Unless you're very overweight, the span of your shoulders is the widest part of the human body. There's only so much that can be accomplished when seats are made narrower than the average shoulder width, and seat pitch is so short that even modestly tall people (I'm 6'0") have their knees touching the seat in front of them even when seats are upright and fully locked.
Business/first is an option, of course, but it's not available on the regional jets that have made such huge inroads in American air transport.
Intercepting and tampering with an email with an attached image is a lot easier than intercepting and tampering with a physical ballot in the possession of the US Mail. Something placed inside a physical envelope and handed off to a postal worker enjoys enormous protection under US law; email does not.
The best use for a bullet pen is in your car. It easily fits within a small tray in your center console, and as you say is highly tolerant of mistreatment. I find them useless for general purpose because they don't remain clipped to a pocket for easy accessibility. In the car context this is an advantage, because you will never take the space pen along when you have any other option - it is easy to leave it in the car at all times.
Try the Pilot Precise V5 RT - the Precise V5 is a rollerball that uses a fountain pen-like ink (so it dries much more quickly than gel ink), but the RT means it's in a retractable/clickable format rather than removable-cap.
I made this comment downthread, but if you like the G2 and similar gel pens (like the Uni-Ball 207) you will LOVE the Pilot Precise V5 RT, which is the Precise V5 Rollerball pen in a click-retract package instead of in a removable-cap package. Rollerball != ballpoint; the ink is the same ink used in fountain pens, and it shows - smooth flow under minimal pressure, with quick drying.
Perhaps you like its size and shape. For writing? I'd never use anything but a fountain pen or a rollerball, neither of which requires any pressure but the weight of the pen to start the ink flowing onto paper. That means you use a lot less effort to write.
There is actually a very interesting theory about why Americans are so much more likely to be skeptical of AGW than, say, Europeans. It's not my own, but I can't remember where I read it so I'll just have to say that I'm copying someone else's idea.
First, if you look at recent maps of world temperature deviations from normal across the seasons, the standout change in Europe has been toward hotter summer temperatures (motivating the adoption of air conditioning further north than would be expected, but without any corresponding savings on winter heating), while North America has mostly experienced milder winters (saving lots of money in more northern areas without costing it in southern states during peak summer). It doesn't feel the same. Second, the rise of the Green types in what used to be called the conservation movement meant that the cause increasingly became identified with leftist politics and an anti-hunter stance - depriving them of a major source of funding.
Talking about catastrophic North American weather is probably the worst possible argument to use to convince Americans, because the weather here is so staggeringly violent that a mild worsening is easily shrugged off as a change in impact location rather than a change in climate.
You mean like the Port of South Louisiana? Ports are a lot more automated than they used to be. They don't need nearly as many people to work. New Orleans itself is not particularly essential to the function of the port; most of the facilities are located upriver from the city. If you look at one of the sources cited in that article (here, though data are from 2004), you'll note that the ports of Baton Rouge, Plaquemines, South Louisiana, and New Orleans added together (reasonable, because they are all physically contiguous) account for almost three times the shipping volume of the Port of NY/NJ.
If your disaster recovery plan for a business based on an island doesn't consider that all transportation may be cut, you're not doing a very good job. Otherwise, you're right.
I'm using it, it's just very susceptible to a small mistake in initial finger placement.
Of course, I have large hands (the last joint of my thumb will completely cover V-G-Y and everything to the right of them on a GS3, not exactly a small phone) so that's part of the problem.
Totally agree. Typing with one thumb at a speed close to two-hand typing is brilliant. However, they really need to figure out a way to add some kind of gesture to prevent the really common misreads - out/put/pot/pit, if/it/of, so forth - the "bounce from letter to letter to specify" feature doesn't work that well. At least we no longer get "Errol" when trying to type "will" or "well".
If they could license the prediction code from Swiftkey, the combination would be almost unbeatable.
