According to some posts made by the suspects: they lured the girl to a party under false pretenses, drugged her, and then had her way with her. At one point, on video, they're caught commenting that they couldn't tell if she was passed out or dead and didn't care either way since they got their rocks off. Then commented/question on whether it's really rape if she never even got the chance to consent or say no.
Actually, the Death Penalty would be counter-intuitive... it would lead to more dead rape victims.
If a rapist is going to get the death penalty anyway, a LOT more of them would probably decide to kill the victim so they couldn't turn them in / report it / etc.
Obviously you have psychos that kill their victims already (before or after) and you have some people that probably still wouldn't kill even if the death penalty was already on the table. But a large percentage would probably decide to do it.
So, by killing the rapists you wind up killing more of the victims.
Don't get me wrong: I feel that rapists and the lot deserve a very painful existence followed by an eternity in the lowest pits of Hell. But I also think that as bad as the victims feel... they deserve a chance to actually LIVE afterwards.
I think snow on the road is a pretty good indicator that there's snow on the road.
Funny
But the idea is to let them know that there's ICE on the road. Ice does not require snow: a mild 40F afternoon with rain can easily be followed by a 20F evening. That moisture would still be there and thus turned to ice. And if it was just a light rain, said ice wouldn't be that obvious. Heck, you even have to worry about freezing rain and the like.
Granted, this could have just been a snarky comment and you knew this. But, while I'm not exactly sure how to feel about this idea, I've talked to people about it before that seriously thought the paint was stupid for exactly the same reason you stated.
My thought is that the glow-in-the-dark paint will be more expensive than the standard line marking paint. It's hard enough for most communities here in the Northeast US to find the budget for the normal paint, which wears off each winter due to winter salting and sanding.
Which brings up another issue... how well would the glow-in-the-dark work long-term?
Even if the paint isn't worn away immediately... most (non-toxic) glow in the dark paints are solar powered (for lack of a better phrase). As time goes on, even if not worn out, it would become dirty. Dirty would mean harder to see... but more importantly that it would absorb less light.
So long term... it would eventually stop "powering up" during the day unless they can keep the streets clean without wearing away the paint. In which case, some motorist that has grown used to seeing the snowflakes on a particular stretch of road might see they're not lit up and think "Oh I guess there's no ice here"
Well, in the end I don't know what the exact temperatures were those times as it's been a few years since I had it. But I do know at least once it would fluxuate a bunch due to whatever (saw it say both 34 and 36 a couple of times in a drive). Depending on my engine temp, if I was stuck behind a big car with a big exhaust, if I was driving fast, if I was sitting in the sun vs going in the shade. I don't recall the specifics.
It could be that they did something like you suggest, but the margin was too narrow and thus my driving conditions kept triggering it like every 5 minutes. Like maybe it was like 35 exactly, started reading 35.7 (rounded up to 36) then started reading 34.9... etc.
Personally, I think putting it on a timer would work best. It went off, it shouldn't be able to be triggered again for the next (say) 30 minutes or until the car restarts. Because if it went off once that should be enough to let you know.
But, my new car doesn't do that. So that's at least one thing that my current car does that doesn't bother me. Now if only Ford would fix some other issues in their TOUCH system.
Well, reflect instead of glow. But yeh, which is why I put in that bit about the ones that I think need it are the ones that are already starting to wear away and would probably be fixed with just a new coat of the regular paint.
I agree with the maintenance bit. But the roads (by me) lack in maintenance in general. If they can't get their act together to plug in the axel-destroying pot holes for a long time... I can't see them running to repaint the lines that have started to wear away.
Some places here in NJ do the same thing, though normally private property like parking lots but I've seen them on the occasional public road. Though perhaps those were just home owners doing it themselves because they were sick of plows messing up their curbs.
Flexible orange poles get stuck near the curb so the plows no where their edges are and don't destroy a curb / sidewalk / etc.
Though since we don't get the "epic" snow in my area that other states or countries get, the poles are usually only 3 feet / 1 meter tall.
If they were "everywhere" then at least that would show where the edges of the road are. Unfortunately, it wouldn't help with the middle line or with multi-lane roads.
I think the point of the glow-in-the-dark "snowflake" is for when conditions are icy... without the snow on the ground. Obviously, if snow is on the ground... that's enough warning for "there may be ice"
It happens a fair amount in certain areas: either with freezing rain, 40F rain during the day following by an evening of 28F temperatures. I imagine the mild-afternoon w/ rain followed by the freezing evening is the bigger issue as a person might think that it's still too warm for ice based on the mild temperatures during their lunch break.
Here in NJ it happens quite a bit, which is of course "fun" when people don't realize it and skid through traffic lights into the middle of an intersection of drive into someone's lawn because they went too fast on a curve.
