And yet by doing that, you are always copying yesterday's design and never quite catching up to the competition. That's what the Soviets discovered the hard way and the Chinese are set to rediscover. You can't pretend to innovate by copying. You have innovate independently to get ahead.
If there's one thing that Microsoft's rise to dominance suggests, it's that copying the true innovators goes far, as long as it's cheap, and your consumers are convinced it's good enough.
The Soviets didn't sell things to the largest consumer markets in the world, nor did the big companies in those markets ship the majority of their manufacturing to them. Most consumers don't give a damn about quality or innovation because it costs more up front.
This isn't a "normal" year for the economy either now, is it?
In the span of a few months, we went from rumours of war with Iran, deteriorating relations with Russia, and other things that made the price of energy stocks shoot up--any energy, not just oil....
to a credit meltdown, massive amounts of foreclosures, a possible global recession and pulling back of discretionary spending.
Funny thing about the timing of the gas price spike: it suddenly made SUVs, campers, and leisure boating unappealing to a lot of people, and now that gas is "affordable" to SUV drivers again, thanks to the credit crisis many can no longer get the financing necessary to buy them, even with discounts of $10,000 or more on some SUVs, thus driving fuel demand even lower.
I never really noticed that gas prices went down in the fall/winter before (didn't get a car until May this year) so don't know what causes that, but this year it seems clear that demand is way down at the consumer level.
As for Wordperfect and floppy disks: yep. That's a problem in our home. We are having to migrate WP files now and then. It is not sufficient to have old computers that run the programs. I had WP on my computer (but didn't use it.) A series of glitches when upgrading to SP3 had as a side effect the corruption of WP on my computer. Whatever the problem was, I could not even re-install it. We are now down to one computer that can read it.
Assuming you still have the necessary hardware working (i.e. floppy drive) to read install WP and read your archived WP documents, can't you do a Windows install into VMWare, then install WP onto that?
Another benefit of this is that you can backup this virtual machine and run it on any other PC you get.
It's funny you say that because many neighborhoods in the U.S. (specifically in Minnesota) are allowing shari'ah law to trump U.S. law when it comes to domestic disputes occuring between Islamic people. Gradually shari'ah law is becoming the new legal system. I believe England is seeing it happen more often than the U.S.
Interestingly, the province of Ontario (yes, in that liberal/socialist/left-wing bastion called Canada) ruled out use of Sharia law in 2005 for civil disputes.
That was the response by the Liberal premier, to a report that recommended Sharia be allowed, and the protests against those recommendations.
Not to be discriminatory against a single religion, in the same stroke the government also said Catholic and Jewish tribunals could no longer be used in deciding civil matters, something they'd been able to do on a voluntary basis since 1991.
I suspect the scanners are only out in the open because the airport is so small they don't have room for them elsewhere, but I think it ought to be like that EVERYWHERE.
How well do these new X-rays render objects?
I pity the people who pack their "personal toys" in their checked luggage to escape potential embarrassment of a screener taking it out and inspecting it... only to have it displayed in high-def for everyone in the lobby to see.
So... What happens now? The conservatives might plan to ram unpopular legislation through ASAP and hope it's forgotten by the next election. However, I think they realize that the embarrassment C-61 (or it's successor) is going to cause will be an ongoing thing. By passing C-61, they grant power to CRIA to embarrass them with U.S.-style frivolous lawsuits at will. If CRIA were so inclined, they could deliberately wait for the next election and then turn courtroom cowboy.
The Conservatives don't care what "the people" think, and in a way, why should they?
If there was any issue that might have made young voters turn up and vote, it would've been this issue. Right or wrong, the threat of being sued and even jailed for downloading copyrighted content should have lit a fire under their asses.
Instead, we had one of the lowest turnouts in Canadian history.
It made me lose faith--not in our system, but the people. The media talks about "voter fatigue" and us having gone to federal polls three times since 2004, each time returning a minority government. Well for fsck sake people, a minority government is the BEST government possible under our system!!! Is it really *that* much to ask for you to go to your local polling station? Or to follow the news for a mere 5 weeks and form an opinion about candidates/parties?