The website is currently down due to Sandy, but go buy the one on this page and use it with your M. I no longer have an M - it died due to coffee spill - but that adapter worked perfectly. I keep it around just in case I ever pass by another M and can't resist myself.
This has nothing to do with corporations or trust in neighbors and everything to do with defending against an overzealous prosecutor who wants to make a name for himself.
The American medical school system accepts all sorts of students, so long as they have high GPA's and MCAT scores. When you get to medical school, though, you realize why all the traditional premed students have been cramming from day one. In med school, the dumbest guy in the class is pretty sharp. Tests tend to focus on the most arcane material imaginable, and so you have to memorize trivia. Experience helps. Of course, trivia is what medicine is really all about - the common things are common, and so easily dealt with. The odd cases are the ones to learn how to recognize.
Allow me to act the part of the brother officer, if you will, and suggest that the conversation you and that doctor had was possibly a product of differing definitions.
When most people ask, "is this addictive?", what they mean is, "will I become physically dependent on this medication?" or "will I become a junkie if I use this even once?". In that case, properly prescribed methamphetamine is actually a pretty low-risk drug. Further, most doctors are steeped in the logic of the DSM-IV, even if they're not psychiatrists. For that, see here and notice that "addiction" doesn't appear - there are substance abuse and dependence, but "addiction" is a popular term that doesn't really have a good home in medicine. There are all sorts of drugs that cause tolerance to their effects and physical withdrawal symptoms if abruptly stopped but that have no abuse liability because they won't get you high (drugs for high blood pressure are a great example - beta blockers, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, clonidine all do it). Conversely, even a drug that could be abused is not necessarily "addictive" in the casual sense that many people mean - I've seen plenty of people who abused benzodiazepines (Xanax, Valium, etc.), but taking one or two here or there is harmless. I took one during a recent trip so I could sleep on a long flight. I didn't get high; I just went straight the hell to sleep and woke up six hours later.
In short, I suspect that the question being answered in the doctor's mind wasn't the one you asked in yours. That's not your fault - as you point out, we are supposed to be the experts - but I hope this helps explain it from the other side of the white coat.
I don't think doctors are more truthful than anyone else on a personal level, but the eternal fear of lawsuits is a strong discipline on professional misbehavior. That's one difference between us and cops: we are ultimately accountable to a system of which we are not a component part
Anyway, totally agree about our "justice" system. Tremendously biased in all the wrong ways - you know, you have to make quota on arrests, arresting white kids generates too much paperwork, so you arrest black kids, but not the hardcore thugs/gang members, because those guys are dangerous, just the dumb teenager smoking weed on the street because he thinks it looks cool. Screws up a lot of people's lives to have that sort of thing on their record - especially the people who are most likely to think that smoking weed in public is a cool idea, because blue-collar jobs often discriminate heavily against anyone with a substance record. (Except painting. Maybe the fumes make it better?)
You're on an English-speaking website based in the US, discussing the US mobile market. The World [sic] is Potentially Interesting But Ultimately Not Germane.
There is the small problem that police officers, by definition of the job, mostly interact with scum. I'm pretty anti-cop, but it's hardly unusual that they think more highly of a "brother officer" than of some random member of the public (who will, for their own very good reasons, usually want to end any interaction with said officer as quickly as possible and by saying as little as possible).
This is pretty common across professions. I'm a doctor, and (e.g.) if another doctor tells me some patient is a drug seeker, I'm almost certainly going to believe them unless I have some serious reason to doubt them (it's her ex-husband, his former neighbor that he hates, etc.). By contrast, I'm expected by the DEA and my state medical board to be suspicious of patients and can get in significant trouble up to and including federal prison if I'm not sufficiently circumspect.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless you're very overweight, the span of your shoulders is the widest part of the human body. There's only so much that can be accomplished when seats are made narrower than the average shoulder width, and seat pitch is so short that even modestly tall people (I'm 6'0") have their knees touching the seat in front of them even when seats are upright and fully locked.
Business/first is an option, of course, but it's not available on the regional jets that have made such huge inroads in American air transport.
