As long as we have the government-created concept of "corporations", I have no problem in giving labor unions equivalent powers. I think I'd like to see the influence of both seriously restricted with regards to government.
Tell that to my friend who has a small business that is not union. He's gotten threats to his family and rocks through the window. I don't care if you are a corporate titan or a union member, you are no better than a common terrorist if you resort to such measures.
Which is a great idea, but you can pick up a $10 corded phone and stick it in a closet somewhere as an even more reliable solution. I bought one for the kitchen, just to avoid removing and refinishing the wall jack that was there when we bought the house:)
Not in NYC - I don't think they get good bang-for-their-buck on the 212 area code, where something like 90% use public transit.
The political season currently has so many robo-calls coming in that I have my home phone forwarded to Google Voice. Anyone important will leave a message, and Google's terrible transcription service is good enough to identify robo-calls:
"Hey, Annex Chicago toners I was out rates when I discovered at ABC were born alive because the botched abortions. We're being left dot. Bye. I worked to protect these babies with the Intern born alive active me on my legislature. State Senator Barack Obama fought against the bill and voted against it 4 times. Brock Obama is the most extreme pro abortion present we ever had gas wise this Chicago. When is voting for Life in again. The Rocko Bahama. I hope you will too. This message was paid for by the Susan B. Anthony list. Not Authorized by any candidate or candidate's committees. S. B. 8 Dash list dot org."
My gut reaction is that you are right. That said, usually these situations call for some regulation... after all, a corporation is a government fabrications, so it makes sense to have a labor equivalent.
If this is what unions did in practice, I'd agree. My (limited) experience with unions and my wife's much more extensive experience shows that they spend most of their energies defending the weakest people in their membership roles. People who, by any objective standard, should be fired. They shift the whole focus of the workforce from "are we achieving the goal?" to "are we following the rules?". Further, they tend to be run by long-time union members and not by people with a professional background in business, finance, etc. Finally, they poison our political atmosphere - we have very weak rules in the US about who can throw money around. Government unions are a total scam, and private unions often get public officials involved in what should be a private business matter. I won't get into physical intimidation, since I'm sure you'd agree that is a black eye that unions are notorious for. To be fair, employers were the ones who were notorious for this in the past.
I think the concept of the union is sound and I think they should be commended for some of their past achievements. I just think we need serious reform of the current practice, which is self-defeating.
It was probably stolen by kids and brought to a professional. They steal the car and then stick it in a parking lot to cool off (in case it has LoJack). Then they bring it to a hack shop. While flat-bed thefts do happen, most cars are hotwired.
"Sacking up" won't save me when someone comes around the blind curve. I agree that taking up the whole lane is the best course in a bad situation - but even better is to avoid the situation altogether. Same reason I don't ride a motorcycle.
Shouldn't 200 watts be plenty? IIRC, a human being can only put out 100 watts average and less than 300 watts peak - so 200 extra watts roughly triples the average output of a human-powered bicycle and significantly boosts the peak output.
So until the attitude about bikes in the US changes, no spiffy technology is going to get folks on bikes.
I would love to bike to work. I work 10 miles away, and I have arranged our living situation such that my kids are a walk away from school. I'm under 40, so I should be fit enough to pedal 20 miles each day.
The problem is safety. I have no way to get into work safely on a bicycle. One of my biking enthusiast friends guided me on a route that he considers safe, but I must say that it terrified me. At one point, the road was so narrow that cars could not pass a bicycle safely and so he showed me his strategy - take up the whole lane. Now, most drivers simply got pissed off and honked. But one decided to overtake us on a blind curve. If another car came around the curve, I have no doubt that one of the two cars would have swerved into us. And I can't even blame the drivers who were frustrated (not that I condone the honking or overtaking), since we were doing around 15 or less on a 35 MPH road. It's true that people should leave a bit earlier for work so that they aren't running late, but planning for your trip time to double is usually not in people's budget.
Bike lanes are also a total joke. They are painted along the edge of the road, so you get nailed when people open car doors, you have careless people using them as right turn lanes - especially when there is legal turn on red, and buses share the space with you - and those drivers are sometimes more aggressive than the regular traffic.
Are you insane? That would take almost 10 minutes! I don't have 10 minutes!:)
When I lived in Manhattan, 10 blocks was approximately the threshold where I'd consider hopping on a bus, depending on the weather and traffic. It was a 10-15 walk to the subway, so I have kind of a different perspective on walking distances than most of my suburban brethren. If I walk 2 miles with my kids to the ice cream shop, they think I've gone mad.
Oh my goodness, it's clear from context that he means most people will be living in urban environments. So many pedants....
Forget runners and bikers, I've beat cross-town traffic in NYC just walking. Conversely, I've taken the cross-town bus and seen the same nanny pushing the same stroller for almost the entire trip.
