Strange I've had no trouble doing this unless it was windy. Happened the first time by ACCIDENT. If your puddle in a pan has enough surface area and no wind it works for me. This is usually with 'regular' gasoline.
I've only done it a few of times, but with still air and a decent flame within a few inches It worked over half the time.
Mycroft
Small nit, but minor roads can be a BAD place to cycle. I used to live near one that had a long hill with a small industrail park near the bottom. It was a 40mph/60kph road and cyclist kept stupidly using it as an easy downhill and riding in the middle of lane.
Considering it had a tiny (1'-2'/ 3/4m) sholder on one side and a rather significant drop-off on the other I'm suprised there weren't regular fatalities as semi's CAN'T slow suddenly when confronted with some idiot doing <1/2 the normal speed. There was a bridge at one point about halfway down with lots of space is the only thing I can think of.
Bottom line is if you insist on using a bike on/near the roadways make shure your NOT on road that winds alot, lacks plenty of shoulder space (or better a bike path) to ride on, or is otherwise going to place some driver with the option of running you over or wrecking even if they're driving normally.
Roads in many areas were never designed with the bicyclist in mind and using them as if they were is at best a risk. And those using them as designed are not very likely to expect your use anymore than a keyboard maker or owner expect the keys to be depressed with ball-peen hammer, shure it CAN be done if you must, but do so with great care.
I suspect alot of the people having issues with FF rendering pages are using buggy extensions, of course that based purely on just my experience of VERY few issues and not having ever felt the need to install an extension. Anectedotal evidence at best.
Still the only other thing I can think of is he might be viewing/. with all it's eye-candy turned on, which I don't do (no broadband available here short of paying out >$1k U.S. plus about $85-$250 a month), but that wouldn't explain being unable to post a reply unles that's had eyecandy added in the last few months or so.
Mycroft
I don't get it. I know several people are saying it happens, but I almost NEVER run into a site that displays appalingly bad in FF(that isn't at least as appalling bad in IE or any other browser). I had a few sites a little off in.8x something IIRC, but usually ctr+ followed by ctrl- fixed it.
I just went to www.gamespot.com and followed one of the review links wanting to see some of the parent posters unusual sfx, NADA, nothing, zero, zip. The only thing is I don't have any extensions or any other crap like flash installed. just what you get 'out of the box' when you d/l FF for winxp and that's it. Haven't even changed any relevant settings (actually only the homepage sofar this time).
I know it's gotta be happening for some people, to many are reporting it unless MS or someone has hired a lot of good convincing fud spreaders, which I doubt.
True enough. I find my like of 'tabbed' in an app is highly variable.
In FF I love it, yet in most other apps I find it a pain the arse, including some other browser I tried a couple years ago.
I suspect in my case it's how it's implemented. In FF it blends in pretty smothly with the rest of the user interface and stays out of the way not killing 'working space' while not being unusably tiny.
Most 'tabbing' tries to look like ugly 'real world' tabs. It's o.k. to be inspired by something conceptually, but sometimes outright mimicry just anoys.
Actually using jpeg format for everything isn't the best idea. jpeg is decent lossy format for photographic images, but isn't as well suited for other sorts of images because it's compression relies in part on characteristics common to photographic images.
Gif has an unfortunate color count limit. PNG is definately better for non-photographic images, especially where loss of data is undesireable.
Also only one of the two patents on the compression algorithym in GIF has expired.
That's strange to consider back so important. I always use 'open in new tab' to follow links when I can. Never could understand why someone would follow a link in a way that closes the refering page when they might want to go back to it. The only time I do that is when going to the next page in an article or when the idiot 'web designer' uses complicated java script or some such bs rather than a simple link.
Mycroft
But how much accuracy can you ascribe to exit polls? I've heard alot from all sides about them not being accurate enough for close races with error margins as high as 5% (enough that 1% and 10% are pretty much the same result).
I've also heard exit poll people even admit the polls are only 'accurate' after being reconcilled with actual count.
Plus the fact that exit polls only measure the claims of voters who are willing to take the polls, wich may or may not be a representative subset of all voters.