My previous car, it would "ding" and take up the whole radio/gps screen whenever the temperature dipped below 35F. And it would stay there for like 30 seconds during which time I couldn't see or use the touch screen (see the map, change the station to one of my favorites, etc). Normally, this wasn't so bad.. just slightly annoying.
EXCEPT when the temperature would be right AROUND 35F. Because between wind, my engine heat, etc. the temperature might fluxuate between 35F and 36F constantly. So thing would "ding" and take up my screen every could of minutes. And I couldn't turn the feature off.
Sure, you might be thinking "how often is the temperature right around 35F" I thought the same thing the first time it repeated... but apparently it's more common in NJ than you'd think.
My current car just has the exterior temperate. It does NOT warn me about the presence of ice nor does it "ding"
Meh, I wouldn't say a waste. There are some roads I've been on that I actually wish the white-lines would glow in the dark. Roads without street lights with (sometimes) more dangerous conditions (curves and such). Of course, some of these roads make me wish for that, because the lines are starting to wear away so it's hard to see... and a plain re-paint might just solve that.
As for showing when freezing conditions are in effect, I guess if they're going to go re-paint with glow-in-the-dark, this isn't a complete waste. And particularly only certain bad stretches of road.
Not all people have an "exterior temperature" reading on their car nor do they care to check. If some roads (like bridges) are more susceptible to freezing, or are insanely dangerous when freezing such as a specific stretch that has 10x the accidents of the average iced road, then it could help a little.
Meanwhile, it would help make the association for drivers that "something is not normal" and adjust their driving habits. Here in NJ, we have people that don't realize how bad road conditions are so they drive just as wild as when the roads are pristine. Which, I guess wouldn't be insane if you have the skills to back it up or are used to it because you live in an area where this is common-place. But they don't, so you see cars and SUVs doing the "idiot dance" across the road because they don't know any better. If you can make that visual association in their heads (ice + roads == bad) maybe it could reduce it.
Personally, I drive fine but I also drive careful when conditions warrant it.
Not really. Yes, he might be overqualified if he went to a Data Entry position and they saw he used to make a lot more as an actual Developer.
But with a basic job like gas stations, flipping burgers, etc... there really isn't much as "overqualified" They take people, and they realize since times are tough people are looking for scrub jobs instead of unemployment or because their unemployment already ran out.
Now... he obviously can't price himself out of the market. If he's going to ask for more money than some average Joe that wants the job... then yeh he's going to get passed over.
The article is unclear: either they tested themselves or they tested the shake for themselves.
It's not that hard to figure out that you were drugged to the point of passing out, and I imagine people that dabbled in drugs and stuff in their youth can tell easier (sensations, experiences, etc). They said the shake tasted funny, they passed out, couldn't wake up, then had what sounds like hangover-like symptoms. I mean, unless they were completely roofied and forgot what was happening the hour-or-so before they passed out.
"Hmm, we both drank something that tasted funny, passed out a short while later around the same time, then felt wasted when we tried to wake up at 1AM, and then still when we woke up the next day"
If it was JUST you, then sure... maybe you just caught the flu. But between it being *2* people at the same time, and the sensation probably felt "off" then I'm not surprised they deduced they'd been doped. Though I'm sure they were hoping they were wrong, or that it was going to be like bad nutmeg / etc used in the shake
If you take heavy a tad too many prescription strength pain-killers for example, it's not like the pain just stops. There's a buzz / feeling / sensation that goes along with it. They probably felt something similar there.
Being a blacksmith, you could probably make some money but it's a niche market. Meanwhile, it's not like they don't exist... you can buy swords at various places. I think even SkyMall used to sell sword replicas from films and such.
It would be great if the world simply rewarded people for doing things, even if just above average. There are things I'd love to do: glass blowing, metal work, etc... unfortunately I need an income. And while I might be able to make a living, between the demand for some things not being huge and my skills might wind up being only "meh" I'd rather keep the job I have.
Don't get me wrong, I LIKE programming... but sometimes I would like to do something singular like the above, where I actually produce something tangible.
Exactly the point I was making. The AC was asking how can you have a copyright if you can't competitively provide it. Following that logic, a copyright wouldn't be enforceable if the owner couldn't do anything competitive with it.
I was using an example of how silly that is: leaving it as "oh well, you win... because I couldn't compete"
Obviously, in real life, the kid gets a lawyer and sues the living **** out of the publisher. Because that's what the copyright is there for.
Honestly, it doesn't matter. Video games are so prevelant... it's hard to find anyone 35 or under that both (A) does NOT have a violent video game in the house and (B) hasn't played violent video games in the past. You might as well blame bottled water: chances are you either have a bottle somewhere in your house or you've at least drank some in the last X years.