Or are you all staring blankly at American Idol, wishing they allowed Canadians to vote for the next vapid American pop star instead? Maybe that's the problem--the younger generation have been told to "vote early, vote often" and think that the single vote they're given in a real election doesn't matter.
I wish. My IT manager asked me to review a list of requirements for hiring a consultant. Not only had he gotten Java and Javascript mixed up, 5 years of JSR-168 experience was a requirement (this was when the JSR-168 portlet specification had been accepted as a standard just two years prior).
I'll grant that web and Java technologies aren't his forte and that he was wise enough to check with me before posting it, but it made me wonder how often HR is merely posting the tech requirements as given to them by clueless tech managers...
Wouldnt the initial fuel injection required to restart the car exceed the potential savings anyway?
I researched this some months ago, and found this discussion, with sources. For most cars, restarting takes the equivalent of 9 or 10 seconds of fuel consumption while idle, and modern engines and starters aren't statistically impacted by doing this repeatedly during a trip.
Consequently, I now turn off my car if I know the light's going to be red for at least 20 seconds.
I took the liberty of transcribing McCain's words. Not to go totally partisan up in here....but you gotta give him props for calling this one:
The business tax. Right now, United States of America business pays the second highest business taxes in the world, 35%. Ireland pays 11%. Now, if you're a business person, and you can locate any place in the world, then obviously if you go to the country where it's 11% tax versus 35, you'll be able to create jobs, increase your business, make more investment, etc. I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses remain in America and create jobs.
Okay, that sounds good. So, what kind of jobs are we talking about creating? In Facebook's case it's programmers. Oops, they're cheaper in India than in the US.
How about manufacturing? Darn, cheaper labour and more lax oversight in China, so they'll set up shop there or contract with existing Chinese manufacturers.
So, for certain types of companies they get their HQs to remain on home soil, while *still* not creating local jobs... though I suppose the cleaning and maintenance workers will have another building to work on.
It's unreasonable to assume a blanket business tax cut will work as claimed with all businesses. Cutting them for multinationals is as ineffective, long term, as handing them money to entice them to stay in an area. And it's not all the company's fault either; labour laws, unions and just plain economics may also contribute to to a company relocating.
The question then becomes "Why does the US use an overcomplicated election system?"
1) No nation-wide standards for voting systems for electing the president. Yeah, yeah, I know it's because theoretically, the states have more power than the federal government, state representatives in the electoral college vote on the president, and the counties in those states decide which way that goes, etc... but you can't seriously tell me that reality today has anything to do with the theory set out in the late 18th century.
2) You seem to vote on everything at once: president, congressman, senator, district attorney, police chief, trustees, etc etc etc... all at the same time. Not only will very few people keep up with what everyone's doing, it also makes the people vying for those positions (or trying to remain in them) publicity hounds, sometimes at the expense of the job itself or the public at large (see: DA Mike Nifong of the Duke rape case).
Change the system so DA, police chiefs and such are appointed by your local elected reps--that's the reps' job. If the appointees are doing a spectacularly inept job, it's the reps' duty to fire them (and if they don't, "fire" the reps in the next election). That simplifies the ballot right off the bat.
I have ideas about improving your federal election system, but don't have time to get into them now, and are probably impossible to implement without a constitutional amendment anyway.
And please, don't tell me that because I'm not an American, that I shouldn't be criticizing or suggesting improvements to your system of government. Your country's actions affect the world way out of proportion to its population, yet the rest of us don't get to vote your leader in (nor am I suggesting we should).
No BS about more funding to the war attached to a bill about child care.
Usually, it's the other way around. For years and years, breast cancer research money was appropriated as part of the Defense Budget.
I just made my example up, actually.
Thanks for a real-life example. My opinion on riders stands: if the defense budget couldn't get passed without relevant amendments, then a) the majority voting bloc, as elected by the people, doesn't believe it's worth passing; and/or b) come next election, if the people disagreed with their reps on this issue strongly enough, they get voted out.
Something similar would happen if legislation/approval for breast cancer research funding was tabled separately.
By the same token, Americans have the right to express an opinion of a foreign democratic (or other) system.
Of course.