Strange I'm using Firefox (0.10.1) on XPpro and have no problem with the adds, don't see them eigther, just a message 'click here to get plugin' or some such. I've turned off just about every form of scripting though.
Mycroft
No kidding they're wish lists, sometimes even fairtales.
I once saw a job listing that 'required' at least 15 years experience in web design and development. this was in about 8 years ago.
Not mention they were also looking for a new head of thier corporate internet division, they specifically mentioned an impossible number of years of experience in writing rfc's and getting them adopted as 'critical internet standards'. By impossible number of years I mean experience in writing them that went back somthing like 10 years prior to the first one.
Your best bet is to look at the job itself, not the requirements. If you can do the job, and especially if you have experience in the job, apply regardless of the 'required experience and training'. Sometimes the person writing the job posting/listing is an HR person or in general management and doesn't really understand the job well enough to set reasonable requirements.
Mycroft
I definately should have prefaced my comment by mentioning that most of experience is in service and not retail. I can see where retail would be more subject to abuse.
Most of my experience that would apply has been when I used to manage a pizza hut with delivery service, or more recently when I picked up a second job back in that bussiness as a driver to make some extra $$.
In that job most customer complaints that are NOT caused at the resturaunts end are matters of the customer having no clue how such an operation runs or even can run. Not thier fault really, but sometimes it can be trying to deal with people who don't understand why delivery areas are limited, or why it takes as long as it does to get a delivery or why the driver can't break a $100 bill on a $12 order. Especially as it seems many of the times it's total failure to even think on thier part. Most of the time a polite, respectfull, simple explanation takes care of it.
That said even in retail you have to put up with a small amount of 'questionable' customer behaviour in order to maintain a postive word of mouth, it also helps to realize somethings that look questionable on surface are caused by honest mistakes and screwups on eigther side and jumping to conclusions can easily build a bad rep for a bussines.
When you said 'all of the decisions are made by the computer system' I sincerly hope a member of management can overide that, we don't have an infallible AI yet.
At that point you I would have said "Thanks I'll make shure to use a credit card so I can always get my money back since your policy is to start denying returns if you give to many defective products out".
And then probably stoped shopping there and warned all my friends NOT to shop there and why.
Mycroft
Actually it depends on how and why you are limiting your customer base. If you get an actual abusive customer (very rare, I'm not talking customers who simply won't accept poor service or products) that is costing you money every time they 'buy' somthing only to use it for what they need it for then return it under some specious claim then you HAVE to eventually stop doing bussiness with them.
If a customer is costing you money you have to find out why and fix it. If it's because you have a crap product or service it is your fault and you should fix it, this accounts for 90%+ of such customers in my experience. Most of the remaining simply don't have the information needed to have a reasonable expectation and this is somthing the bussiness can correct as long as they explain things simply and RESPECTFULLY.
The other 1% percent are the people trying to scam free stuff by making up bogus complaints. Those are the only 'customers' you look at banning. And even then you don't ban them at first, you start out being nice, accepting what they say on face value, even appoligizing when you KNOW it's thier screw up not yours. You'd be supprised how often many scammers loose the heart to scam you if you treat them well enough at first. In the end you may wind up with a few 'customers' you litterly can't afford to have if you wan't to stay in bussiness, these are the heartless scummbags and complete and utter idiots who simply cost you too much money no matter what, and if your treating everyone else right the good word of mouth will show up the complaints of the idiots and scammers who friends and family already know them well enough to ignore thier 'advice' anyway.
Actaully the 'normal' range in IQ tests vary some from test to test, though most run 99-109 as the 'normal' range. I've seen accepted tests that use 90-100 and 101-110 and a few that don't use a 200 point range. Not all scale the same eigther. A score of 148 on one test is 99th percentile while on another 154 came out as 98th percentile.
Also tests are re-callibrated from time to time to take into acount changes in the intellegence and education levels that occur over time. So the number of questions you get right is essentialy graded on the curve, only it graded such that the middle of the curve centers around 99-109 or wherever that test uses.
So yeah, if they're using data from multiple different tests taken at differnt times and places thier gonna get skewed results even without 'fudging'.
