I was taught from my driving instructor (who drove trucks for a living) to drive with two feet. As long as you're driving automatics, it only made sense that this provides safer driving since:
1) You can't hit the wrong pedal with the "one foot" you're using. Left foot is always brake, right is always gas.
2) You can cover the brake while holding the accelerator down. Not needing to depress and switch pedals improves reaction times.
3) If you ever did slam down with two feet, brakes override the engine. As a two-foot driver, I doubt I'd press the right foot down to brake, though -- I've had enough close calls. Additionally, I've occasionally tried using my right foot to brake in low-speed situations and it's scary, since I'm so hard-wired to only use the left.
I don't recommend re-teaching existing drivers, but we should at least be teaching new drivers the safest way.
The "one foot" style of driving is simply a poor carryover from manual transmissions. If automatic-transmission cars were designed from scratch today with no backstory, we'd have the brake over on the left, the gas on the right. Simple, obvious.
By causing some degree of inflammation now and causing reforms, the revelations may reduce greater conflicts in the future. Imagine these programs were revealed in their infancy, and stopped then. We wouldn't have had the increased tension we have now. The scope of these programs appears to have continually expanded, virtually unchecked. The uproar over even larger programs could be worse.
It can be analogous to the Pentagon papers from revelation immediately, but long-term, many lives were saved.
I think what is happening is that people can be paced easily. I see it when traffic starts to roll at a traffic light -- people will match the car beside them often.
A deflationary currency sucks, because over time, you will be paying back your loans over time in deflating BTCs that are worth more and more in real money terms, than the money you borrowed.
Most of the time you are baying back more money in real terms than the money you borrowed -- it just depends on the APR of the loan.
An APR of %0 in bitcoins based against a 2% USD inflation would be a equivalent to a 4% APR in USD against the same inflation rate.
Will it be possible that Democrats and Republicans work together for the nation? Will RIAA/MIAA admit that they have been wrong and allow that piracy in fact is not as harmful to the music industry as they have said? Will sheeple wake up and take charge of their lives? Will Thanksgiving day shoppers will be calm, patient, and polite? Will my boss give me a raise?
In no particular order, "no", "no", "no", "no" and "probably not".
The grandparent was talking about the USPS, which has been ruined by requiring pension allocations 75 years in advance, and yes, this was entirely a Republican venture. Nothing you are talking about even resembles the magnitude of pre-funding the USPS has to do.
If natural gas had been cheaper but dirtier than coal, we would likely have greater emission levels. Even a blind squirrel/hand-of-market finds a nut once in a while...
I don't see how people are being forced to use insecure communications. Websites can choose to get certificates from wherever they want. All this does is take out one of the certificate providers.
I'll point out that a lack of increase is effectively a cut because of inflation.
I'm not an accountant by any means, but it's clear to me that anything beyond the most basic accounting is done using expected cash flows in the future. If the budget assumes increased inflows of cash, and there is a project that assumes increased outflows of cash, do you not think that eliminating the increased outflow contributes to less spending?
You could tax 100% of the income of the rich and get about $500 billion a year more than now. Assuming they continue to work for 0$ a year. You can't balance without taxing the middle class, which won't happen.
In order to make your point effectively, you need to say how much more money than the $500 billion we'd potentially get by taxing the middle class or poor at the similar rate of 100%. (Of course, define the thresholds for rich and middle class as well).
Google has quite some balls sending me an email today asking me to upgrade my personal Google Apps account to their business tier today. Only $5/month!
You know what I would pay for? Google Reader.
(For the record, the reason I don't upgrade is because I'm a single user of the domain, but have 3 accounts - one personal, one for root, and one for a separate alerts mailbox...labels don't suffice yet).
It's one thing to shut down a product that is didn't make it out of the gate (e.g., Buzz), but it's another to shut down a product that is considered to be the premier product in its space.
I've been using Google products for a long time, and have understood most of their shutdowns. I used to think that as long as the service wasn't "experimental", it'd stick around. But going forward, I have 0 trust, since obviously even having the #1 product isn't enough.
I understand your point, but don't think we can achieve a "completely enforced reasonable law". Even crafted perfectly at the beginning, the needs for laws change, they often don't expire, and begin to encroach into unrelated territory later on.
Judges may or may not help resolve unjust situations, merely deciding that enforcement is being applied accurately instead of trying to determine a fair outcome.
I think it's helpful to realize that the US government was designed to not be efficient by having three branches. This is opposed to, say, Great Britain, where the government is more or less completely controlled by one party at any one time. The same inefficiency should apply to enforcement of laws, as to their creation.
Slashdot Mirror
I was taught from my driving instructor (who drove trucks for a living) to drive with two feet. As long as you're driving automatics, it only made sense that this provides safer driving since:
1) You can't hit the wrong pedal with the "one foot" you're using. Left foot is always brake, right is always gas.