Note that the parliamentary system is designed to DO things. Our system is designed to hamstring government, not to encourage its excesses.
In theory, this may be the case. In practise, the US system does neither. The most shocking examples to me are the allowing of totally un-related riders to be attached to bills, or having private industry or special interest groups writing the legislation that a member introduces as his own (after suitable bribes... ahem, lobbying... has occurred).
Riders were discussed just yesterday I think; someone pointed out it was a system of compromise, so the pot is sweetened enough that enough congress critters and senators will vote it through. Sorry, I don't buy it--if your system is designed to hamstring government and prevent excesses, its current form fails on both counts. Otherwise riders would never be allowed, and bills would have to pass on fail as written, or with changes relevant to the legislation. No BS about more funding to the war attached to a bill about child care.
The best way to hamstring government is, firstly, not have a de facto two-party system. With at least three strong parties, either nothing ever gets done, or coalitions form on an issue-by-issue basis. Of course, if the minority government has weak opposition parties, they can act like a majority and easily get things through. See Canada as a recent example.
Of course, we saw in the 1930s what happened when the German government couldn't get anything done--ultimately, the people do expect their representatives to get SOMEthing accomplished to earn their pay.
I think that was kind of his point. How can a non US citizen validly express such an opinion of our (outdated) electoral process?
I don't know if you're agreeing with his point or simply emphasizing what it was, so I'll address the statement itself.
As the most politically influential country in the world, US elections do not simply determine the direction of your country, it directly affects the rest of the world who have no say in who gets to sit in the big chair.
Non-Americans absolutely have the right to express an opinion of a US democratic system, and it's just as valid as an American's (almost half of whom don't even bother participating in it anyway!).
Where I am, downshifting without braking on a highway can be dangerous: people driving automatics (which probably make up 90% of cars across North America) simply don't expect a car to decelerate that quickly without brakes.
Combine this with them yakking on cell phones or otherwise distracted, if they don't see that bright red visual cue it may delay their reaction by a critical second or two. Then they slam on *their* brakes making the resulting wave much worse than if I'd braked lightly in the first place.
Personally, I think a two-stage brake signal would be beneficial. Stage one would be what we have now--solid red, indicating a light braking or deceleration. Stage two is emergency/sudden braking, and the brake lights rapidly flash on and off. This stage would be tripped if deceleration is higher than some threshold, maybe around the same rate that lock up the seatbelt harnesses. Drivers behind could then adjust their own reactions accordingly.
You identified the problem with the technique: it assumes other drivers are at least as good/considerate as you.
I try maintaining a 2-second rule normally, but in heavier traffic the reality is that others will cut in, possibly causing me to brake to regain that 2-second space (or just plain avoid hitting the bastard). This in itself will cause the very wave we're trying to prevent! How is this *not* the fault of other motorists? What habits of mine can I possibly fix?
Your hill-climbing scenario also assumes that all vehicles have the same acceleration power and rolling resistance.
For example, say I'm going the same speed as the car in front of me on a level stretch leading to a hill. I drive a subcompact, the car in front is larger and loaded down.
As we reach the hill, unless he presses the throttle down significantly he will slow down, and at a much faster rate than my car. If he doesn't anticipate and delays throttling up until he's already on the hill and slowing, even if my foot is completely off the throttle I won't bleed off speed quickly enough.
So I have two choices: let the distance between us close to dangerous levels, or brake lightly. Guess what, I'm choosing the latter.
I could've also anticipated his slowdown a few seconds earlier and lifted off the throttle a bit, but this may result in the driver behind me putting *his* brakes on. Not only does this cause yet another wave, we both lose fuel efficiency by not starting into the hill climb as fast as possible.
Bottom line is that heavy traffic almost inevitably results in a jam at the base of the hill, and for a short while afterwards going up the hill, even if all the drivers are on the same page.
The US is still playing junior varsity "nation building" by comparison.
And the other favourite: "Someone did something worse in the past, so we can do whatever we want!"
Interestingly, this is the same kind of excuse China and other developing countries give for being lax on environmental controls--the developed countries got where they are now because they industrialized with wild abandon, so they should be allowed to too, and never mind the lessons learned since then.