The biker was not too bad, though you'd still react oddly to a person staring at you as you come out of a store. The other one that was fine was when he imitated a regular camera crew and filmed the person being escorted out.
If I were to attempt to make a point about this, I would set up a camera zoomed into a spot. Then I would wait for someone to occupy that spot (say, the Starbucks table) and walk over with a tablet streaming the picture. Show the person that they are being recorded. Point to the camera. See if they like that feeling. Instead, he ends up making a one-man freak show tape. I have to agree he is probably a "dumb fuck":)
Cameras are not sociopathic. I'm not really sure how to respond to giving a diagnosis to a camera.
Anyway, most of the things he did would have elicited the same response with or without a camera. Ever stared through a window at a guy eating? Then, when the guy moves away from the window, did you go inside after him? You probably haven't, because you probably aren't a sociopath. Have you ever sat down uninvited at a table with a man having a phone conversation, when all of the other tables are available and clean? Probably not. Have you ever stared in a car window at someone sitting in their car? I doubt it.
If the dude had no camera, it would be almost the same thing. Walk up to a guy sitting in a car and just stare in the window. Sit down at a table with someone talking on the phone. Stare in through a plate-glass window at someone eating, then when they move, follow them inside. No camera, the reaction would have been the same.
I get the point he was trying to make. I may even agree a bit. He just did a horrendous job of making that point and instead behaved like a sociopath, and because he had a camera rolling we get to see what people do when sociopaths interact with normal (or even abnormal) people.
Funniest part of the video and sums up my feelings on the whole project. This has nothing to do with surveillance and everything to do with a sociopath making people uncomfortable.
Alright, but asteroids large enough to kill everyone in a major metropolitan area come more frequently. Tunguska-sized events might be as frequent as once every 400 years. If we address this more immediate, more manageable risk with today's technology, maybe in 1000 years we will have slowly progressed far enough to address larger threats.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as we have the government-created concept of "corporations", I have no problem in giving labor unions equivalent powers. I think I'd like to see the influence of both seriously restricted with regards to government.
Tell that to my friend who has a small business that is not union. He's gotten threats to his family and rocks through the window. I don't care if you are a corporate titan or a union member, you are no better than a common terrorist if you resort to such measures.
Which is a great idea, but you can pick up a $10 corded phone and stick it in a closet somewhere as an even more reliable solution. I bought one for the kitchen, just to avoid removing and refinishing the wall jack that was there when we bought the house :)
Not in NYC - I don't think they get good bang-for-their-buck on the 212 area code, where something like 90% use public transit.
The political season currently has so many robo-calls coming in that I have my home phone forwarded to Google Voice. Anyone important will leave a message, and Google's terrible transcription service is good enough to identify robo-calls:
"Hey, Annex Chicago toners I was out rates when I discovered at ABC were born alive because the botched abortions. We're being left dot. Bye. I worked to protect these babies with the Intern born alive active me on my legislature. State Senator Barack Obama fought against the bill and voted against it 4 times. Brock Obama is the most extreme pro abortion present we ever had gas wise this Chicago. When is voting for Life in again. The Rocko Bahama. I hope you will too. This message was paid for by the Susan B. Anthony list. Not Authorized by any candidate or candidate's committees. S. B. 8 Dash list dot org."
Rocko Bahama, LOL...
My gut reaction is that you are right. That said, usually these situations call for some regulation... after all, a corporation is a government fabrications, so it makes sense to have a labor equivalent.
I confess to knowing nothing about it. If it is a trade association, then it probably suffers from the same type of political corruptions as unions.
If this is what unions did in practice, I'd agree. My (limited) experience with unions and my wife's much more extensive experience shows that they spend most of their energies defending the weakest people in their membership roles. People who, by any objective standard, should be fired. They shift the whole focus of the workforce from "are we achieving the goal?" to "are we following the rules?". Further, they tend to be run by long-time union members and not by people with a professional background in business, finance, etc. Finally, they poison our political atmosphere - we have very weak rules in the US about who can throw money around. Government unions are a total scam, and private unions often get public officials involved in what should be a private business matter. I won't get into physical intimidation, since I'm sure you'd agree that is a black eye that unions are notorious for. To be fair, employers were the ones who were notorious for this in the past.
I think the concept of the union is sound and I think they should be commended for some of their past achievements. I just think we need serious reform of the current practice, which is self-defeating.
How so? I lived in NYC for several years with no car, and never had to worry about auto insurance unless I rented a car.
My wife had no car when living in Philadelphia and had the same experience.
Do you have some strange situation in your state where they assume you have a car?
It was probably stolen by kids and brought to a professional. They steal the car and then stick it in a parking lot to cool off (in case it has LoJack). Then they bring it to a hack shop. While flat-bed thefts do happen, most cars are hotwired.
