One of the "unspoken rules" of society though is that any outlet exposed in a public place is fair game. And some of the "actual laws" cover the fact that any outlet must be safe to plug into, and any device sold must be standards compliant to safely plug into any compatable outlet.
Seriously, the outlets aren't safe to plug into when the train is moving? Why the hell are they on and available? Someone with bad eyesight, or illiterate, or not English-speaking, or seriously drunk could be plugging in. It should be an electrical code violation to have a socket that isn't safe for any (standards compliant) plug to connect to.
Democracy is about convincing the voting public. If you annoy the voting public so much, that they call on the government to give in just to shut up the protesters, then it's a job well done!
I don't think that could ever really happen. Leaving aside the fact that I don't think it's morally acceptable to interfere with other people's rights to advance your own (two wrongs, etc.), I don't think it could ever be effective. If you block someone from going about their normal life, their emotional response is to hate you. Even if they would have been sympathetic to your cause, they will now start rationalizing why you are "wrong". If they start calling on the government, it will be demands that they put a stop to your group. The best you can hope for is they will think "I agree with their goals, but these jerks go too far!"
Re:Excellent. Now how about High Fructose Corn Syr
on
FDA Bans Trans Fat
·
· Score: 2
This is what pisses me off every time HFCS comes up in a debate. You're not supposed to replace HFCS with sugar. You are supposed to replace it with fresher, less processed foods that don't need added sugars.
The problem I think was that 2 different anti-HFCS groups got some publicity at the same time. One was Dr what's-his-name who called HFCS "poison". But he really meant all sugars. It's just that HFCS was the main one found in everything at the time (because it's cheaper, easier to add since its liquid, and the corn supply is more stable than the sugar supply).
At the same time, the "Passover Coke" crowd was making noise about how much better CocaCola tasted with cane sugar, compared to HFCS. I agree that it does taste awesome, but that has nothing to do with health.
Unfortunately, these two movements collided in the public conscienceless and became "HFCS is really bad for you, and should be replaced with sugar". So now you have idiotic things like Raisin Bran that proudly says "No HFCS" on the box but is full of added sucrose. Raisins are supposed to be the sweetener in Raisin Bran, the only other ingredient should be bran.
I've spent significant time in Europe and Asia and "America" is universally understood to mean USA and "American" to mean people from the USA, even by people who can barely croak out an English sentence. They might understand "USA", but "U.S." or "United States"? Forget it.
The only people who take issue with that usage of "America/American" (aside from internet pendants) are Spanish speakers who rather arrogantly insist that the English word "American" needs to match up with the Spanish word "Americano".
Personally, I say we adopt "Americano" into English as a word meaning "person from the Western Hemisphere" and end the debate.
What bugs me about medical billing is apparently hospitals don't have any employees. Hospitals are apparently just flee-markets that provide space to hundreds of independent individuals and companies who all send separate bills for their services whenever they get around to it.
The hospital sends their own bill. Then the doctor sends a separate bill (WTF? The doctor isn't even employed by the hospital?) The EKG tech, sonogram tech, x-ray tech, all send there own bills (often months later). Anesthesiologist, separate bill.
What exactly is the hospital bill for? Apparently, the only employee the hospital has is the billing co-ordinator, who makes sure all these separate entities know who to bill.
Yes but water that's bottled from tap water is filtered first, removing the fluoride (and chlorine and whatever else is in the tap water). That's why it tastes better than the tap water and they are able to get money for it.
I've already seen self-driving forklifts in some factory environments (they've existed for at least a decade). The process lines summon them when a large roll/bin/whatever is almost complete and they (slowly) drive over just as it finishes and take the product over to the warehouse. The vehicles automatically stop if you get within about 2 feet of them. When not summoned anywhere in particular they drive themselves over to a designated out-of-the-way spot and line up in a neat queue to wait for orders.
Wait what? Gas (combustion) Turbines have way higher efficiency than steam turbines, mainly because they operate at much higher temperatures than steam turbines.
Gas turbines these days are getting close to 40% efficiency, and close to 60% if you put them in combined cycle (where you use the exhaust heat to boil water to run a steam turbine).
Count me in that group too. I used to be all uptight about alcohol, but I got over it with age. Now that I'm theoretically ok with making oneself stupider, I've tried to take up drinking. But I find that all the alcoholic beverages I've tried to drink taste horrendously bad. I've so far been unable to drink enough alcohol to notice any effects on myself (it takes me about an hour and a half to choke down a bottle of beer). I don't know how you all manage to consume that stuff.
I think you people must be stealing my coathangers. I never have enough.
Alternately, maybe you don't have a wife, who constantly buys new clothes that need to be hung up.