Never mind other countries; I remember reading in a 1989 issue of National Geographic that 13% of American high school grads couldn't identify their own country on a world map!
Thankfully their 2006 study showed improvement... only 6% had problems finding the USA on a world map.
Problem is, the current government and its industry minister Jim Prentice is all about keeping their heads stuck up the asses of the industry, and against the public interest.
Consider their recent record: Telus and Bell introduce 15-cents-per-received-SMS, even if it's spam... Prentice made noise about investigating, then dropped it like a hot potato after "discussing" it with the telcos.
Bell not only kills net neutrality for its own customers, but also for ISPs which lease lines off it. Prentice regurgitates the Bell BS about there being plenty of other ISPs to choose from. Umm, do you have two brain cells to rub together!? Consumers have essentially TWO affordable options for broadband: cable, and Bell-owned lines, regardless of who the ISP actually is!
The Conservatives are also making serious noise about passing DMCA-like legislation, but worse. Again, listening to industry special interests, and not even some of the artists themselves, who know such laws won't help them, despite claims by the industry to the contrary.
Bottom line, the Cons are ensuring that any regulatory body that can make a difference for consumers is castrated, and Telus, Bell, and Rogers know this. This story is only the most recent example of how bold these bastards have gotten.
I've essentially done my duty as a good capitalist-loving person and ensured that these companies aren't getting my business. Well, that's great--except I don't have a cell phone that's practically essential in today's society!
This Conservative government has taken the "Industry Minister" role too literally; maybe we need a "Consumer Minister" to balance it out.
Slashdot Mirror
And yet by doing that, you are always copying yesterday's design and never quite catching up to the competition. That's what the Soviets discovered the hard way and the Chinese are set to rediscover. You can't pretend to innovate by copying. You have innovate independently to get ahead.
If there's one thing that Microsoft's rise to dominance suggests, it's that copying the true innovators goes far, as long as it's cheap, and your consumers are convinced it's good enough.
The Soviets didn't sell things to the largest consumer markets in the world, nor did the big companies in those markets ship the majority of their manufacturing to them. Most consumers don't give a damn about quality or innovation because it costs more up front.
This isn't a "normal" year for the economy either now, is it?
In the span of a few months, we went from rumours of war with Iran, deteriorating relations with Russia, and other things that made the price of energy stocks shoot up--any energy, not just oil....
to a credit meltdown, massive amounts of foreclosures, a possible global recession and pulling back of discretionary spending.
Funny thing about the timing of the gas price spike: it suddenly made SUVs, campers, and leisure boating unappealing to a lot of people, and now that gas is "affordable" to SUV drivers again, thanks to the credit crisis many can no longer get the financing necessary to buy them, even with discounts of $10,000 or more on some SUVs, thus driving fuel demand even lower.
I never really noticed that gas prices went down in the fall/winter before (didn't get a car until May this year) so don't know what causes that, but this year it seems clear that demand is way down at the consumer level.
As for Wordperfect and floppy disks: yep. That's a problem in our home. We are having to migrate WP files now and then. It is not sufficient to have old computers that run the programs. I had WP on my computer (but didn't use it.) A series of glitches when upgrading to SP3 had as a side effect the corruption of WP on my computer. Whatever the problem was, I could not even re-install it. We are now down to one computer that can read it.
Assuming you still have the necessary hardware working (i.e. floppy drive) to read install WP and read your archived WP documents, can't you do a Windows install into VMWare, then install WP onto that?
Another benefit of this is that you can backup this virtual machine and run it on any other PC you get.
It's funny you say that because many neighborhoods in the U.S. (specifically in Minnesota) are allowing shari'ah law to trump U.S. law when it comes to domestic disputes occuring between Islamic people. Gradually shari'ah law is becoming the new legal system. I believe England is seeing it happen more often than the U.S.
Interestingly, the province of Ontario (yes, in that liberal/socialist/left-wing bastion called Canada) ruled out use of Sharia law in 2005 for civil disputes.
That was the response by the Liberal premier, to a report that recommended Sharia be allowed, and the protests against those recommendations.