"Sacking up" won't save me when someone comes around the blind curve. I agree that taking up the whole lane is the best course in a bad situation - but even better is to avoid the situation altogether. Same reason I don't ride a motorcycle.
Shouldn't 200 watts be plenty? IIRC, a human being can only put out 100 watts average and less than 300 watts peak - so 200 extra watts roughly triples the average output of a human-powered bicycle and significantly boosts the peak output.
I'm sure you'd agree that your average thief might find it easier to procure a pickup than a car hauler...
So until the attitude about bikes in the US changes, no spiffy technology is going to get folks on bikes.
I would love to bike to work. I work 10 miles away, and I have arranged our living situation such that my kids are a walk away from school. I'm under 40, so I should be fit enough to pedal 20 miles each day.
The problem is safety. I have no way to get into work safely on a bicycle. One of my biking enthusiast friends guided me on a route that he considers safe, but I must say that it terrified me. At one point, the road was so narrow that cars could not pass a bicycle safely and so he showed me his strategy - take up the whole lane. Now, most drivers simply got pissed off and honked. But one decided to overtake us on a blind curve. If another car came around the curve, I have no doubt that one of the two cars would have swerved into us. And I can't even blame the drivers who were frustrated (not that I condone the honking or overtaking), since we were doing around 15 or less on a 35 MPH road. It's true that people should leave a bit earlier for work so that they aren't running late, but planning for your trip time to double is usually not in people's budget.
Bike lanes are also a total joke. They are painted along the edge of the road, so you get nailed when people open car doors, you have careless people using them as right turn lanes - especially when there is legal turn on red, and buses share the space with you - and those drivers are sometimes more aggressive than the regular traffic.
Are you insane? That would take almost 10 minutes! I don't have 10 minutes! :)
When I lived in Manhattan, 10 blocks was approximately the threshold where I'd consider hopping on a bus, depending on the weather and traffic. It was a 10-15 walk to the subway, so I have kind of a different perspective on walking distances than most of my suburban brethren. If I walk 2 miles with my kids to the ice cream shop, they think I've gone mad.
Oh my goodness, it's clear from context that he means most people will be living in urban environments. So many pedants....
Forget runners and bikers, I've beat cross-town traffic in NYC just walking. Conversely, I've taken the cross-town bus and seen the same nanny pushing the same stroller for almost the entire trip.
The biker was not too bad, though you'd still react oddly to a person staring at you as you come out of a store. The other one that was fine was when he imitated a regular camera crew and filmed the person being escorted out.
If I were to attempt to make a point about this, I would set up a camera zoomed into a spot. Then I would wait for someone to occupy that spot (say, the Starbucks table) and walk over with a tablet streaming the picture. Show the person that they are being recorded. Point to the camera. See if they like that feeling. Instead, he ends up making a one-man freak show tape. I have to agree he is probably a "dumb fuck" :)
Revealing that I think this guy did a very poor job of making his point?
In fact, if the summary didn't tell me what his point was, I would have thought he was trying to do a bad copy of Tom Green.
Cameras are not sociopathic. I'm not really sure how to respond to giving a diagnosis to a camera.
Anyway, most of the things he did would have elicited the same response with or without a camera. Ever stared through a window at a guy eating? Then, when the guy moves away from the window, did you go inside after him? You probably haven't, because you probably aren't a sociopath. Have you ever sat down uninvited at a table with a man having a phone conversation, when all of the other tables are available and clean? Probably not. Have you ever stared in a car window at someone sitting in their car? I doubt it.
Coal? Sure. Oil? Where do you live where a significant amount of electricity comes from oil?
Google for "indium" and "solar cells". There are some other promising technologies to get away from indium, but right now that's the standard.
If the dude had no camera, it would be almost the same thing. Walk up to a guy sitting in a car and just stare in the window. Sit down at a table with someone talking on the phone. Stare in through a plate-glass window at someone eating, then when they move, follow them inside. No camera, the reaction would have been the same.
I get the point he was trying to make. I may even agree a bit. He just did a horrendous job of making that point and instead behaved like a sociopath, and because he had a camera rolling we get to see what people do when sociopaths interact with normal (or even abnormal) people.
"You even look like a dumb fuck."
Funniest part of the video and sums up my feelings on the whole project. This has nothing to do with surveillance and everything to do with a sociopath making people uncomfortable.
With a salvage title, sure. Otherwise it's fraud IMHO.
Pffft... with that, Apple could barely construct and equip a nuclear aircraft carrier!
Alright, but asteroids large enough to kill everyone in a major metropolitan area come more frequently. Tunguska-sized events might be as frequent as once every 400 years. If we address this more immediate, more manageable risk with today's technology, maybe in 1000 years we will have slowly progressed far enough to address larger threats.