As for safe driving, people on OxyContin should not be driving at all. That stuff in any quantity at all leaves you far more impaired than 0.08 BAC will for most.
I believe I have promoted responsibility for your actions. Not sure where you got the idea I think it is a right. I wish a lot fewer people had the privilege.
I fully believe impaired driving is bad (whether due to drinking, drugs, fatigue, reading the paper, electronics, whatever)
I believe that some arbitrarily chosen number with no basis in fact set as a legally deciding factor for automatic guilt is bad.
MADD has done wonders for demonizing anyone with 1 sip of alcohol as "drunk". Be careful with your mouthwash or breath freshener, or that hand sanitizer. I'm against drunk driving. I'm also against arbitrary laws no matter what their original intent.
You're on a crusade and missed the point entirely. Arbitrary laws are bad. I'm optimistically assuming you have some level of intelligence, so let that previous statement sink in.
I fully believe impaired driving is bad (whether due to drinking, drugs, fatigue, reading the paper, electronics, whatever)
I believe that some arbitrarily chosen number with no basis in fact set as a legally deciding factor for automatic guilt is bad.
Since you're blinded and likely slow - that latter reference was to your threatening language in the previous post as being "proof" of your violent nature, and an automatically imposed sentence. Get it now?
The limit does not exist so that you can have "just one beer" and still be able to drive. If you plan to drive, do not drink alcohol. None.
Yep, nice in theory, but you might as well take the US back to Prohibition. Fortunately, between taxis, Uber, Lyft, and soon autonomous cars, we can perhaps avoid the entire thing.
The step that you and many others who share a similar opinion miss is that in general, the police don't waste their time pulling someone over without some form of probable cause.
For drunk driving accusations, this falls into one of two dominant scenarios: 1) it's about 3AM and all the bars closed down for the morning; 2) the driver was driving recklessly. Even if it is 3AM, if you do not show any signs of impairment when the officer comes to talk to you, they probably won't waste their time with a field sobriety test.
Note that at 3am, hopped up cops are more than happy to pull over anyone, for any reason. They are bored, and arresting anyone, even under false pretenses, means they get to do something other than just being bored.
they've either gotten stuck with a cop who's had a bad day and will look for any slight excuse to fine or arrest someone
Yep, and that means arresting you whether you're guilty or not, just because you were out, oh, and they have an "unofficial" quota to meet.
...you dumb fuck... immature douchebag...choke on your mother's cock...result in the death...immature irresponsible piece of shit.
People that cannot contain themselves and threaten and curse repeatedly have been shown to be much more likely to commit violent random crimes. Please submit yourself to the federal prison system immediately, as apparently you are unfit for society.
That's how arbitrary laws work, dumbass. Thank goodness you're supporting the nanny state.
there are no lame ass whiny entitled excuses or explanations that apply. don't drive drunk, no exceptions
Ah, but what is "drunk"? Is it an arbitrary value or is it an actual assessment of whether you are truly impaired? (The former in the US, in case you're wondering)
Yes, I'm fully aware this goes against the nanny prohibitionists currently gaining favor everywhere, because alcohol is Bad [Tm]. A BAC of 0.08 might put one 90 lb female completely out but another will be perfectly lucid and sane. I personally know a guy that can't drink more than 2 light beers without becoming impaired for the evening (bad luck in the gene lotto) and his BAC is far below 0.08. I know another guy who sometimes drinks all day, and you'd never know. I guarantee you his BAC is above 0.1 for a good period of that time. Instead of an arbitrary BAC as proof, how about it being merely evidence to support proving impairment by actually testing... impairment? For chronic offenders this is relatively simple and obvious.
Note that I fully support throwing the book at those who harm others while DUI. You've run out of mitigating circumstances at that point and deserve the maximum penalty for whatever you did, to run consecutively in cases of multiple harm. Responsibility is something that should be applied appropriately, and merely having an arbitrary BAC is not a reason to throw the entire book at someone.
Eventually USB2 realised it's potential and stopped sucking and actually caught up with firewire in terms of actual speed, but that took years.