Not to be discriminatory against a single religion, in the same stroke the government also said Catholic and Jewish tribunals could no longer be used in deciding civil matters, something they'd been able to do on a voluntary basis since 1991.
I suspect the scanners are only out in the open because the airport is so small they don't have room for them elsewhere, but I think it ought to be like that EVERYWHERE.
How well do these new X-rays render objects?
I pity the people who pack their "personal toys" in their checked luggage to escape potential embarrassment of a screener taking it out and inspecting it... only to have it displayed in high-def for everyone in the lobby to see.
So... What happens now? The conservatives might plan to ram unpopular legislation through ASAP and hope it's forgotten by the next election. However, I think they realize that the embarrassment C-61 (or it's successor) is going to cause will be an ongoing thing. By passing C-61, they grant power to CRIA to embarrass them with U.S.-style frivolous lawsuits at will. If CRIA were so inclined, they could deliberately wait for the next election and then turn courtroom cowboy.
The Conservatives don't care what "the people" think, and in a way, why should they?
If there was any issue that might have made young voters turn up and vote, it would've been this issue. Right or wrong, the threat of being sued and even jailed for downloading copyrighted content should have lit a fire under their asses.
Instead, we had one of the lowest turnouts in Canadian history.
It made me lose faith--not in our system, but the people. The media talks about "voter fatigue" and us having gone to federal polls three times since 2004, each time returning a minority government. Well for fsck sake people, a minority government is the BEST government possible under our system!!! Is it really *that* much to ask for you to go to your local polling station? Or to follow the news for a mere 5 weeks and form an opinion about candidates/parties?
Or are you all staring blankly at American Idol, wishing they allowed Canadians to vote for the next vapid American pop star instead? Maybe that's the problem--the younger generation have been told to "vote early, vote often" and think that the single vote they're given in a real election doesn't matter.
I wish. My IT manager asked me to review a list of requirements for hiring a consultant. Not only had he gotten Java and Javascript mixed up, 5 years of JSR-168 experience was a requirement (this was when the JSR-168 portlet specification had been accepted as a standard just two years prior).
I'll grant that web and Java technologies aren't his forte and that he was wise enough to check with me before posting it, but it made me wonder how often HR is merely posting the tech requirements as given to them by clueless tech managers...
Wouldnt the initial fuel injection required to restart the car exceed the potential savings anyway?
I researched this some months ago, and found this discussion, with sources. For most cars, restarting takes the equivalent of 9 or 10 seconds of fuel consumption while idle, and modern engines and starters aren't statistically impacted by doing this repeatedly during a trip.
Consequently, I now turn off my car if I know the light's going to be red for at least 20 seconds.
Hardly the first time American interests have abused NAFTA to the detriment of Canadians.
Other examples: softwood lumber, taking water from the Great Lakes, crippling our attempts to enforce environmental standards, and my current favourite... American private health providers arguing our public health system violates NAFTA.
I took the liberty of transcribing McCain's words. Not to go totally partisan up in here....but you gotta give him props for calling this one:
The business tax. Right now, United States of America business pays the second highest business taxes in the world, 35%. Ireland pays 11%. Now, if you're a business person, and you can locate any place in the world, then obviously if you go to the country where it's 11% tax versus 35, you'll be able to create jobs, increase your business, make more investment, etc. I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses remain in America and create jobs.
Okay, that sounds good. So, what kind of jobs are we talking about creating? In Facebook's case it's programmers. Oops, they're cheaper in India than in the US.
How about manufacturing? Darn, cheaper labour and more lax oversight in China, so they'll set up shop there or contract with existing Chinese manufacturers.
So, for certain types of companies they get their HQs to remain on home soil, while *still* not creating local jobs... though I suppose the cleaning and maintenance workers will have another building to work on.
It's unreasonable to assume a blanket business tax cut will work as claimed with all businesses. Cutting them for multinationals is as ineffective, long term, as handing them money to entice them to stay in an area. And it's not all the company's fault either; labour laws, unions and just plain economics may also contribute to to a company relocating.
The question then becomes "Why does the US use an overcomplicated election system?"