It's like when Jack Thomson proclaimed during hours one of the school shooting a few years ago before the police released any details or went to the guy's house, that he guarantees that the shooter has an FPS game somewhere at home. He might as well have said "I guarantee the guy has a sweater in a drawer somewhere in his house" Video games are prevalent enough, and obviously someone violent will have them.
With the electronics, it wasn't a problem of something getting physically stuck but a sensor sending faulty data regardless of the position of the pedal, or the software just completely putzing up. Supposedly even flooring it wouldn't "reset" the issue. Think frozen computer... clicking erratically won't fix the issue. In my case, the sensor was faulty and would occasionally just stop reading input from the pedal at all until I turned off the car (think "reboot").
But yes, my first thought would be to throw it into neutral so the brakes aren't fighting the engine. In my case, I never had to worry about THAT since as I mentioned, the occasional throttle fluxuation didn't net me any real acceleration.
But, you figure, the issue isn't so much "OMG I'm on an open highway and I can't slow down" which actually happened to a few people that couldn't think of "Neutral" on their automatics. But I digress.
The problem is when you only really have a second or two before the hit. Like the car in front of you jammed on the brakes, or you go from a rolling stop to full-blown acceleration at a stop sign / intersection, pedestrians crossing, etc. In those situations, you only really have 1-2 seconds to *undo* the acceleration before the thump/crash/whatever.
In those 1 - 2 seconds, a person tends to go from: - Time to stop, slow down, whatever - Brake - Why am I not slowing down enough / W T H is the engine still revving / Why am I speeding up - Brake harder - Maybe I should put it in Neut.... - Thump
Especially if you don't know w t h is going on, as this was going on for a while before it hit the news.
Did you ever stop to think that maybe Batman should be in the Public Domain by now, rendering all of this moot?
I'd considered RECENTLY as I was having a debate about the whole "Disney" thing and how they pretty much took control of a lot of old content. My position is more of a personal preference since (A) IANAL and (B) the law is on DC's side about not releasing Batman to Public Domain.
I think I'm OK with a company holding the rights AS LONG AS they are actively developing it. In the case of Batman: there are multiple comics out each month that continue and expand the story. They've branched off with Batgirl, Batwoman, Nightwing, Red Robin, Red Hood, Batman Inc, etc. And film-wise, they're still releasing new stuff. They've done stuff and gone in directions that the 1930's would never dream. Sure, there's a lot of crud in there, but at least in the Batman franchise the comics have more good than bad.
If they were just SITTING on the content, then I'd have a problem with it and want it on public domain. OR if they were just releasing a cruddy sequel every X years just to maintain their license because those license-extensions usually stink (think the Fantastic Four film from the 90s).
But in the case of comics, I'm OK with it. Sure, I'd RATHER the artists the created the characters owned it (in part or in whole) but I'm not against DC keeping their content from Public Domain so long as they continue to develop it.
But if it was something that was dropped entirely and gathering dust, then I think it should probably go to Public Domain after 50 years.
Toyota accelerator fiasco? Was that not found to be oldsters who can't tell brake from gas?
Bring back 3 pedals, that would sort this out.
No, a few years ago Toyota had an actual issue that was perhaps blown out of proportion, but it existed in some rare cars. I forget if it was a software glitch or some bad parts.
Accelerators are electronic / computerized now. It USED to be, you pushed the accelerator, which pulled a cable, which pulled a widget that controls the throttle. Now it's computerized: so the pedals now send a signal to a computer that says "He's pushing it this hard" and the computer says "OK, let's adjust the air/fuel mixture and increase the throttle, so we save some gas"
The issue was, the computer was having issues so it was thinking users were accelerating when they weren't. Sometimes the foot was off the pedal completely and it was still accelerating.
It was in small cases whose instances were probably exaggerated, but it was happening from time to time. But you can see the safety issue... people car would speed up (or at least not slow down) as they approached stop signs, pedestrians, traffic on the highway, etc.
Heck, I had similar issues in my GM car. In my case, the pedal "unit" was faulty. When pressed, it started sending the data that I was flooring it / releasing it / flooring it / releasing it every second so my car was going all over the pace. I had to have it replaced. Fortunately for my case it wasn't as much of a safety issue as the accelerate would be cancelled out by the release.
[How can you copright] Something you can't competitively provide to the public?
Let's turn back the clock to the 80's or 90's before the Internet really got big..
The following scenario doesn't apply to the batmobile issue, but it DOES apply to your train of thought which I've heard from others before...
Young Author: This is great, my new concept of a super hero with backstory X, costume Y, and logo Z is a great idea! I've had it since childhood. Let me just get a copyright and stuff. Maybe show off a self-printed Issue #1 at a covention. I could probably find a printer to make some copies, I could probably sell a few dozen copies.