USB2 still sucks, and is still far far slower and less reliable than any FW implementation. However, USB3 can be faster than FW400 or FW800. USB, however hobbled we'll continue to be by it, will continue to exist for the foreseeable future even though much better protocols exist. It's not always the best that win.
It's only a problem when [religions] teach prejudice, intolerance and hate.
In addition to drinkypoo's point, you're basically stating that Islam is a problem, then? Along with Westboro church and any other religion claiming to be the one and only way?
The operating system won't let you. Any operating system which does let you will be banned under the 'free trade' treaty for breaking DRM.
It's hard to tell whether the DRM fanatics are insane or just plain evil. But, either way, they have to destroy general-purpose computing to make it work.
Stupid advertisers want ads that they measure working by clicks, so they optimize the ads to attract clicks, but that doesn't drive purchasing. The best ads are the ones that consumers don't even realize they've seen, but just develop a cumulative effect of exposure. That's hard to do, and requires a lot of time, money, and effort to get right. Even then it's a crapshoot, like trying to write a popular song. But in the end, there's a market for so many chairs and so many peaches and so many computers, and advertising can steer enough purchases towards yours and away from somebody else's equivalent one in a way that merely improving the specifications can't do.
I never click an ad, unless it's by mistake, which does occasionally happen. What's really great is when you search for something someone else wants. That in no way is something you'd ever buy, like a 10kW generator. That followed me around a while. Perhaps the most fun you can have is randomly search for a word a day at amazon (via script of course) and see what wonderful ads you get, provided you see any. It certainly screws with their metrics.
I'm not sure either, as purchasing is usually something I do as a focused action. I make the decision to buy it, and then I do 1 of 2 things: I purchase it or I put a filter into my RSS reader to highlight sales on it.
TBH, the google ads were the only ones that are remotely applicable in my book. The rest are rarely relevant, unless it's for stereo or video equipment on AVSForums, for instance, or cars on edmunds, etc.
And to continue the OT: I've stated before that the largest mistake made by all the publication companies was to not embrace the web with a "subscription" model, even if "free" with subscription in the beginning leading to the current lack of willingness of people to pay for almost all content. I wouldn't mind paying a subscription fee for a magazine or newspaper, but would only do so if the content was significantly better than the current offerings, sans the 1000 ads.
The biggest issue with their ads is that I don't ever click on them even if I see them. I'm the "don't look for something until I need it, then I buy it" kind of person. So, let's say I'm looking for a chair. I'll do my research, and likely purchase a chair in a day. That's before the ad network gets updated. What's hilarious is the ads are showing me the chair I bought (creepy yes) but that chair is no longer of interest to me for purchase. And it continues doing so for the next month or more. Almost all my purchases are done this way, as that allows for strong budgeting.
I've actually done some of this route, except for the encrypting content separately part. Since I host the server, locking it down is simple enough, so only those I wish to share things with can get there. Works for me, and was relatively trivial to setup, for me. Like you, I don't believe most people will go that route. And that's a shame, really, because setting that up shouldn't be so hard nor difficult that people have issues with it.
The only way a post scarcity society will work long-term is to have an "allowance". That allowance will be enough to live on and enjoy things, but to gain "more" to gain something you want you'll need to work or do something someone else wants to pay for. Odds are the allowance would be split 3 ways: housing, living, and discretionary.
Maybe I'm missing something... It wouldn't be the first time.
The only thing you're missing is why would you put your kids pics in the cloud, or anything else personal. Unless you're going to publish it for worldwide consumption, the "cloud" is not the place to put it.
Slashdot Mirror
As for safe driving, people on OxyContin should not be driving at all. That stuff in any quantity at all leaves you far more impaired than 0.08 BAC will for most.
I believe I have promoted responsibility for your actions. Not sure where you got the idea I think it is a right. I wish a lot fewer people had the privilege.