1) No nation-wide standards for voting systems for electing the president. Yeah, yeah, I know it's because theoretically, the states have more power than the federal government, state representatives in the electoral college vote on the president, and the counties in those states decide which way that goes, etc... but you can't seriously tell me that reality today has anything to do with the theory set out in the late 18th century.
2) You seem to vote on everything at once: president, congressman, senator, district attorney, police chief, trustees, etc etc etc... all at the same time. Not only will very few people keep up with what everyone's doing, it also makes the people vying for those positions (or trying to remain in them) publicity hounds, sometimes at the expense of the job itself or the public at large (see: DA Mike Nifong of the Duke rape case).
Change the system so DA, police chiefs and such are appointed by your local elected reps--that's the reps' job. If the appointees are doing a spectacularly inept job, it's the reps' duty to fire them (and if they don't, "fire" the reps in the next election). That simplifies the ballot right off the bat.
I have ideas about improving your federal election system, but don't have time to get into them now, and are probably impossible to implement without a constitutional amendment anyway.
And please, don't tell me that because I'm not an American, that I shouldn't be criticizing or suggesting improvements to your system of government. Your country's actions affect the world way out of proportion to its population, yet the rest of us don't get to vote your leader in (nor am I suggesting we should).
Usually, it's the other way around. For years and years, breast cancer research money was appropriated as part of the Defense Budget.
I just made my example up, actually.
Thanks for a real-life example. My opinion on riders stands: if the defense budget couldn't get passed without relevant amendments, then a) the majority voting bloc, as elected by the people, doesn't believe it's worth passing; and/or b) come next election, if the people disagreed with their reps on this issue strongly enough, they get voted out.
Something similar would happen if legislation/approval for breast cancer research funding was tabled separately.
By the same token, Americans have the right to express an opinion of a foreign democratic (or other) system.
Of course.
Note that the parliamentary system is designed to DO things. Our system is designed to hamstring government, not to encourage its excesses.
In theory, this may be the case. In practise, the US system does neither. The most shocking examples to me are the allowing of totally un-related riders to be attached to bills, or having private industry or special interest groups writing the legislation that a member introduces as his own (after suitable bribes... ahem, lobbying... has occurred).
Riders were discussed just yesterday I think; someone pointed out it was a system of compromise, so the pot is sweetened enough that enough congress critters and senators will vote it through. Sorry, I don't buy it--if your system is designed to hamstring government and prevent excesses, its current form fails on both counts. Otherwise riders would never be allowed, and bills would have to pass on fail as written, or with changes relevant to the legislation. No BS about more funding to the war attached to a bill about child care.
The best way to hamstring government is, firstly, not have a de facto two-party system. With at least three strong parties, either nothing ever gets done, or coalitions form on an issue-by-issue basis. Of course, if the minority government has weak opposition parties, they can act like a majority and easily get things through. See Canada as a recent example.
Of course, we saw in the 1930s what happened when the German government couldn't get anything done--ultimately, the people do expect their representatives to get SOMEthing accomplished to earn their pay.
I think that was kind of his point. How can a non US citizen validly express such an opinion of our (outdated) electoral process?
I don't know if you're agreeing with his point or simply emphasizing what it was, so I'll address the statement itself.
As the most politically influential country in the world, US elections do not simply determine the direction of your country, it directly affects the rest of the world who have no say in who gets to sit in the big chair.
Non-Americans absolutely have the right to express an opinion of a US democratic system, and it's just as valid as an American's (almost half of whom don't even bother participating in it anyway!).
Where I am, downshifting without braking on a highway can be dangerous: people driving automatics (which probably make up 90% of cars across North America) simply don't expect a car to decelerate that quickly without brakes.
Combine this with them yakking on cell phones or otherwise distracted, if they don't see that bright red visual cue it may delay their reaction by a critical second or two. Then they slam on *their* brakes making the resulting wave much worse than if I'd braked lightly in the first place.
Personally, I think a two-stage brake signal would be beneficial. Stage one would be what we have now--solid red, indicating a light braking or deceleration. Stage two is emergency/sudden braking, and the brake lights rapidly flash on and off. This stage would be tripped if deceleration is higher than some threshold, maybe around the same rate that lock up the seatbelt harnesses. Drivers behind could then adjust their own reactions accordingly.
