Seen cars do that too. Yes, cyclists need to obey the rules of the road. Where I am , that is the law.
I would like to gently suggest you reconsider what appears to be prejudgment of cyclists as "bad". Yes, there are bad cyclists, there are bad car drivers, there are bad manicurists, etc. There are good ones also.
"Yes, because bicycling down the middle of a street in complete black and with zero lights or reflectors is not asking to be run over."
Was he cycling in the middle of the street? Probably not. And if he was?
Was he in complete black? Probably not. And if he was?
Did he have no lights or reflectors? Probably not. And if he was?
I doubt seriously he was asking to be run over. As someone who used to ride seriously, you can make your bike up like a Christmas tree and still not be seen. You can be not seen in perfect daylight conditions. And you can, as a cyclist, be perfectly well seen and have someone decide they are going to run you over, deliberately. I have been the victim of that ( obeying the rules of the road ) on several occasions. Roll a few miles in a cyclist's pedals before you judge ( no, I don't think those "cyclists" who run red lights and disobey the rules as OK. Not OK to run them over, but I personally dislike intensely when I see a cyclist disobeying. )
"This accident very well might of ruined the other guy's life as well, and might of been totally not his fault, for all we know."
It might well be as you say, but then, why not stay? Why not try to help?
We dont know.
"And no amount of driving skill can protect you from invisible stupid bicyclers."
Try riding a bike for about a year, seriously. You will start to think "what will protect me from blind, stupid car drivers".
"Or they did not want to go to jail for 20 years for a no-fault accident"
Mind made up already? From what I have read, it sounds like the car driver was at fault. He was hit from behind, and the driver slowed, and swerved And then drove off. Could be either at fault. With the hit from behind part, it is hard to seriously argue is was the cyclist at fault.
"a lot of the cyclists around here are either stupid or have a deathwish, judging by how flagrantly they violate right-of-way laws"
Stupid, I think.... But I, as a former cyclist, have been seeing more of this around me, and I hate it. Just remember all, not all cyclists are like that, as not all car drivers are like the ones who commit vehicular assault.
In my short, but ignominious career on a bicycle, I have had
A couple drivers chase me all over the place, deliberately trying to hit me
Several incidences where cars tried to nudge me around ( one I caught and explained things to ( no, really, rationally and all that ), response was "oh, I see" ), including one where the car ( a taxi, in this case ) actually hit the rear wheel of my bike with his fender. I am super lucky I didn't fall ( with the additional push from the car ) into a parked car. I called the taxi company about it, they hung up on me.
Many "I didn't see you" moments, including it broad daylight ( which is why I don't buy the "wear white" thing, some of them *just* *don't* *look* ).
I remember riding at night ( with lights and all ), and having a couple in a van pull up next to me and tell me that I shouldn't ride at night, because the driver of the van was legally blind..... No, really. And that is just what I can remember from 30 years gone.
"Having gone up about 20% since obama care passed."
Having paid for my own insurance for a time, I can tell you that rates increase all the time, at the drop of a hat. The increases were large, and pretty common.
Effects, directly, note 1, note 2 Another person either
On the dole ( increases govt spending in US ), possibly leading to increase in crime in US
Jobless, possibly homeless ( note 1 ), possibly leading to increase in crime in US
Going after the dwindling pool of jobs in "career", resulting in downward pressure on IT wage ( which reduces tax revenue in US ).
Going after pool of jobs out of career, downward pressure on wages ( reduction in tax revenue ).
Note 1, Lost tax revenue to US govt, decrease in aggregate amount available to spend in US economy Note 2, Additional tax revenue to India's govt, increase in aggregate amount available to spend in India's economy
There are other cascade effects, prices in US will have to fall, given the decreases in amounts available to spend. ( I.E., you have less to spend, so you move out of your house ( reducing mortgage/rent paid ), you tighten the belt ( spending less on food, and non-essentials ) , which means lowered amounts going to your creditors/people-you-pay-for-stuff, which means, in turn, less for them.....