MADD has done wonders for demonizing anyone with 1 sip of alcohol as "drunk". Be careful with your mouthwash or breath freshener, or that hand sanitizer. I'm against drunk driving. I'm also against arbitrary laws no matter what their original intent.
all i know is that you have hijacked the topic with a tirade about arbitrary laws
Apparently you wish to continue to ecstatically celebrate your narrow-minded righteousness. Keep stroking, maybe you'll get a payoff.
You're on a crusade and missed the point entirely. Arbitrary laws are bad. I'm optimistically assuming you have some level of intelligence, so let that previous statement sink in.
I fully believe impaired driving is bad (whether due to drinking, drugs, fatigue, reading the paper, electronics, whatever)
I believe that some arbitrarily chosen number with no basis in fact set as a legally deciding factor for automatic guilt is bad.
Since you're blinded and likely slow - that latter reference was to your threatening language in the previous post as being "proof" of your violent nature, and an automatically imposed sentence. Get it now?
The limit does not exist so that you can have "just one beer" and still be able to drive. If you plan to drive, do not drink alcohol. None.
Yep, nice in theory, but you might as well take the US back to Prohibition. Fortunately, between taxis, Uber, Lyft, and soon autonomous cars, we can perhaps avoid the entire thing.
The step that you and many others who share a similar opinion miss is that in general, the police don't waste their time pulling someone over without some form of probable cause.
I guess that's why we have so many non-violating stop and search court cases?
For drunk driving accusations, this falls into one of two dominant scenarios: 1) it's about 3AM and all the bars closed down for the morning; 2) the driver was driving recklessly. Even if it is 3AM, if you do not show any signs of impairment when the officer comes to talk to you, they probably won't waste their time with a field sobriety test.
Note that at 3am, hopped up cops are more than happy to pull over anyone, for any reason. They are bored, and arresting anyone, even under false pretenses, means they get to do something other than just being bored.
they've either gotten stuck with a cop who's had a bad day and will look for any slight excuse to fine or arrest someone
Yep, and that means arresting you whether you're guilty or not, just because you were out, oh, and they have an "unofficial" quota to meet.
...you dumb fuck... immature douchebag ...choke on your mother's cock...result in the death...immature irresponsible piece of shit.
People that cannot contain themselves and threaten and curse repeatedly have been shown to be much more likely to commit violent random crimes. Please submit yourself to the federal prison system immediately, as apparently you are unfit for society.
That's how arbitrary laws work, dumbass. Thank goodness you're supporting the nanny state.
there are no lame ass whiny entitled excuses or explanations that apply. don't drive drunk, no exceptions
Ah, but what is "drunk"? Is it an arbitrary value or is it an actual assessment of whether you are truly impaired? (The former in the US, in case you're wondering)
Yes, I'm fully aware this goes against the nanny prohibitionists currently gaining favor everywhere, because alcohol is Bad [Tm]. A BAC of 0.08 might put one 90 lb female completely out but another will be perfectly lucid and sane. I personally know a guy that can't drink more than 2 light beers without becoming impaired for the evening (bad luck in the gene lotto) and his BAC is far below 0.08. I know another guy who sometimes drinks all day, and you'd never know. I guarantee you his BAC is above 0.1 for a good period of that time. Instead of an arbitrary BAC as proof, how about it being merely evidence to support proving impairment by actually testing... impairment? For chronic offenders this is relatively simple and obvious.
Note that I fully support throwing the book at those who harm others while DUI. You've run out of mitigating circumstances at that point and deserve the maximum penalty for whatever you did, to run consecutively in cases of multiple harm. Responsibility is something that should be applied appropriately, and merely having an arbitrary BAC is not a reason to throw the entire book at someone.
Firewire was much faster, and much more reliable.
Eventually USB2 realised it's potential and stopped sucking and actually caught up with firewire in terms of actual speed, but that took years.
USB2 still sucks, and is still far far slower and less reliable than any FW implementation. However, USB3 can be faster than FW400 or FW800. USB, however hobbled we'll continue to be by it, will continue to exist for the foreseeable future even though much better protocols exist. It's not always the best that win.
Your final paragraph sums up why ad tracking is pointless.