Evil Publisher: Hey Bob, I was at the convent and I saw a possible new idea for a hero we could use. Let's release it.
(A few months later)
Young Author: W T H! That was my idea. It has the same backstory, costume, and flippin' logo! I copyrighted it and everything. You're selling thousands of copies all around the country!
Evil Publisher: How can you copyright something you can't competitively provide to the public.
Young Author: Oh I guess you're right. I should have listened to that Anonymous Coward.
It's not like Warner is selling their own cars these guys compete with. What's the point of pissing off your fanbase?
They have to protect their property somewhat. If the car has the Batman logo, then they might have more of a leg to stand on. DC owns the Batman brand, letting someone (A) profit from it without their cut or consent and (B) potentially DAMAGE (or at the least dilute) the brand would hurt their bottom line.
Let's say they shrug their shoulders and say "have at it" like some fans want. Where does it end? I'm not talking about fan fiction and stuff, but for-profit stuff.
Let's take an EXTREME, let's say they shrug their shoulders completely and let anyone do anything with "Batman" Someone could technically make a cartoon that airs on Showtime or something... where Batman is a racist child abuser or something. Such a thing would hurt the Batman brand. Obviously that's an extreme example but you get the point.
But let's say in THIS example... some guy starts mass producing the Batmobile (logo and all) and there are hundreds of them on the road. Maybe the classic one, maybe the Jim Burton ones, whatever. And lets say either the quality stinks or there are some bad accidents with it or something, like the Toyota accelerator fiasco but worse. DC would start getting a LOT of bad press, even if it was just informal.
Some uninformed parents might say "Oh, I'm not taking my son to see the new Batman movie... not after DC let those incidents happen with their Batmobiles" or whatever.
IANAL, but even fro ma practical standpoint... I see it being fuzzy.
I imagine it falls somewhere between kit-cars and merchandise. Also, I imagine the Batman Logo would hurt it. If it had THAT, then DC would tear them a new one. Without it? Hard to say.
For example, let's say you start selling sculptures of model X-Wings / Millenium Falcons / Enterprises / Battlestars / etc. without first getting permission / approval / licenses. Well, you'd be violating a bunch of copyrights / trademarks / etc. and would be very open to a lawsuit. Lucas and the rest of them could tear you a new one if they wanted to.
Now let's say you copy (EXACTLY) a 2012 Ferrari. I don't mean "it has similar lines as a Ferrari" but you start selling it exactly the same (or as close as possible). Similar specs / HP, same body, the flippin' Ferrari logo. You'd probably also be hit with a lawsuit. Without the logo you'd still have trouble, but the logo would open up a whole new case of issues.
But let's say your car is just really similar... like it has a near-indistinguishable front and rear as another car. For example, around ~2006 some manufacturer (I think Toyota) copied a LOT of the body styling of the Cadillac CTS. The first company could probably go after you if you copied something very original or ground-breaking... but I imagine it would be a toss-up.
And then you have kit-cars, where you can sell kits that let enthusiasts build their own cars: Model Ts, small popular sports cars from the 50s, etc. But I don't know if the sellers have to buy a license / get approval / etc. before selling the kits.
... bullshit. 10,000 pages a year? Even if you count every page of every book and all the toilet paper I wipe my arse with it would be a fraction of that.
I'm all for saving paper, but this kind of exaggeration isn't very helpful. It's like the old one about plastic bags having an average lifetime of less than three minutes, which seems to ignore the fact that most people use them as bin liners.
It's actually not THAT much when you think about it.
Over a year, you typically have under 250 work days. So let's say ~240 10,000 / 240 = 42 sheets per day
I know people that blow that average away every... single... day. And that's NOT even counting the lawyers I know that need paperwork for EVERYTHING they do. They go through hundreds of sheets per day.
Some people need to print documents: either as part of their job or because it makes life easier.
Could they reduce it? Sure. But if you have to read documents for 4 hour stretches so you can review/comment/correct, even I prefer reading on paper instead of an LCD. An e-Ink solution might be ideal but then it becomes harder to comment/highlight/correct/etc.
True, but "robots first" isn't a bad plan so long as we don't get lazy about it. It would be cool if we could send some automatons to start terraforming or at least building some basic structures. You know, law some infrastructure in place before we get there. Getting there is going to be tough, but building from scratch in an inhospitable place is going to be REALLY tough.
That is assuming we don't get lazy about it, as in "What's the rush, Mars-Bot is getting stuff ready for us"
Or, you know, the Singularity doesn't happen. Those robotic Martians might not want us there to mess up their place.