You identified the problem with the technique: it assumes other drivers are at least as good/considerate as you.
I try maintaining a 2-second rule normally, but in heavier traffic the reality is that others will cut in, possibly causing me to brake to regain that 2-second space (or just plain avoid hitting the bastard). This in itself will cause the very wave we're trying to prevent! How is this *not* the fault of other motorists? What habits of mine can I possibly fix?
Your hill-climbing scenario also assumes that all vehicles have the same acceleration power and rolling resistance.
For example, say I'm going the same speed as the car in front of me on a level stretch leading to a hill. I drive a subcompact, the car in front is larger and loaded down.
As we reach the hill, unless he presses the throttle down significantly he will slow down, and at a much faster rate than my car. If he doesn't anticipate and delays throttling up until he's already on the hill and slowing, even if my foot is completely off the throttle I won't bleed off speed quickly enough.
So I have two choices: let the distance between us close to dangerous levels, or brake lightly. Guess what, I'm choosing the latter.
I could've also anticipated his slowdown a few seconds earlier and lifted off the throttle a bit, but this may result in the driver behind me putting *his* brakes on. Not only does this cause yet another wave, we both lose fuel efficiency by not starting into the hill climb as fast as possible.
Bottom line is that heavy traffic almost inevitably results in a jam at the base of the hill, and for a short while afterwards going up the hill, even if all the drivers are on the same page.
"Salesman" is. Look at a used car lot. Apply the same ideas to windows pc sales.
No need to imagine what that's like... Ballmer did this with Windows v1.0:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6YgZc5th6g
I need a twinkie and some diet squirt.
Perfect! Microsoft provides this in the form of its Zune-wielding CEO, Steve "I'll squirt this song to you" Ballmer.
Oh wait, you asked for diet. Never mind.
Good to know Honda's merger with Satan Corp. is working out for them.
However, it's Ford who teamed up with Microsoft and gave us "Sync."
Fix Or Repair Daily, and Found On Road Dead, has never been more apt!
That's why the US government is doing everything it can to speed up the warming of our north. ;-)
Not to mention any links contained in PDFs or printed material. Good luck changing those.
The US is still playing junior varsity "nation building" by comparison.
And the other favourite: "Someone did something worse in the past, so we can do whatever we want!"
Interestingly, this is the same kind of excuse China and other developing countries give for being lax on environmental controls--the developed countries got where they are now because they industrialized with wild abandon, so they should be allowed to too, and never mind the lessons learned since then.
It's like the old joke: (former) Australian PM John Howard has his head so far up GWB's ass, he can see Tony Blair's feet.
Never mind other countries; I remember reading in a 1989 issue of National Geographic that 13% of American high school grads couldn't identify their own country on a world map!
Thankfully their 2006 study showed improvement... only 6% had problems finding the USA on a world map.
Source
Problem is, the current government and its industry minister Jim Prentice is all about keeping their heads stuck up the asses of the industry, and against the public interest.
Consider their recent record:
Telus and Bell introduce 15-cents-per-received-SMS, even if it's spam... Prentice made noise about investigating, then dropped it like a hot potato after "discussing" it with the telcos.
Bell not only kills net neutrality for its own customers, but also for ISPs which lease lines off it. Prentice regurgitates the Bell BS about there being plenty of other ISPs to choose from. Umm, do you have two brain cells to rub together!? Consumers have essentially TWO affordable options for broadband: cable, and Bell-owned lines, regardless of who the ISP actually is!
The Conservatives are also making serious noise about passing DMCA-like legislation, but worse. Again, listening to industry special interests, and not even some of the artists themselves, who know such laws won't help them, despite claims by the industry to the contrary.
Bottom line, the Cons are ensuring that any regulatory body that can make a difference for consumers is castrated, and Telus, Bell, and Rogers know this. This story is only the most recent example of how bold these bastards have gotten.
I've essentially done my duty as a good capitalist-loving person and ensured that these companies aren't getting my business. Well, that's great--except I don't have a cell phone that's practically essential in today's society!
This Conservative government has taken the "Industry Minister" role too literally; maybe we need a "Consumer Minister" to balance it out.