Intercepting and tampering with an email with an attached image is a lot easier than intercepting and tampering with a physical ballot in the possession of the US Mail. Something placed inside a physical envelope and handed off to a postal worker enjoys enormous protection under US law; email does not.
Is running DOS a big deal? I would assume not, but I suppose I could be wrong.
Ah, yes, you're insane. Sorry.
The best use for a bullet pen is in your car. It easily fits within a small tray in your center console, and as you say is highly tolerant of mistreatment. I find them useless for general purpose because they don't remain clipped to a pocket for easy accessibility. In the car context this is an advantage, because you will never take the space pen along when you have any other option - it is easy to leave it in the car at all times.
Usually not - more like 8000-10000 feet, which is roughly the range of a ski resort.
Try the Pilot Precise V5 RT - the Precise V5 is a rollerball that uses a fountain pen-like ink (so it dries much more quickly than gel ink), but the RT means it's in a retractable/clickable format rather than removable-cap.
I made this comment downthread, but if you like the G2 and similar gel pens (like the Uni-Ball 207) you will LOVE the Pilot Precise V5 RT, which is the Precise V5 Rollerball pen in a click-retract package instead of in a removable-cap package. Rollerball != ballpoint; the ink is the same ink used in fountain pens, and it shows - smooth flow under minimal pressure, with quick drying.
Perhaps you like its size and shape. For writing? I'd never use anything but a fountain pen or a rollerball, neither of which requires any pressure but the weight of the pen to start the ink flowing onto paper. That means you use a lot less effort to write.
gubmint/ evil science/ liberals
Your words, not mine. Who, precisely, were you meaning to slur with that line? Poor Democrats?
Katrina wasn't small. It was huge. Sandy was just bigger. You want a small, destructive storm? You want Camille.
There is actually a very interesting theory about why Americans are so much more likely to be skeptical of AGW than, say, Europeans. It's not my own, but I can't remember where I read it so I'll just have to say that I'm copying someone else's idea.
First, if you look at recent maps of world temperature deviations from normal across the seasons, the standout change in Europe has been toward hotter summer temperatures (motivating the adoption of air conditioning further north than would be expected, but without any corresponding savings on winter heating), while North America has mostly experienced milder winters (saving lots of money in more northern areas without costing it in southern states during peak summer). It doesn't feel the same. Second, the rise of the Green types in what used to be called the conservation movement meant that the cause increasingly became identified with leftist politics and an anti-hunter stance - depriving them of a major source of funding.
Talking about catastrophic North American weather is probably the worst possible argument to use to convince Americans, because the weather here is so staggeringly violent that a mild worsening is easily shrugged off as a change in impact location rather than a change in climate.
You mean like the Port of South Louisiana? Ports are a lot more automated than they used to be. They don't need nearly as many people to work. New Orleans itself is not particularly essential to the function of the port; most of the facilities are located upriver from the city. If you look at one of the sources cited in that article (here, though data are from 2004), you'll note that the ports of Baton Rouge, Plaquemines, South Louisiana, and New Orleans added together (reasonable, because they are all physically contiguous) account for almost three times the shipping volume of the Port of NY/NJ.
I'm sorry, are you trying to tell us that New Orleans is a Republican stronghold? Or New York?
If your disaster recovery plan for a business based on an island doesn't consider that all transportation may be cut, you're not doing a very good job. Otherwise, you're right.
I'm using it, it's just very susceptible to a small mistake in initial finger placement.
Of course, I have large hands (the last joint of my thumb will completely cover V-G-Y and everything to the right of them on a GS3, not exactly a small phone) so that's part of the problem.
Totally agree. Typing with one thumb at a speed close to two-hand typing is brilliant. However, they really need to figure out a way to add some kind of gesture to prevent the really common misreads - out/put/pot/pit, if/it/of, so forth - the "bounce from letter to letter to specify" feature doesn't work that well. At least we no longer get "Errol" when trying to type "will" or "well".