Slashdot Mirror
According to some posts made by the suspects: they lured the girl to a party under false pretenses, drugged her, and then had her way with her. At one point, on video, they're caught commenting that they couldn't tell if she was passed out or dead and didn't care either way since they got their rocks off. Then commented/question on whether it's really rape if she never even got the chance to consent or say no.
Really creepy stuff.
NOTE: by "they deserve a chance" I mean "the VICTIMS deserve a chance"
My post is all about the victims.
Actually, the Death Penalty would be counter-intuitive... it would lead to more dead rape victims.
If a rapist is going to get the death penalty anyway, a LOT more of them would probably decide to kill the victim so they couldn't turn them in / report it / etc.
Obviously you have psychos that kill their victims already (before or after) and you have some people that probably still wouldn't kill even if the death penalty was already on the table. But a large percentage would probably decide to do it.
So, by killing the rapists you wind up killing more of the victims.
Don't get me wrong: I feel that rapists and the lot deserve a very painful existence followed by an eternity in the lowest pits of Hell. But I also think that as bad as the victims feel... they deserve a chance to actually LIVE afterwards.
I think snow on the road is a pretty good indicator that there's snow on the road.
Funny
But the idea is to let them know that there's ICE on the road. Ice does not require snow: a mild 40F afternoon with rain can easily be followed by a 20F evening. That moisture would still be there and thus turned to ice. And if it was just a light rain, said ice wouldn't be that obvious. Heck, you even have to worry about freezing rain and the like.
Granted, this could have just been a snarky comment and you knew this. But, while I'm not exactly sure how to feel about this idea, I've talked to people about it before that seriously thought the paint was stupid for exactly the same reason you stated.
My thought is that the glow-in-the-dark paint will be more expensive than the standard line marking paint. It's hard enough for most communities here in the Northeast US to find the budget for the normal paint, which wears off each winter due to winter salting and sanding.
Which brings up another issue... how well would the glow-in-the-dark work long-term?
Even if the paint isn't worn away immediately... most (non-toxic) glow in the dark paints are solar powered (for lack of a better phrase). As time goes on, even if not worn out, it would become dirty. Dirty would mean harder to see... but more importantly that it would absorb less light.
So long term... it would eventually stop "powering up" during the day unless they can keep the streets clean without wearing away the paint. In which case, some motorist that has grown used to seeing the snowflakes on a particular stretch of road might see they're not lit up and think "Oh I guess there's no ice here"
Well, in the end I don't know what the exact temperatures were those times as it's been a few years since I had it. But I do know at least once it would fluxuate a bunch due to whatever (saw it say both 34 and 36 a couple of times in a drive). Depending on my engine temp, if I was stuck behind a big car with a big exhaust, if I was driving fast, if I was sitting in the sun vs going in the shade. I don't recall the specifics.
It could be that they did something like you suggest, but the margin was too narrow and thus my driving conditions kept triggering it like every 5 minutes. Like maybe it was like 35 exactly, started reading 35.7 (rounded up to 36) then started reading 34.9... etc.
Personally, I think putting it on a timer would work best. It went off, it shouldn't be able to be triggered again for the next (say) 30 minutes or until the car restarts. Because if it went off once that should be enough to let you know.
But, my new car doesn't do that. So that's at least one thing that my current car does that doesn't bother me. Now if only Ford would fix some other issues in their TOUCH system.
Well, reflect instead of glow. But yeh, which is why I put in that bit about the ones that I think need it are the ones that are already starting to wear away and would probably be fixed with just a new coat of the regular paint.
I agree with the maintenance bit. But the roads (by me) lack in maintenance in general. If they can't get their act together to plug in the axel-destroying pot holes for a long time... I can't see them running to repaint the lines that have started to wear away.
Some places here in NJ do the same thing, though normally private property like parking lots but I've seen them on the occasional public road. Though perhaps those were just home owners doing it themselves because they were sick of plows messing up their curbs.
Flexible orange poles get stuck near the curb so the plows no where their edges are and don't destroy a curb / sidewalk / etc.
Though since we don't get the "epic" snow in my area that other states or countries get, the poles are usually only 3 feet / 1 meter tall.
If they were "everywhere" then at least that would show where the edges of the road are. Unfortunately, it wouldn't help with the middle line or with multi-lane roads.
I think the point of the glow-in-the-dark "snowflake" is for when conditions are icy... without the snow on the ground. Obviously, if snow is on the ground... that's enough warning for "there may be ice"
It happens a fair amount in certain areas: either with freezing rain, 40F rain during the day following by an evening of 28F temperatures. I imagine the mild-afternoon w/ rain followed by the freezing evening is the bigger issue as a person might think that it's still too warm for ice based on the mild temperatures during their lunch break.
Here in NJ it happens quite a bit, which is of course "fun" when people don't realize it and skid through traffic lights into the middle of an intersection of drive into someone's lawn because they went too fast on a curve.