Mycroft
Altho this thread had wander way off topic I thought I'd put my $.02 american in.
You seem one the few who is actually trying to think about things rather than swallow the soundbites.
However I must dissagree on the idea of taxes for social aid programs being good, in small measure at the local level they can be, but not at the national level as you introduce typical inefficiencies and waste and loopholes and inequeties of scale and beurocracy.
What really happens is when you tax past a certain limit you effectively take money out of the economy hurting it, wich lowers incomes, which puts more people in need of 'socail aid' wich requires more money thus more taxes. It used to be churches and local charities used to help the needy for most the part, and they still try, but high taxes take much of the money they used to get.
And no government spending doesn't help the economy anywhere near as much per $ as the spending and investing people will do when they have the money themselves.
Our current tax system where the more you make the less you keep (as a percentage) is actualy a dissincentive to being more productive and contributing to the economy.
Protecting rights is a good, even vital in many cases, cause to choose sides over. But you'll help more people by taking less of thier money, and they'll be able help those in need around them far better than a beurocracy the scale of the US federal government can.
FWIW I didn't vote for eighter Kerry (any man who lie like that, make a promise then tell how he's going to break it very few sentences later..), Or Bush (You have the right to goto jail on a whim, you no right to counsel terrorist, need I say more?). Instead I voted for the candidate who wanted to get government out of my house and out of my wallet.
Mycroft
It does however show that children learn from adult example. Somthing we pretty much already knew. However it just doesn't address catharsis vs contagion.
Mycroft
I'm digging up some old reading here so please be nice with the corrections, clarifications.
But I believe you just outlined the 'contagion vs catharsis' philosophical debate from back when the ancient greek/roman philosphers had the same argument.
The simple question is do fantasies/stories of unacceptable behaviours incourage them, or give safe outlet to them.
I think the fact we've been arguing this since antiquity shows it's neighther clear cut nor easy to answer. Personally I think it can do eigther/both depending on the person and circumstance.
Mycroft
Well us voting for our electors was considered the best way by most of them, my mentioning of states did kinda gloss that over.
And they did in fact think about political parties, they specifically didn't see them as a good thing and hoped we would avoid them which is one of the pluses of the electoral college system they set up. Political parties are ways to simplify the issues for the voter and of course concentrate political power.
I believe one of the other reasons they chose to set up a representitive democracy was help combat the potential rise of political parties by reducing the issues a citizen had to face in voting to eigther local issues they were likely involved in on a day to day basis or to 'can Joe or Tom do a better job on figuring out the big picture and do what best about issues I don't have time to study since I work sun-up to sun-down'.
The founding fathers were far from perfect, but they were even farther from stupid and niave. They put a lot of thought and wisdom into what they did and tampering with that without lots of though and consideration is most likely disaster.
I strongly suspect if we did our level best to bring our leagle and political structure more into line with constitution (and bill of rights) and government they intended we'd have a much better time of it.
Whenever I see a judge rule on the constitution without reference what they said at the time about what they meant and why they wrote it I flinch.
Actually the Federal government is a creation of a specific set of people, the same people who put the electoral colledge in there for many good reasons.
Some of these reasons were pragmatic (a popular only vote wouldn't have worked, unless election 'day' was about 3-6 months long), but there were also other reasons including the view that the federal government was in part a body to co-ordinate and regulate several states. And by states they meant what most of the world means by state, ie a nation state.
And lastly the electoral college was to act as a safeguard against the momentary passions of the people and rule of the mob from electing a bad president, Hitler was elected after all. The goal was for the states to select intelligent, wise, informed, civic minded persons to devote the time and effort necessary to select the president.
The current system is a bad bastardization of direct democracy where the people select the president, and what the founders intended. This gives us the WORST of both worlds.
I would rather have the original system, or at least give it another try (I do fear corruption of that system). But barring that I suspect there might be enough diversity of opinion and ideas for true democracy in this are to work if properly safeguarded.
Me I buy the $40 plastic crap vcr and DON'T cry if it behaves like a $40 crap vcr (I expect to get a few months of normal use at least though).