Started in Secondary school, 8th grade. Basic on a school system, not sure what it was, i think an HP for a bit till they delivered the PDP 11. I think it was a/40. Teletypes and teleprinters. Hello 130, 3 ( I remember that!!!!! ) They upgraded to another PDP 11 later, I remember it being a/70, but someone else remembers differently. Did the class assignments, learned Basic, Fortran, Pascal, PDP assembly ( won a "write a shorter routine than the prof thing" ).... Did a compiler course. Mom got a Vic20 for me and my brother and sister. Then I had to enter the real world, worked for a time, then went to Jr College, did pascal and C on Apple II's. Moved on to C++ after college, then added VB, C# and VB.net ( where I am currently stuck ).
On windows 7: start find and click "control panel" find and click "administrative tools" find and click "services" find the service you want to deal with, double click click stop to stop the service if you don't want it to start on system start, change the "startup type" dropdown to "disabled" or "manual".
Maybe, maybe not. Assume it isn't. Even then, *WHY* did it do what it did in that block of code? You look at it, it doesn't make sense, you rewrite yourself into a bug. Or, in your rewrite, the structure of the code is different, what is done in that one block of code now needs to be spread out over different sections of the new. But you cant/don't track that. Bug. If it is, then all your problems are compounded, you will have to test it, find out what it does ( and did you find everything? ) Users aren't much help, as pointed out above, they will tell you all about the main case(s) they use regularly. They wont ( not maliciously, either ) tell you about the special case stuff it does. It just doesn't occur to them. You can try to drag it out of them. If you know enough to ask the right questions.
"I expect that this will cause a general reduction in population, with the reduction happening, by definition, in the otherwise useless parts of society. The parts that flourish will be the parts that are most useful (Smarter, stronger, better looking...). Basically its a gentler version of survival of the fittest"
If the world were truly as much a meritocracy as you seem to believe it to be, this would be well and good.
Unfortunately, it is not. Luck has a huge role to play in those that get to be in the "off welfare" class. ( note, hard work and smarts can also be in the mix ). Do you *really* think *everyone* in the current "wealthy" class is better or smarter or stronger than you? Or me? I sure don't. If were really all about smart or strong or whatever, I, for one, would be much more highly placed. I suspect many here would be also.
It used to be bread and circuses, now, you are happy with circuses.
And the 1% have all your free stuff, and persons of the opposite ( or same ) sex that will throw themselves at the 1% and other perks that the 99% will never have. So, no more has gone to the 1% in the "free stuff" category as well.
On competing: when will expenses match those of the "competition"? That is the crux of the matter. Costs are higher here. Lower a US programmers rent/mortgage, food costs, transportation costs, etc, and he/she/ti will be quite competitive. When those expenses are lower, the companies complaining will have to make less. It cant be any other way, the money wont be there, as the wages will be down.
So, no, they are not acting in the best interests of the citizens.
There are plenty of tech people here, and the run up to the dot com crash proved that people will train up for tech work when the market gives them a reason to do so. There is NO reason for more H1Bs except to depress wages.
" It's immoral and reprehensible to have a social welfare state"
If you buy into the NAIRU concept, that there *has* to be unemployment or there will be unacceptable inflation, then I don't see how you can say ( morally ) that assistance for those so unemployed is a bad thing.
And they will continue to use their wealth and power to drive down their tax amounts all the while whining about how they pay too much and how those making many orders of magnitude less aren't contributing. Never mind billions would give body parts to exchange places with them and have their "problems".
Slashdot Mirror
Seen cars do that too. Yes, cyclists need to obey the rules of the road. Where I am , that is the law.
I would like to gently suggest you reconsider what appears to be prejudgment of cyclists as "bad".
Yes, there are bad cyclists, there are bad car drivers, there are bad manicurists, etc.
There are good ones also.
For a while, I was thinking of purchasing a gun and putting it in a holster so it would be visible to people coming up on me from behind.
I honestly believe that that would have been effective, the thought being "wow, he is more than just some squishy thing I can run over".