My previous car, it would "ding" and take up the whole radio/gps screen whenever the temperature dipped below 35F. And it would stay there for like 30 seconds during which time I couldn't see or use the touch screen (see the map, change the station to one of my favorites, etc). Normally, this wasn't so bad.. just slightly annoying.
EXCEPT when the temperature would be right AROUND 35F. Because between wind, my engine heat, etc. the temperature might fluxuate between 35F and 36F constantly. So thing would "ding" and take up my screen every could of minutes. And I couldn't turn the feature off.
Sure, you might be thinking "how often is the temperature right around 35F" I thought the same thing the first time it repeated... but apparently it's more common in NJ than you'd think.
My current car just has the exterior temperate. It does NOT warn me about the presence of ice nor does it "ding"
Meh, I wouldn't say a waste. There are some roads I've been on that I actually wish the white-lines would glow in the dark. Roads without street lights with (sometimes) more dangerous conditions (curves and such). Of course, some of these roads make me wish for that, because the lines are starting to wear away so it's hard to see... and a plain re-paint might just solve that.
As for showing when freezing conditions are in effect, I guess if they're going to go re-paint with glow-in-the-dark, this isn't a complete waste. And particularly only certain bad stretches of road.
Not all people have an "exterior temperature" reading on their car nor do they care to check. If some roads (like bridges) are more susceptible to freezing, or are insanely dangerous when freezing such as a specific stretch that has 10x the accidents of the average iced road, then it could help a little.
Meanwhile, it would help make the association for drivers that "something is not normal" and adjust their driving habits. Here in NJ, we have people that don't realize how bad road conditions are so they drive just as wild as when the roads are pristine. Which, I guess wouldn't be insane if you have the skills to back it up or are used to it because you live in an area where this is common-place. But they don't, so you see cars and SUVs doing the "idiot dance" across the road because they don't know any better. If you can make that visual association in their heads (ice + roads == bad) maybe it could reduce it.
Personally, I drive fine but I also drive careful when conditions warrant it.
Not always - it's the curse of overqualified.
Not really. Yes, he might be overqualified if he went to a Data Entry position and they saw he used to make a lot more as an actual Developer.
But with a basic job like gas stations, flipping burgers, etc... there really isn't much as "overqualified" They take people, and they realize since times are tough people are looking for scrub jobs instead of unemployment or because their unemployment already ran out.
Now... he obviously can't price himself out of the market. If he's going to ask for more money than some average Joe that wants the job... then yeh he's going to get passed over.
The article is unclear: either they tested themselves or they tested the shake for themselves.
It's not that hard to figure out that you were drugged to the point of passing out, and I imagine people that dabbled in drugs and stuff in their youth can tell easier (sensations, experiences, etc). They said the shake tasted funny, they passed out, couldn't wake up, then had what sounds like hangover-like symptoms. I mean, unless they were completely roofied and forgot what was happening the hour-or-so before they passed out.
"Hmm, we both drank something that tasted funny, passed out a short while later around the same time, then felt wasted when we tried to wake up at 1AM, and then still when we woke up the next day"
If it was JUST you, then sure... maybe you just caught the flu. But between it being *2* people at the same time, and the sensation probably felt "off" then I'm not surprised they deduced they'd been doped. Though I'm sure they were hoping they were wrong, or that it was going to be like bad nutmeg / etc used in the shake
If you take heavy a tad too many prescription strength pain-killers for example, it's not like the pain just stops. There's a buzz / feeling / sensation that goes along with it. They probably felt something similar there.
Being a blacksmith, you could probably make some money but it's a niche market. Meanwhile, it's not like they don't exist... you can buy swords at various places. I think even SkyMall used to sell sword replicas from films and such.
It would be great if the world simply rewarded people for doing things, even if just above average. There are things I'd love to do: glass blowing, metal work, etc... unfortunately I need an income. And while I might be able to make a living, between the demand for some things not being huge and my skills might wind up being only "meh" I'd rather keep the job I have.
Don't get me wrong, I LIKE programming... but sometimes I would like to do something singular like the above, where I actually produce something tangible.
:Sigh:
Exactly the point I was making. The AC was asking how can you have a copyright if you can't competitively provide it. Following that logic, a copyright wouldn't be enforceable if the owner couldn't do anything competitive with it.
I was using an example of how silly that is: leaving it as "oh well, you win... because I couldn't compete"
Obviously, in real life, the kid gets a lawyer and sues the living **** out of the publisher. Because that's what the copyright is there for.
Honestly, it doesn't matter. Video games are so prevelant... it's hard to find anyone 35 or under that both (A) does NOT have a violent video game in the house and (B) hasn't played violent video games in the past. You might as well blame bottled water: chances are you either have a bottle somewhere in your house or you've at least drank some in the last X years.