Back in 80-82is my dad bought a high end vcr (had hook-ups for pro/semi-pro cams, etc.) and paid almost $900 for it (closer to 1200-1400 in todays money at a guess) and it was still running like new at least ten years later, I think it finnally died in around '96. Mind you this thing had a detachable recorder unit that was portable for use with a camera that got taken to all sorts of things, including outdoor things like camping and took all sorts of abuse.
My MB and processor however I spent >$800 on and if eigther of them dies for no good reason before obsolesence I might be a bit peeved.
Actually NO don't buy a service plan. At least usually. Most 'service plans' (insurance is how thier treated as in some states) have a out for 'abuse' or 'improper use' in them. Guess what they call it if your product breaks.
Now if the 'service plan' is a 'no fault' (as in you are covered no matter how it broke) then weigh the other restrictions (who pays shipping, how much lee-way they have in replace/replace with simular/pay cash, ect) vs the cost and your best guess on how likely you are to need it.
Believe me if they have an out, the insurer will use it.
"And by refusing to vote for the lesser evil you're going to allow the greater evil to regain power? Explain to me your logic in this particular line of reasoning."
Simple, by voting for the best and encoraging others to do the same I don't participate in perpetuating evil.
If you think waiting for someone better to have a 'chance' before voting for him/her like most sheeple (contrived word, sheep + people) do, you play right in the false dichotomy the 'two' so called parties feed you and do exactly what they want. Might as lay down and surrender in that case.
fwiw I consider Kerry the worse of two evils, not by alot though. Considering his record of raising taxes, lying to get ahead no matter what, willing to stab people in harms way in the back, etc. I consider it worse than Bush's crony-ism and borderline zeolotry and so on. Aslo thier the same when it comes to Iraq pre-invasion, it's only after that Kerry acts like he wasn't in a hurry to do the same thing, compared to Bush's near refusal to admit things aren't going perfect.
Slashdot Mirror
Strange I've had no trouble doing this unless it was windy. Happened the first time by ACCIDENT. If your puddle in a pan has enough surface area and no wind it works for me. This is usually with 'regular' gasoline. I've only done it a few of times, but with still air and a decent flame within a few inches It worked over half the time. Mycroft
Small nit, but minor roads can be a BAD place to cycle. I used to live near one that had a long hill with a small industrail park near the bottom. It was a 40mph/60kph road and cyclist kept stupidly using it as an easy downhill and riding in the middle of lane.
Considering it had a tiny (1'-2'/ 3/4m) sholder on one side and a rather significant drop-off on the other I'm suprised there weren't regular fatalities as semi's CAN'T slow suddenly when confronted with some idiot doing <1/2 the normal speed. There was a bridge at one point about halfway down with lots of space is the only thing I can think of.
Bottom line is if you insist on using a bike on/near the roadways make shure your NOT on road that winds alot, lacks plenty of shoulder space (or better a bike path) to ride on, or is otherwise going to place some driver with the option of running you over or wrecking even if they're driving normally.
Roads in many areas were never designed with the bicyclist in mind and using them as if they were is at best a risk. And those using them as designed are not very likely to expect your use anymore than a keyboard maker or owner expect the keys to be depressed with ball-peen hammer, shure it CAN be done if you must, but do so with great care.
Mycroft
I suspect alot of the people having issues with FF rendering pages are using buggy extensions, of course that based purely on just my experience of VERY few issues and not having ever felt the need to install an extension. Anectedotal evidence at best. Still the only other thing I can think of is he might be viewing /. with all it's eye-candy turned on, which I don't do (no broadband available here short of paying out >$1k U.S. plus about $85-$250 a month), but that wouldn't explain being unable to post a reply unles that's had eyecandy added in the last few months or so.
Mycroft
I don't get it. I know several people are saying it happens, but I almost NEVER run into a site that displays appalingly bad in FF(that isn't at least as appalling bad in IE or any other browser). I had a few sites a little off in .8x something IIRC, but usually ctr+ followed by ctrl- fixed it.
I just went to www.gamespot.com and followed one of the review links wanting to see some of the parent posters unusual sfx, NADA, nothing, zero, zip. The only thing is I don't have any extensions or any other crap like flash installed. just what you get 'out of the box' when you d/l FF for winxp and that's it. Haven't even changed any relevant settings (actually only the homepage sofar this time).