"Yes, because bicycling down the middle of a street in complete black and with zero lights or reflectors is not asking to be run over."
Was he cycling in the middle of the street? Probably not. And if he was?
Was he in complete black? Probably not. And if he was?
Did he have no lights or reflectors? Probably not. And if he was?
I doubt seriously he was asking to be run over. As someone who used to ride seriously, you can make your bike up like a Christmas tree and still not be seen. You can be not seen in perfect daylight conditions. And you can, as a cyclist, be perfectly well seen and have someone decide they are going to run you over, deliberately. I have been the victim of that ( obeying the rules of the road ) on several occasions. Roll a few miles in a cyclist's pedals before you judge ( no, I don't think those "cyclists" who run red lights and disobey the rules as OK. Not OK to run them over, but I personally dislike intensely when I see a cyclist disobeying. )
"This accident very well might of ruined the other guy's life as well, and might of been totally not his fault, for all we know."
It might well be as you say, but then, why not stay? Why not try to help?
We dont know.
"And no amount of driving skill can protect you from invisible stupid bicyclers."
Try riding a bike for about a year, seriously. You will start to think "what will protect me from blind, stupid car drivers".
"Or they did not want to go to jail for 20 years for a no-fault accident"
Mind made up already? From what I have read, it sounds like the car driver was at fault.
He was hit from behind, and the driver slowed, and swerved
And then drove off. Could be either at fault. With the hit from behind part, it is hard to seriously argue is was the cyclist at fault.
"a lot of the cyclists around here are either stupid or have a deathwish, judging by how flagrantly they violate right-of-way laws"
Stupid, I think.... But I, as a former cyclist, have been seeing more of this around me, and I hate it.
Just remember all, not all cyclists are like that, as not all car drivers are like the ones who commit vehicular assault.
In my short, but ignominious career on a bicycle, I have had
A couple drivers chase me all over the place, deliberately trying to hit me
Several incidences where cars tried to nudge me around ( one I caught and explained things to ( no, really, rationally and all that ), response was "oh, I see" ), including one where the car ( a taxi, in this case ) actually hit the rear wheel of my bike with his fender. I am super lucky I didn't fall ( with the additional push from the car ) into a parked car. I called the taxi company about it, they hung up on me.
Many "I didn't see you" moments, including it broad daylight ( which is why I don't buy the "wear white" thing, some of them *just* *don't* *look* ).
I remember riding at night ( with lights and all ), and having a couple in a van pull up next to me and tell me that I shouldn't ride at night, because the driver of the van was legally blind..... No, really.
And that is just what I can remember from 30 years gone.
"Having gone up about 20% since obama care passed."
Having paid for my own insurance for a time, I can tell you that rates increase all the time, at the drop of a hat.
The increases were large, and pretty common.
I feel you missed it.... It should have been:
Obamacare has always been at war with East Asia
Effects, directly, note 1, note 2
Another person either
On the dole ( increases govt spending in US ), possibly leading to increase in crime in US
Jobless, possibly homeless ( note 1 ), possibly leading to increase in crime in US
Going after the dwindling pool of jobs in "career", resulting in downward pressure on IT wage ( which reduces tax revenue in US ).
Going after pool of jobs out of career, downward pressure on wages ( reduction in tax revenue ).
Note 1, Lost tax revenue to US govt, decrease in aggregate amount available to spend in US economy
Note 2, Additional tax revenue to India's govt, increase in aggregate amount available to spend in India's economy
There are other cascade effects, prices in US will have to fall, given the decreases in amounts available to spend.
( I.E., you have less to spend, so you move out of your house ( reducing mortgage/rent paid ), you tighten the belt ( spending less on food, and non-essentials ) , which means lowered amounts going to your creditors/people-you-pay-for-stuff, which means, in turn, less for them.....
Then you wont mind if we put you in a large airtight container and pump all the "environment change" in with you.
Or normalize all capitalization, punctuation, spelling and grammar.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NB-36H
I believe this is the aircraft you are referring to.