2) You can cover the brake while holding the accelerator down. Not needing to depress and switch pedals improves reaction times.
3) If you ever did slam down with two feet, brakes override the engine. As a two-foot driver, I doubt I'd press the right foot down to brake, though -- I've had enough close calls. Additionally, I've occasionally tried using my right foot to brake in low-speed situations and it's scary, since I'm so hard-wired to only use the left.
I don't recommend re-teaching existing drivers, but we should at least be teaching new drivers the safest way.
The "one foot" style of driving is simply a poor carryover from manual transmissions. If automatic-transmission cars were designed from scratch today with no backstory, we'd have the brake over on the left, the gas on the right. Simple, obvious.
I suspect the pedal would move, just like it does in my radar-guided cruise control.
Tab completion is largely a function of the shell (bash/zsh/etc.), not of the program being completed.
By causing some degree of inflammation now and causing reforms, the revelations may reduce greater conflicts in the future. Imagine these programs were revealed in their infancy, and stopped then. We wouldn't have had the increased tension we have now. The scope of these programs appears to have continually expanded, virtually unchecked. The uproar over even larger programs could be worse.
It can be analogous to the Pentagon papers from revelation immediately, but long-term, many lives were saved.
I fully agree. Our goal should be competitive markets. Whether that means more regulation, or less regulation, our goal is increased competition.
Subscribers get HTTPS.
I think what is happening is that people can be paced easily. I see it when traffic starts to roll at a traffic light -- people will match the car beside them often.
Most of the time you are baying back more money in real terms than the money you borrowed -- it just depends on the APR of the loan.
An APR of %0 in bitcoins based against a 2% USD inflation would be a equivalent to a 4% APR in USD against the same inflation rate.
In no particular order, "no", "no", "no", "no" and "probably not".
Actually, manufacturers do report their own efficiency numbers, and the EPA spot-checks them.
http://business.time.com/2012/12/10/more-reason-to-be-skeptical-about-new-car-mpg-claims/
This time it's appropriate to Blame Canada!
Consider I-Bonds, inflation-protected bonds from the Treasury.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/indiv/products/prod_ibonds_glance.htm
Bush, Democrat in disguise?
H.R. 6407 (109th): Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act
Signed by the President Dec 20, 2006
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr6407
The grandparent was talking about the USPS, which has been ruined by requiring pension allocations 75 years in advance, and yes, this was entirely a Republican venture. Nothing you are talking about even resembles the magnitude of pre-funding the USPS has to do.
If natural gas had been cheaper but dirtier than coal, we would likely have greater emission levels. Even a blind squirrel/hand-of-market finds a nut once in a while...
The big difference is that banks are regulated under laws and publicly-known regulations. What is applying to Google is not a law, and is secret.
Actually, it only takes one party in control of 41% of the Senate to grind government to a halt.
I don't see how people are being forced to use insecure communications. Websites can choose to get certificates from wherever they want. All this does is take out one of the certificate providers.
I'll point out that a lack of increase is effectively a cut because of inflation.
I'm not an accountant by any means, but it's clear to me that anything beyond the most basic accounting is done using expected cash flows in the future. If the budget assumes increased inflows of cash, and there is a project that assumes increased outflows of cash, do you not think that eliminating the increased outflow contributes to less spending?
In order to make your point effectively, you need to say how much more money than the $500 billion we'd potentially get by taxing the middle class or poor at the similar rate of 100%. (Of course, define the thresholds for rich and middle class as well).
Which car is this?
Google has quite some balls sending me an email today asking me to upgrade my personal Google Apps account to their business tier today. Only $5/month!
You know what I would pay for? Google Reader.
(For the record, the reason I don't upgrade is because I'm a single user of the domain, but have 3 accounts - one personal, one for root, and one for a separate alerts mailbox...labels don't suffice yet).
It's one thing to shut down a product that is didn't make it out of the gate (e.g., Buzz), but it's another to shut down a product that is considered to be the premier product in its space.
I've been using Google products for a long time, and have understood most of their shutdowns. I used to think that as long as the service wasn't "experimental", it'd stick around. But going forward, I have 0 trust, since obviously even having the #1 product isn't enough.
There is no question I'd pay for Google reader. One of the great properties it has is that searching for subscriptions is extremely easy.
I understand your point, but don't think we can achieve a "completely enforced reasonable law". Even crafted perfectly at the beginning, the needs for laws change, they often don't expire, and begin to encroach into unrelated territory later on.
Judges may or may not help resolve unjust situations, merely deciding that enforcement is being applied accurately instead of trying to determine a fair outcome.
I think it's helpful to realize that the US government was designed to not be efficient by having three branches. This is opposed to, say, Great Britain, where the government is more or less completely controlled by one party at any one time. The same inefficiency should apply to enforcement of laws, as to their creation.