It's like when Jack Thomson proclaimed during hours one of the school shooting a few years ago before the police released any details or went to the guy's house, that he guarantees that the shooter has an FPS game somewhere at home. He might as well have said "I guarantee the guy has a sweater in a drawer somewhere in his house" Video games are prevalent enough, and obviously someone violent will have them.
With the electronics, it wasn't a problem of something getting physically stuck but a sensor sending faulty data regardless of the position of the pedal, or the software just completely putzing up. Supposedly even flooring it wouldn't "reset" the issue. Think frozen computer... clicking erratically won't fix the issue. In my case, the sensor was faulty and would occasionally just stop reading input from the pedal at all until I turned off the car (think "reboot").
But yes, my first thought would be to throw it into neutral so the brakes aren't fighting the engine. In my case, I never had to worry about THAT since as I mentioned, the occasional throttle fluxuation didn't net me any real acceleration.
But, you figure, the issue isn't so much "OMG I'm on an open highway and I can't slow down" which actually happened to a few people that couldn't think of "Neutral" on their automatics. But I digress.
The problem is when you only really have a second or two before the hit. Like the car in front of you jammed on the brakes, or you go from a rolling stop to full-blown acceleration at a stop sign / intersection, pedestrians crossing, etc. In those situations, you only really have 1-2 seconds to *undo* the acceleration before the thump/crash/whatever.
In those 1 - 2 seconds, a person tends to go from:
- Time to stop, slow down, whatever
- Brake
- Why am I not slowing down enough / W T H is the engine still revving / Why am I speeding up
- Brake harder
- Maybe I should put it in Neut....
- Thump
Especially if you don't know w t h is going on, as this was going on for a while before it hit the news.
Did you ever stop to think that maybe Batman should be in the Public Domain by now, rendering all of this moot?
I'd considered RECENTLY as I was having a debate about the whole "Disney" thing and how they pretty much took control of a lot of old content. My position is more of a personal preference since (A) IANAL and (B) the law is on DC's side about not releasing Batman to Public Domain.
I think I'm OK with a company holding the rights AS LONG AS they are actively developing it. In the case of Batman: there are multiple comics out each month that continue and expand the story. They've branched off with Batgirl, Batwoman, Nightwing, Red Robin, Red Hood, Batman Inc, etc. And film-wise, they're still releasing new stuff. They've done stuff and gone in directions that the 1930's would never dream. Sure, there's a lot of crud in there, but at least in the Batman franchise the comics have more good than bad.
If they were just SITTING on the content, then I'd have a problem with it and want it on public domain. OR if they were just releasing a cruddy sequel every X years just to maintain their license because those license-extensions usually stink (think the Fantastic Four film from the 90s).
But in the case of comics, I'm OK with it. Sure, I'd RATHER the artists the created the characters owned it (in part or in whole) but I'm not against DC keeping their content from Public Domain so long as they continue to develop it.
But if it was something that was dropped entirely and gathering dust, then I think it should probably go to Public Domain after 50 years.
Toyota accelerator fiasco? Was that not found to be oldsters who can't tell brake from gas?
Bring back 3 pedals, that would sort this out.
No, a few years ago Toyota had an actual issue that was perhaps blown out of proportion, but it existed in some rare cars. I forget if it was a software glitch or some bad parts.
Accelerators are electronic / computerized now. It USED to be, you pushed the accelerator, which pulled a cable, which pulled a widget that controls the throttle. Now it's computerized: so the pedals now send a signal to a computer that says "He's pushing it this hard" and the computer says "OK, let's adjust the air/fuel mixture and increase the throttle, so we save some gas"
The issue was, the computer was having issues so it was thinking users were accelerating when they weren't. Sometimes the foot was off the pedal completely and it was still accelerating.
It was in small cases whose instances were probably exaggerated, but it was happening from time to time. But you can see the safety issue... people car would speed up (or at least not slow down) as they approached stop signs, pedestrians, traffic on the highway, etc.
Heck, I had similar issues in my GM car. In my case, the pedal "unit" was faulty. When pressed, it started sending the data that I was flooring it / releasing it / flooring it / releasing it every second so my car was going all over the pace. I had to have it replaced. Fortunately for my case it wasn't as much of a safety issue as the accelerate would be cancelled out by the release.
[How can you copright] Something you can't competitively provide to the public?
Let's turn back the clock to the 80's or 90's before the Internet really got big..
The following scenario doesn't apply to the batmobile issue, but it DOES apply to your train of thought which I've heard from others before...
Young Author: This is great, my new concept of a super hero with backstory X, costume Y, and logo Z is a great idea! I've had it since childhood. Let me just get a copyright and stuff. Maybe show off a self-printed Issue #1 at a covention. I could probably find a printer to make some copies, I could probably sell a few dozen copies.