If the article is to be believed, it did fly ( although not on nuclear power )
Started in Secondary school, 8th grade. /40. /70, but someone else remembers differently.
Basic on a school system, not sure what it was, i think an HP for a bit till they delivered the PDP 11. I think it was a
Teletypes and teleprinters.
Hello 130, 3
( I remember that!!!!! )
They upgraded to another PDP 11 later, I remember it being a
Did the class assignments, learned Basic, Fortran, Pascal, PDP assembly ( won a "write a shorter routine than the prof thing" ).... Did a compiler course.
Mom got a Vic20 for me and my brother and sister.
Then I had to enter the real world, worked for a time, then went to Jr College, did pascal and C on Apple II's.
Moved on to C++ after college, then added VB, C# and VB.net ( where I am currently stuck ).
"then yet "
read at that point in time it was .
That is not clicking an icon.....
I was trying to point out was the vast difference between "oh, just click an icon" and what really needs to happen...
On windows 7:
start
find and click "control panel"
find and click "administrative tools"
find and click "services"
find the service you want to deal with, double click
click stop to stop the service
if you don't want it to start on system start, change the "startup type" dropdown to "disabled" or "manual".
But they already own the electron microscope. Unlikely they want to buy another....
'Is the source code lost"
Maybe, maybe not.
Assume it isn't. Even then, *WHY* did it do what it did in that block of code? You look at it, it doesn't make sense, you rewrite yourself into a bug.
Or, in your rewrite, the structure of the code is different, what is done in that one block of code now needs to be spread out over different sections of the new. But you cant/don't track that. Bug.
If it is, then all your problems are compounded, you will have to test it, find out what it does ( and did you find everything? )
Users aren't much help, as pointed out above, they will tell you all about the main case(s) they use regularly.
They wont ( not maliciously, either ) tell you about the special case stuff it does. It just doesn't occur to them. You can try to drag it out of them. If you know enough to ask the right questions.
"I expect that this will cause a general reduction in population, with the reduction happening, by definition, in the otherwise useless parts of society. The parts that flourish will be the parts that are most useful (Smarter, stronger, better looking...). Basically its a gentler version of survival of the fittest"
If the world were truly as much a meritocracy as you seem to believe it to be, this would be well and good.
Unfortunately, it is not. Luck has a huge role to play in those that get to be in the "off welfare" class. ( note, hard work and smarts can also be in the mix ).
Do you *really* think *everyone* in the current "wealthy" class is better or smarter or stronger than you? Or me?
I sure don't. If were really all about smart or strong or whatever, I, for one, would be much more highly placed.
I suspect many here would be also.
It used to be bread and circuses, now, you are happy with circuses.
And the 1% have all your free stuff, and persons of the opposite ( or same ) sex that will throw themselves at the 1% and other perks that the 99% will never have. So, no more has gone to the 1% in the "free stuff" category as well.
Yes, just like that.
"If that were true then outsourcing to India would have done that a long time ago."
It is in the process of doing that now. Or why do you think the economy in the US is down?
On competing: when will expenses match those of the "competition"? That is the crux of the matter. Costs are higher here. Lower a US programmers rent/mortgage, food costs, transportation costs, etc, and he/she/ti will be quite competitive. When those expenses are lower, the companies complaining will have to make less. It cant be any other way, the money wont be there, as the wages will be down.
So, no, they are not acting in the best interests of the citizens.
There are plenty of tech people here, and the run up to the dot com crash proved that people will train up for tech work when the market gives them a reason to do so. There is NO reason for more H1Bs except to depress wages.
" It's immoral and reprehensible to have a social welfare state"
If you buy into the NAIRU concept, that there *has* to be unemployment or there will be unacceptable inflation, then I don't see how you can say ( morally ) that assistance for those so unemployed is a bad thing.
And they will continue to use their wealth and power to drive down their tax amounts all the while whining about how they pay too much and how those making many orders of magnitude less aren't contributing. Never mind billions would give body parts to exchange places with them and have their "problems".