If they could license the prediction code from Swiftkey, the combination would be almost unbeatable.
The website is currently down due to Sandy, but go buy the one on this page and use it with your M. I no longer have an M - it died due to coffee spill - but that adapter worked perfectly. I keep it around just in case I ever pass by another M and can't resist myself.
This has nothing to do with corporations or trust in neighbors and everything to do with defending against an overzealous prosecutor who wants to make a name for himself.
Pilot V5 RT. It's the 0.5 mm Pilot V5 Rollerball in a clickable package. Ink looks great, dries much more quickly than gel ink.
The American medical school system accepts all sorts of students, so long as they have high GPA's and MCAT scores. When you get to medical school, though, you realize why all the traditional premed students have been cramming from day one. In med school, the dumbest guy in the class is pretty sharp. Tests tend to focus on the most arcane material imaginable, and so you have to memorize trivia. Experience helps. Of course, trivia is what medicine is really all about - the common things are common, and so easily dealt with. The odd cases are the ones to learn how to recognize.
Allow me to act the part of the brother officer, if you will, and suggest that the conversation you and that doctor had was possibly a product of differing definitions.
When most people ask, "is this addictive?", what they mean is, "will I become physically dependent on this medication?" or "will I become a junkie if I use this even once?". In that case, properly prescribed methamphetamine is actually a pretty low-risk drug. Further, most doctors are steeped in the logic of the DSM-IV, even if they're not psychiatrists. For that, see here and notice that "addiction" doesn't appear - there are substance abuse and dependence, but "addiction" is a popular term that doesn't really have a good home in medicine. There are all sorts of drugs that cause tolerance to their effects and physical withdrawal symptoms if abruptly stopped but that have no abuse liability because they won't get you high (drugs for high blood pressure are a great example - beta blockers, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, clonidine all do it). Conversely, even a drug that could be abused is not necessarily "addictive" in the casual sense that many people mean - I've seen plenty of people who abused benzodiazepines (Xanax, Valium, etc.), but taking one or two here or there is harmless. I took one during a recent trip so I could sleep on a long flight. I didn't get high; I just went straight the hell to sleep and woke up six hours later.
In short, I suspect that the question being answered in the doctor's mind wasn't the one you asked in yours. That's not your fault - as you point out, we are supposed to be the experts - but I hope this helps explain it from the other side of the white coat.
I don't think doctors are more truthful than anyone else on a personal level, but the eternal fear of lawsuits is a strong discipline on professional misbehavior. That's one difference between us and cops: we are ultimately accountable to a system of which we are not a component part
Anyway, totally agree about our "justice" system. Tremendously biased in all the wrong ways - you know, you have to make quota on arrests, arresting white kids generates too much paperwork, so you arrest black kids, but not the hardcore thugs/gang members, because those guys are dangerous, just the dumb teenager smoking weed on the street because he thinks it looks cool. Screws up a lot of people's lives to have that sort of thing on their record - especially the people who are most likely to think that smoking weed in public is a cool idea, because blue-collar jobs often discriminate heavily against anyone with a substance record. (Except painting. Maybe the fumes make it better?)
You're on an English-speaking website based in the US, discussing the US mobile market. The World [sic] is Potentially Interesting But Ultimately Not Germane.
There is the small problem that police officers, by definition of the job, mostly interact with scum. I'm pretty anti-cop, but it's hardly unusual that they think more highly of a "brother officer" than of some random member of the public (who will, for their own very good reasons, usually want to end any interaction with said officer as quickly as possible and by saying as little as possible).
This is pretty common across professions. I'm a doctor, and (e.g.) if another doctor tells me some patient is a drug seeker, I'm almost certainly going to believe them unless I have some serious reason to doubt them (it's her ex-husband, his former neighbor that he hates, etc.). By contrast, I'm expected by the DEA and my state medical board to be suspicious of patients and can get in significant trouble up to and including federal prison if I'm not sufficiently circumspect.