Evil Publisher: Hey Bob, I was at the convent and I saw a possible new idea for a hero we could use. Let's release it.
(A few months later)
Young Author: W T H! That was my idea. It has the same backstory, costume, and flippin' logo! I copyrighted it and everything. You're selling thousands of copies all around the country!
Evil Publisher: How can you copyright something you can't competitively provide to the public.
Young Author: Oh I guess you're right. I should have listened to that Anonymous Coward.
It's not like Warner is selling their own cars these guys compete with. What's the point of pissing off your fanbase?
They have to protect their property somewhat. If the car has the Batman logo, then they might have more of a leg to stand on. DC owns the Batman brand, letting someone (A) profit from it without their cut or consent and (B) potentially DAMAGE (or at the least dilute) the brand would hurt their bottom line.
Let's say they shrug their shoulders and say "have at it" like some fans want. Where does it end? I'm not talking about fan fiction and stuff, but for-profit stuff.
Let's take an EXTREME, let's say they shrug their shoulders completely and let anyone do anything with "Batman" Someone could technically make a cartoon that airs on Showtime or something... where Batman is a racist child abuser or something. Such a thing would hurt the Batman brand. Obviously that's an extreme example but you get the point.
But let's say in THIS example... some guy starts mass producing the Batmobile (logo and all) and there are hundreds of them on the road. Maybe the classic one, maybe the Jim Burton ones, whatever. And lets say either the quality stinks or there are some bad accidents with it or something, like the Toyota accelerator fiasco but worse. DC would start getting a LOT of bad press, even if it was just informal.
Some uninformed parents might say "Oh, I'm not taking my son to see the new Batman movie... not after DC let those incidents happen with their Batmobiles" or whatever.
IANAL, but even fro ma practical standpoint... I see it being fuzzy.
I imagine it falls somewhere between kit-cars and merchandise. Also, I imagine the Batman Logo would hurt it. If it had THAT, then DC would tear them a new one. Without it? Hard to say.
For example, let's say you start selling sculptures of model X-Wings / Millenium Falcons / Enterprises / Battlestars / etc. without first getting permission / approval / licenses. Well, you'd be violating a bunch of copyrights / trademarks / etc. and would be very open to a lawsuit. Lucas and the rest of them could tear you a new one if they wanted to.
Now let's say you copy (EXACTLY) a 2012 Ferrari. I don't mean "it has similar lines as a Ferrari" but you start selling it exactly the same (or as close as possible). Similar specs / HP, same body, the flippin' Ferrari logo. You'd probably also be hit with a lawsuit. Without the logo you'd still have trouble, but the logo would open up a whole new case of issues.
But let's say your car is just really similar... like it has a near-indistinguishable front and rear as another car. For example, around ~2006 some manufacturer (I think Toyota) copied a LOT of the body styling of the Cadillac CTS. The first company could probably go after you if you copied something very original or ground-breaking... but I imagine it would be a toss-up.
And then you have kit-cars, where you can sell kits that let enthusiasts build their own cars: Model Ts, small popular sports cars from the 50s, etc. But I don't know if the sellers have to buy a license / get approval / etc. before selling the kits.
... bullshit. 10,000 pages a year? Even if you count every page of every book and all the toilet paper I wipe my arse with it would be a fraction of that.
I'm all for saving paper, but this kind of exaggeration isn't very helpful. It's like the old one about plastic bags having an average lifetime of less than three minutes, which seems to ignore the fact that most people use them as bin liners.
It's actually not THAT much when you think about it.
Over a year, you typically have under 250 work days. So let's say ~240
10,000 / 240 = 42 sheets per day
I know people that blow that average away every... single... day. And that's NOT even counting the lawyers I know that need paperwork for EVERYTHING they do. They go through hundreds of sheets per day.
Some people need to print documents: either as part of their job or because it makes life easier.
Could they reduce it? Sure. But if you have to read documents for 4 hour stretches so you can review/comment/correct, even I prefer reading on paper instead of an LCD. An e-Ink solution might be ideal but then it becomes harder to comment/highlight/correct/etc.
Earth's magnetic field encompasses the ISS, and it's strong enough to help repel quite a bit.
True, but "robots first" isn't a bad plan so long as we don't get lazy about it. It would be cool if we could send some automatons to start terraforming or at least building some basic structures. You know, law some infrastructure in place before we get there. Getting there is going to be tough, but building from scratch in an inhospitable place is going to be REALLY tough.
That is assuming we don't get lazy about it, as in "What's the rush, Mars-Bot is getting stuff ready for us"
Or, you know, the Singularity doesn't happen. Those robotic Martians might not want us there to mess up their place.