I know it's gotta be happening for some people, to many are reporting it unless MS or someone has hired a lot of good convincing fud spreaders, which I doubt.
Mycroft
True enough. I find my like of 'tabbed' in an app is highly variable.
In FF I love it, yet in most other apps I find it a pain the arse, including some other browser I tried a couple years ago.
I suspect in my case it's how it's implemented. In FF it blends in pretty smothly with the rest of the user interface and stays out of the way not killing 'working space' while not being unusably tiny.
Most 'tabbing' tries to look like ugly 'real world' tabs. It's o.k. to be inspired by something conceptually, but sometimes outright mimicry just anoys.
Mycroft
Actually using jpeg format for everything isn't the best idea. jpeg is decent lossy format for photographic images, but isn't as well suited for other sorts of images because it's compression relies in part on characteristics common to photographic images.
Gif has an unfortunate color count limit.
PNG is definately better for non-photographic images, especially where loss of data is undesireable.
Also only one of the two patents on the compression algorithym in GIF has expired.
Mycroft
That's strange to consider back so important. I always use 'open in new tab' to follow links when I can. Never could understand why someone would follow a link in a way that closes the refering page when they might want to go back to it. The only time I do that is when going to the next page in an article or when the idiot 'web designer' uses complicated java script or some such bs rather than a simple link. Mycroft
But how much accuracy can you ascribe to exit polls? I've heard alot from all sides about them not being accurate enough for close races with error margins as high as 5% (enough that 1% and 10% are pretty much the same result).
I've also heard exit poll people even admit the polls are only 'accurate' after being reconcilled with actual count.
Plus the fact that exit polls only measure the claims of voters who are willing to take the polls, wich may or may not be a representative subset of all voters.
Mycroft
OOPS, except that 'law' says invoking godwins law on purpos does not invoke it. :)
Mycroft
Strange I'm using Firefox (0.10.1) on XPpro and have no problem with the adds, don't see them eigther, just a message 'click here to get plugin' or some such. I've turned off just about every form of scripting though. Mycroft
No your not the only one, the theory that Bush caused the Florida hurricanes is obviously very flawed 'thinking' and not even close to logic. Mycrfot
No kidding they're wish lists, sometimes even fairtales. I once saw a job listing that 'required' at least 15 years experience in web design and development. this was in about 8 years ago. Not mention they were also looking for a new head of thier corporate internet division, they specifically mentioned an impossible number of years of experience in writing rfc's and getting them adopted as 'critical internet standards'. By impossible number of years I mean experience in writing them that went back somthing like 10 years prior to the first one. Your best bet is to look at the job itself, not the requirements. If you can do the job, and especially if you have experience in the job, apply regardless of the 'required experience and training'. Sometimes the person writing the job posting/listing is an HR person or in general management and doesn't really understand the job well enough to set reasonable requirements. Mycroft
I definately should have prefaced my comment by mentioning that most of experience is in service and not retail. I can see where retail would be more subject to abuse.
Most of my experience that would apply has been when I used to manage a pizza hut with delivery service, or more recently when I picked up a second job back in that bussiness as a driver to make some extra $$.
In that job most customer complaints that are NOT caused at the resturaunts end are matters of the customer having no clue how such an operation runs or even can run. Not thier fault really, but sometimes it can be trying to deal with people who don't understand why delivery areas are limited, or why it takes as long as it does to get a delivery or why the driver can't break a $100 bill on a $12 order. Especially as it seems many of the times it's total failure to even think on thier part. Most of the time a polite, respectfull, simple explanation takes care of it.
That said even in retail you have to put up with a small amount of 'questionable' customer behaviour in order to maintain a postive word of mouth, it also helps to realize somethings that look questionable on surface are caused by honest mistakes and screwups on eigther side and jumping to conclusions can easily build a bad rep for a bussines.
When you said 'all of the decisions are made by the computer system' I sincerly hope a member of management can overide that, we don't have an infallible AI yet.