What I really want to know about "deflate-gate" is how does it even work? What's the advantage of an under-inflated ball? It seems like it would be harder to throw an under-inflated ball accurately. It might help you grip a ball better, but how often do NFL players fumble (enough to really make a difference?)?
And how would the Patriots keep the other team from getting the same advantage? The deflated balls would end up being used by both sides right? Even if the Patriots were stealthily deflating them on the field wouldn't the other team get the same ball after the next turnover?
Or do they change balls after every turnover? If so, how would the Patriots rig it so only they got the deflated ones?
Most illegal immigrants could not ever qualify for any of the existing visa categories, no matter how many hoops they were willing to jump though.
That's why they come illegally, the vast majority would never be able to get even a tourist visa into the US, let alone a work authorization.
I don't see how you could possibly not believe that. The entire history of humanity, both individually and collectively, has been to drive ever closer to this ideal.
Individually, we all work toward the goal of retirement (hopefully early retirement). Collectively, the entire history of technology has always been to make it possible to achieve more with less effort.
Seriously, what other ultimate goal could we possibly have?
I think the problem is that 2 different anti-HFCS campaigns reached the public conscience at about the same time.
One was the Passover Coke crowd, they were complaining that sucrose tastes better than HFCS in Coca-Cola. They were calling for sucrose to replace HFCS for taste (and nostalgia) reasons.
The second was the HFCS is causing obesity crowd, who were against HFCS because it was being added to everything, even stuff you wouldn't expect to be sugary. They were really calling for an end to adding sugar to everything, HFCS just happened to be the type of sugar that was being added. Their point was not that HFCS was somehow worse than sucrose, but rather that HFCS was AS BAD as sucrose (which you should only be eating as an occasional treat). They wanted the HFCS (and any other added sugars) removed from food and not replaced with anything.
These 2 movements collided in the public consciousness and led to people thinking "HFCS makes you fat, and it should be replaced by sucrose."
Do I lay down on an empty train/bus? No because its in public and people would stare.
Do I lay down in the office? No, because that's considered unprofessional.
Do I always lay down at home? Abso-fracking-lutely!
Do I lay back in my chair in front or the TV or while using my laptop? Well, I usually lay on the floor, not in a chair, but yes.
Laying down is the only position I find truly comfortable, and I generally do lay down either in bed or on the floor as much as possible except when eating (as that gets too messy).
Furniture is for guests.
The big pluses of Southwest are no fees for checked baggage (there's no way my work stuff is fitting in carry-on) and the ability to change tickets for no extra fee beyond the difference in ticket price (I almost never correctly guess when I'll be finished with a work assignment).
This plus the fact that you can buy a ticket last minute and still have a shot at a decent seat (and now that I am A-list, I am guaranteed a decent seat) have always made Southwest super attractive to business fliers like me who usually book last minute and frequently need to change return tickets.
If you pay the extra $10, you get to be one of the first 15 people on the plane. Then you can plop down in almost any seat you want since all the seats are still unoccupied.
Their boarding system is Awesome, assuming that you fly alone and know their process. Basically Southwest wants business travelers like me, who rarely fly together with anyone else and fly frequently enough to learn and remember their system.
Knowing to check in 24 hours in advance gets me a low number boarding ticket, and now that I am "A-list" I get to board at the end of A group even if I check in late.
Southwest is pretty much designed around frequent business travelers so it sucks for families and people who don't fly much.
For those who don't know, boarding order is critical on Southwest. You don't get a seat assignment, its first-come-first-serve, like riding a bus, once you get on the plane.
You get a boarding pass with A 1 thru 60, B 1 thru 60, or C 1 thru 60 and everyone boards in that order. The A people get great seats and C people get crap (center seats, back of the plane, no seats together for people traveling together, etc).
Frequent fliers get to skip ahead board between A and B groups (assuming they didn't have and A anyway) which still has lots of good seats free. Families traveling with children 4 or under also get to board before the B group (so they can get seats together).
This guy probably had high number B or C tickets and wanted to use his "A-list" frequent flier status to board early and get 3 seats together with his kids. But his kids didn't have "A-list" status and where too old to qualify for family boarding so they would have wait for their high boarding number to get on the plane.
Monopoly apologists always drag out the "its so much better if you use the 'auction property if it isn't bought' rule". I've never seen a situation where it matters, everyone always buys every single property that they land on. Every single time. Occasionally someone will be a little short on cash (from buying tons of property already) and there's a little bit of "should I really mortgage stuff to buy this property?" But they always do it, nobody ever leaves property unbought.
Slashdot Mirror
Spoiler alert:
In this one, Han shoots third.