It's only a problem when [religions] teach prejudice, intolerance and hate.
In addition to drinkypoo's point, you're basically stating that Islam is a problem, then? Along with Westboro church and any other religion claiming to be the one and only way?
The operating system won't let you. Any operating system which does let you will be banned under the 'free trade' treaty for breaking DRM.
It's hard to tell whether the DRM fanatics are insane or just plain evil. But, either way, they have to destroy general-purpose computing to make it work.
How about evil greedy insane expiring bastards?
And yet... my phone will take an indecipherable screen shot at better than pixel to pixel resolution.
With JPEG you get horrible colour blocks and banding artefacts. It ruins most pictures.
So that's why so many cameras use JPEG!
Haven't searched for anything laptops or linux since, still the most common ad I see, being on probably 75% of all sites I visit.
Better than adverts for Depends undergarments or spanks. :)
Stupid advertisers want ads that they measure working by clicks, so they optimize the ads to attract clicks, but that doesn't drive purchasing. The best ads are the ones that consumers don't even realize they've seen, but just develop a cumulative effect of exposure. That's hard to do, and requires a lot of time, money, and effort to get right. Even then it's a crapshoot, like trying to write a popular song. But in the end, there's a market for so many chairs and so many peaches and so many computers, and advertising can steer enough purchases towards yours and away from somebody else's equivalent one in a way that merely improving the specifications can't do.
I never click an ad, unless it's by mistake, which does occasionally happen. What's really great is when you search for something someone else wants. That in no way is something you'd ever buy, like a 10kW generator. That followed me around a while. Perhaps the most fun you can have is randomly search for a word a day at amazon (via script of course) and see what wonderful ads you get, provided you see any. It certainly screws with their metrics.
I'm not sure either, as purchasing is usually something I do as a focused action. I make the decision to buy it, and then I do 1 of 2 things: I purchase it or I put a filter into my RSS reader to highlight sales on it.
TBH, the google ads were the only ones that are remotely applicable in my book. The rest are rarely relevant, unless it's for stereo or video equipment on AVSForums, for instance, or cars on edmunds, etc.
And to continue the OT: I've stated before that the largest mistake made by all the publication companies was to not embrace the web with a "subscription" model, even if "free" with subscription in the beginning leading to the current lack of willingness of people to pay for almost all content. I wouldn't mind paying a subscription fee for a magazine or newspaper, but would only do so if the content was significantly better than the current offerings, sans the 1000 ads.
The biggest issue with their ads is that I don't ever click on them even if I see them. I'm the "don't look for something until I need it, then I buy it" kind of person. So, let's say I'm looking for a chair. I'll do my research, and likely purchase a chair in a day. That's before the ad network gets updated. What's hilarious is the ads are showing me the chair I bought (creepy yes) but that chair is no longer of interest to me for purchase. And it continues doing so for the next month or more. Almost all my purchases are done this way, as that allows for strong budgeting.
The bandwidth costs of getting the ads to the viewer, all the way from their server to my phone, should be part of their expenses.
Then they charge the advertisers enough to cover that expense.
That certainly would reduce the heavy ads.
I've actually done some of this route, except for the encrypting content separately part. Since I host the server, locking it down is simple enough, so only those I wish to share things with can get there. Works for me, and was relatively trivial to setup, for me. Like you, I don't believe most people will go that route. And that's a shame, really, because setting that up shouldn't be so hard nor difficult that people have issues with it.
The only way a post scarcity society will work long-term is to have an "allowance". That allowance will be enough to live on and enjoy things, but to gain "more" to gain something you want you'll need to work or do something someone else wants to pay for. Odds are the allowance would be split 3 ways: housing, living, and discretionary.
Heres my history of FPS games, "Tennis for Two", while not first person ...
Pong
I would have stated Hamurabi as the first. Interesting it was a repackaging of The Sumer.
Maybe I'm missing something... It wouldn't be the first time.
The only thing you're missing is why would you put your kids pics in the cloud, or anything else personal. Unless you're going to publish it for worldwide consumption, the "cloud" is not the place to put it.