to think that where they're going is more important than where you're going. Courtesy is sorely lacking and parents don't seem to be teaching it. It's not just drivers, many bicyclist ride like this also and run red lights and stop signs, cut off vehicles and nearly run over pedestrians.
I hate those people with the bumper stickers that say "Practice Random Acts of Kindness". Why Random? Are you going to be unkind the rest of the time? Why don't you just try to do it all or at least most of the time?
Well, it seems that I'm obviously not dyslexic, because I can't notice any speed improvement. It all seems the same to me.