Indonesia (the largest Islamic nation in the world)
Also Malaysia
One of the "unspoken rules" of society though is that any outlet exposed in a public place is fair game. And some of the "actual laws" cover the fact that any outlet must be safe to plug into, and any device sold must be standards compliant to safely plug into any compatable outlet. Seriously, the outlets aren't safe to plug into when the train is moving? Why the hell are they on and available? Someone with bad eyesight, or illiterate, or not English-speaking, or seriously drunk could be plugging in. It should be an electrical code violation to have a socket that isn't safe for any (standards compliant) plug to connect to.
I don't think that could ever really happen. Leaving aside the fact that I don't think it's morally acceptable to interfere with other people's rights to advance your own (two wrongs, etc.), I don't think it could ever be effective. If you block someone from going about their normal life, their emotional response is to hate you. Even if they would have been sympathetic to your cause, they will now start rationalizing why you are "wrong". If they start calling on the government, it will be demands that they put a stop to your group. The best you can hope for is they will think "I agree with their goals, but these jerks go too far!"
This is what pisses me off every time HFCS comes up in a debate. You're not supposed to replace HFCS with sugar. You are supposed to replace it with fresher, less processed foods that don't need added sugars.
The problem I think was that 2 different anti-HFCS groups got some publicity at the same time. One was Dr what's-his-name who called HFCS "poison". But he really meant all sugars. It's just that HFCS was the main one found in everything at the time (because it's cheaper, easier to add since its liquid, and the corn supply is more stable than the sugar supply).
At the same time, the "Passover Coke" crowd was making noise about how much better CocaCola tasted with cane sugar, compared to HFCS. I agree that it does taste awesome, but that has nothing to do with health.
Unfortunately, these two movements collided in the public conscienceless and became "HFCS is really bad for you, and should be replaced with sugar". So now you have idiotic things like Raisin Bran that proudly says "No HFCS" on the box but is full of added sucrose. Raisins are supposed to be the sweetener in Raisin Bran, the only other ingredient should be bran.
I've spent significant time in Europe and Asia and "America" is universally understood to mean USA and "American" to mean people from the USA, even by people who can barely croak out an English sentence. They might understand "USA", but "U.S." or "United States"? Forget it.
The only people who take issue with that usage of "America/American" (aside from internet pendants) are Spanish speakers who rather arrogantly insist that the English word "American" needs to match up with the Spanish word "Americano".
Personally, I say we adopt "Americano" into English as a word meaning "person from the Western Hemisphere" and end the debate.
I means you are a cartoonist!
I supposed remembering old Dilbert references probably marks me as a tech dinosaur.
What bugs me about medical billing is apparently hospitals don't have any employees. Hospitals are apparently just flee-markets that provide space to hundreds of independent individuals and companies who all send separate bills for their services whenever they get around to it.
The hospital sends their own bill. Then the doctor sends a separate bill (WTF? The doctor isn't even employed by the hospital?) The EKG tech, sonogram tech, x-ray tech, all send there own bills (often months later). Anesthesiologist, separate bill.
What exactly is the hospital bill for? Apparently, the only employee the hospital has is the billing co-ordinator, who makes sure all these separate entities know who to bill.
Yes but water that's bottled from tap water is filtered first, removing the fluoride (and chlorine and whatever else is in the tap water). That's why it tastes better than the tap water and they are able to get money for it.
I've already seen self-driving forklifts in some factory environments (they've existed for at least a decade). The process lines summon them when a large roll/bin/whatever is almost complete and they (slowly) drive over just as it finishes and take the product over to the warehouse. The vehicles automatically stop if you get within about 2 feet of them. When not summoned anywhere in particular they drive themselves over to a designated out-of-the-way spot and line up in a neat queue to wait for orders.
Wait what? Gas (combustion) Turbines have way higher efficiency than steam turbines, mainly because they operate at much higher temperatures than steam turbines.
Gas turbines these days are getting close to 40% efficiency, and close to 60% if you put them in combined cycle (where you use the exhaust heat to boil water to run a steam turbine).
I think the second law will be "A robot must obey the orders given to it by stockholders, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law."
Of course not! On Titan you would liquid-methane-board the native terrorists!
Count me in that group too. I used to be all uptight about alcohol, but I got over it with age. Now that I'm theoretically ok with making oneself stupider, I've tried to take up drinking. But I find that all the alcoholic beverages I've tried to drink taste horrendously bad. I've so far been unable to drink enough alcohol to notice any effects on myself (it takes me about an hour and a half to choke down a bottle of beer). I don't know how you all manage to consume that stuff.
I think you people must be stealing my coathangers. I never have enough.