Mycroft
At that point you I would have said "Thanks I'll make shure to use a credit card so I can always get my money back since your policy is to start denying returns if you give to many defective products out". And then probably stoped shopping there and warned all my friends NOT to shop there and why. Mycroft
Actually it depends on how and why you are limiting your customer base. If you get an actual abusive customer (very rare, I'm not talking customers who simply won't accept poor service or products) that is costing you money every time they 'buy' somthing only to use it for what they need it for then return it under some specious claim then you HAVE to eventually stop doing bussiness with them.
If a customer is costing you money you have to find out why and fix it. If it's because you have a crap product or service it is your fault and you should fix it, this accounts for 90%+ of such customers in my experience. Most of the remaining simply don't have the information needed to have a reasonable expectation and this is somthing the bussiness can correct as long as they explain things simply and RESPECTFULLY.
The other 1% percent are the people trying to scam free stuff by making up bogus complaints. Those are the only 'customers' you look at banning. And even then you don't ban them at first, you start out being nice, accepting what they say on face value, even appoligizing when you KNOW it's thier screw up not yours. You'd be supprised how often many scammers loose the heart to scam you if you treat them well enough at first. In the end you may wind up with a few 'customers' you litterly can't afford to have if you wan't to stay in bussiness, these are the heartless scummbags and complete and utter idiots who simply cost you too much money no matter what, and if your treating everyone else right the good word of mouth will show up the complaints of the idiots and scammers who friends and family already know them well enough to ignore thier 'advice' anyway.
Mycroft
Actaully the 'normal' range in IQ tests vary some from test to test, though most run 99-109 as the 'normal' range. I've seen accepted tests that use 90-100 and 101-110 and a few that don't use a 200 point range. Not all scale the same eigther. A score of 148 on one test is 99th percentile while on another 154 came out as 98th percentile. Also tests are re-callibrated from time to time to take into acount changes in the intellegence and education levels that occur over time. So the number of questions you get right is essentialy graded on the curve, only it graded such that the middle of the curve centers around 99-109 or wherever that test uses. So yeah, if they're using data from multiple different tests taken at differnt times and places thier gonna get skewed results even without 'fudging'. Mycroft
blast it PREVIEW!!
Sorry about that mess folks, guess who didn't preview and notice how slashdot killed my paragraphs. My Fault
Mycroft
Altho this thread had wander way off topic I thought I'd put my $.02 american in. You seem one the few who is actually trying to think about things rather than swallow the soundbites. However I must dissagree on the idea of taxes for social aid programs being good, in small measure at the local level they can be, but not at the national level as you introduce typical inefficiencies and waste and loopholes and inequeties of scale and beurocracy. What really happens is when you tax past a certain limit you effectively take money out of the economy hurting it, wich lowers incomes, which puts more people in need of 'socail aid' wich requires more money thus more taxes. It used to be churches and local charities used to help the needy for most the part, and they still try, but high taxes take much of the money they used to get. And no government spending doesn't help the economy anywhere near as much per $ as the spending and investing people will do when they have the money themselves. Our current tax system where the more you make the less you keep (as a percentage) is actualy a dissincentive to being more productive and contributing to the economy. Protecting rights is a good, even vital in many cases, cause to choose sides over. But you'll help more people by taking less of thier money, and they'll be able help those in need around them far better than a beurocracy the scale of the US federal government can. FWIW I didn't vote for eighter Kerry (any man who lie like that, make a promise then tell how he's going to break it very few sentences later..), Or Bush (You have the right to goto jail on a whim, you no right to counsel terrorist, need I say more?). Instead I voted for the candidate who wanted to get government out of my house and out of my wallet. Mycroft
It does however show that children learn from adult example. Somthing we pretty much already knew. However it just doesn't address catharsis vs contagion. Mycroft
I'm digging up some old reading here so please be nice with the corrections, clarifications. But I believe you just outlined the 'contagion vs catharsis' philosophical debate from back when the ancient greek/roman philosphers had the same argument. The simple question is do fantasies/stories of unacceptable behaviours incourage them, or give safe outlet to them. I think the fact we've been arguing this since antiquity shows it's neighther clear cut nor easy to answer. Personally I think it can do eigther/both depending on the person and circumstance. Mycroft
Well us voting for our electors was considered the best way by most of them, my mentioning of states did kinda gloss that over.