Alternately, maybe you don't have a wife, who constantly buys new clothes that need to be hung up.
What I really want to know about "deflate-gate" is how does it even work? What's the advantage of an under-inflated ball? It seems like it would be harder to throw an under-inflated ball accurately. It might help you grip a ball better, but how often do NFL players fumble (enough to really make a difference?)?
And how would the Patriots keep the other team from getting the same advantage? The deflated balls would end up being used by both sides right? Even if the Patriots were stealthily deflating them on the field wouldn't the other team get the same ball after the next turnover?
Or do they change balls after every turnover? If so, how would the Patriots rig it so only they got the deflated ones?
Most illegal immigrants could not ever qualify for any of the existing visa categories, no matter how many hoops they were willing to jump though.
That's why they come illegally, the vast majority would never be able to get even a tourist visa into the US, let alone a work authorization.
I don't see how you could possibly not believe that. The entire history of humanity, both individually and collectively, has been to drive ever closer to this ideal.
Individually, we all work toward the goal of retirement (hopefully early retirement). Collectively, the entire history of technology has always been to make it possible to achieve more with less effort.
Seriously, what other ultimate goal could we possibly have?
I think the problem is that 2 different anti-HFCS campaigns reached the public conscience at about the same time.
One was the Passover Coke crowd, they were complaining that sucrose tastes better than HFCS in Coca-Cola. They were calling for sucrose to replace HFCS for taste (and nostalgia) reasons.
The second was the HFCS is causing obesity crowd, who were against HFCS because it was being added to everything, even stuff you wouldn't expect to be sugary. They were really calling for an end to adding sugar to everything, HFCS just happened to be the type of sugar that was being added. Their point was not that HFCS was somehow worse than sucrose, but rather that HFCS was AS BAD as sucrose (which you should only be eating as an occasional treat). They wanted the HFCS (and any other added sugars) removed from food and not replaced with anything.
These 2 movements collided in the public consciousness and led to people thinking "HFCS makes you fat, and it should be replaced by sucrose."
I'm not the original poster but - um what?
Do I lay down on an empty train/bus? No because its in public and people would stare.
Do I lay down in the office? No, because that's considered unprofessional.
Do I always lay down at home? Abso-fracking-lutely!
Do I lay back in my chair in front or the TV or while using my laptop? Well, I usually lay on the floor, not in a chair, but yes.
Laying down is the only position I find truly comfortable, and I generally do lay down either in bed or on the floor as much as possible except when eating (as that gets too messy).
Furniture is for guests.
The big pluses of Southwest are no fees for checked baggage (there's no way my work stuff is fitting in carry-on) and the ability to change tickets for no extra fee beyond the difference in ticket price (I almost never correctly guess when I'll be finished with a work assignment).
This plus the fact that you can buy a ticket last minute and still have a shot at a decent seat (and now that I am A-list, I am guaranteed a decent seat) have always made Southwest super attractive to business fliers like me who usually book last minute and frequently need to change return tickets.
If you pay the extra $10, you get to be one of the first 15 people on the plane. Then you can plop down in almost any seat you want since all the seats are still unoccupied.
Their boarding system is Awesome, assuming that you fly alone and know their process. Basically Southwest wants business travelers like me, who rarely fly together with anyone else and fly frequently enough to learn and remember their system.
Knowing to check in 24 hours in advance gets me a low number boarding ticket, and now that I am "A-list" I get to board at the end of A group even if I check in late.
Southwest is pretty much designed around frequent business travelers so it sucks for families and people who don't fly much.
For those who don't know, boarding order is critical on Southwest. You don't get a seat assignment, its first-come-first-serve, like riding a bus, once you get on the plane.
You get a boarding pass with A 1 thru 60, B 1 thru 60, or C 1 thru 60 and everyone boards in that order. The A people get great seats and C people get crap (center seats, back of the plane, no seats together for people traveling together, etc).
Frequent fliers get to skip ahead board between A and B groups (assuming they didn't have and A anyway) which still has lots of good seats free. Families traveling with children 4 or under also get to board before the B group (so they can get seats together).
This guy probably had high number B or C tickets and wanted to use his "A-list" frequent flier status to board early and get 3 seats together with his kids. But his kids didn't have "A-list" status and where too old to qualify for family boarding so they would have wait for their high boarding number to get on the plane.
Monopoly apologists always drag out the "its so much better if you use the 'auction property if it isn't bought' rule". I've never seen a situation where it matters, everyone always buys every single property that they land on. Every single time. Occasionally someone will be a little short on cash (from buying tons of property already) and there's a little bit of "should I really mortgage stuff to buy this property?" But they always do it, nobody ever leaves property unbought.