And they did in fact think about political parties, they specifically didn't see them as a good thing and hoped we would avoid them which is one of the pluses of the electoral college system they set up. Political parties are ways to simplify the issues for the voter and of course concentrate political power.
I believe one of the other reasons they chose to set up a representitive democracy was help combat the potential rise of political parties by reducing the issues a citizen had to face in voting to eigther local issues they were likely involved in on a day to day basis or to 'can Joe or Tom do a better job on figuring out the big picture and do what best about issues I don't have time to study since I work sun-up to sun-down'.
The founding fathers were far from perfect, but they were even farther from stupid and niave. They put a lot of thought and wisdom into what they did and tampering with that without lots of though and consideration is most likely disaster.
I strongly suspect if we did our level best to bring our leagle and political structure more into line with constitution (and bill of rights) and government they intended we'd have a much better time of it.
Whenever I see a judge rule on the constitution without reference what they said at the time about what they meant and why they wrote it I flinch.
Mycroft
Actually the Federal government is a creation of a specific set of people, the same people who put the electoral colledge in there for many good reasons.
Some of these reasons were pragmatic (a popular only vote wouldn't have worked, unless election 'day' was about 3-6 months long), but there were also other reasons including the view that the federal government was in part a body to co-ordinate and regulate several states. And by states they meant what most of the world means by state, ie a nation state.
And lastly the electoral college was to act as a safeguard against the momentary passions of the people and rule of the mob from electing a bad president, Hitler was elected after all. The goal was for the states to select intelligent, wise, informed, civic minded persons to devote the time and effort necessary to select the president.
The current system is a bad bastardization of direct democracy where the people select the president, and what the founders intended. This gives us the WORST of both worlds.
I would rather have the original system, or at least give it another try (I do fear corruption of that system). But barring that I suspect there might be enough diversity of opinion and ideas for true democracy in this are to work if properly safeguarded.
Mycroft
Me I buy the $40 plastic crap vcr and DON'T cry if it behaves like a $40 crap vcr (I expect to get a few months of normal use at least though).
Back in 80-82is my dad bought a high end vcr (had hook-ups for pro/semi-pro cams, etc.) and paid almost $900 for it (closer to 1200-1400 in todays money at a guess) and it was still running like new at least ten years later, I think it finnally died in around '96. Mind you this thing had a detachable recorder unit that was portable for use with a camera that got taken to all sorts of things, including outdoor things like camping and took all sorts of abuse.
My MB and processor however I spent >$800 on and if eigther of them dies for no good reason before obsolesence I might be a bit peeved.
Mycroft
Actually NO don't buy a service plan. At least usually. Most 'service plans' (insurance is how thier treated as in some states) have a out for 'abuse' or 'improper use' in them. Guess what they call it if your product breaks.
Now if the 'service plan' is a 'no fault' (as in you are covered no matter how it broke) then weigh the other restrictions (who pays shipping, how much lee-way they have in replace/replace with simular/pay cash, ect) vs the cost and your best guess on how likely you are to need it.
Believe me if they have an out, the insurer will use it.
Mycroft
"And by refusing to vote for the lesser evil you're going to allow the greater evil to regain power? Explain to me your logic in this particular line of reasoning."
Simple, by voting for the best and encoraging others to do the same I don't participate in perpetuating evil.
If you think waiting for someone better to have a 'chance' before voting for him/her like most sheeple (contrived word, sheep + people) do, you play right in the false dichotomy the 'two' so called parties feed you and do exactly what they want. Might as lay down and surrender in that case.
fwiw I consider Kerry the worse of two evils, not by alot though. Considering his record of raising taxes, lying to get ahead no matter what, willing to stab people in harms way in the back, etc. I consider it worse than Bush's crony-ism and borderline zeolotry and so on. Aslo thier the same when it comes to Iraq pre-invasion, it's only after that Kerry acts like he wasn't in a hurry to do the same thing, compared to Bush's near refusal to admit things aren't going perfect.
Mycroft