Uses a LOT less water than a dishwasher. A lot less noise, too.
A dishwasher uses less water and power than hand washing. And a good dishwasher is quiet. If you can hear it, it's your fault for not buying the quiet one. Much less sound than the sound of running water.
My old '50s dishwasher I grew up with used the house hot water, but the higher end dishwashers use cold only. They have more control of the water temp, and use less power than using hot water, and didn't get hot hot water when plugged into hot water anyway, for the reason you mention.
Do they plug into hot anymore? Even the last cheap one I looked at was cold only.
Eco for mine has no drying cycle. It's drip dry only. You have to be there when it ends, and crack the door when it finishes, or they get musty and moldy smelling, as the colder eco wash doesn't do a good job sanitizing. Unless I'm planning on being there when it ends and opening the door, and am in no hurry from the longer, colder wash, I won't use it.
You learn what your soap/machine doesn't handle and adjust. My current budget model has never failed to get a casserole dish clean. I don't wash much solidified grease, but eggs, and other things dried on wash off without issue. Unless you bought the top of the line with a disposer, you should be scraping anyway. Not a pre-clean, but scraping off the chunks. And even the top of the line won't wash "everything". Plates of spaghetti won't work. The noodles will wrap around the other dishes and racks, rather than going down. But they'll be clean noodles when done. But scrape off what you can, and the 1" and smaller pieces dried to the 2-week old plate will wash off fine. I've never had problems with peanut butter. And the kids have bowls of it all the time. Sometimes straight, sometimes with crackers. I've even tried sometimes without scraping.
Nope. Modern dishwashers shouldn't have that requirement. I had a Bosch with a disposer. You could put anything you wanted in there. Make up a nice Christmas meal, and put the plate, uneaten in the dishwasher, along with 15 more just like it. They'd come out sparkling. Provided the green beans didn't get caught sideways somewhere outside the disposer.
My current budget machine will take care of a casserole dish without issue. No soaking or pre-washing needed. Scrape and wash. Nothing has come out dirty since. Though, if you block the spinning sprayer (can happen if something falls down from the top, or sticks up from the bottom) it doesn't do a good job. But aside from that physical interference, it's never failed to clean anything put in it.
I grew up with a dishwasher that didn't really work. So all dishes had to be pre-washed. The dishwasher was a rinse cycle with detergent.
I know lots of older people who still pre-wash. They only need the "light" cycle. The regular cycle on my current dishwasher will wash a burned casserole dish on "regular", so no idea what someone would need heavy duty for. Maybe if they use their diswasher to wash car wheels. The Eco on mine saves 25% power, but washes quicker at a lower temp, and skips the dry cycle. If I'm there when it ends, and can wait, mostly clean dishes wash fine, and I open the dishwasher at the end for overnight drying of the dishes, using the dishwasher rack as a drying rack. But that energy savings is rarely used, as I'm often starting it as I go to bed, or just waking up, both times when they cycle doesn't work.
I usually set it on Auto, and let it go. But I like having the 9 other settings, in case I'm doing something unusual.
I once owned a Bosch like you describe. It had an IR laser that shot through the waste water sensing contaminatns to determine how many cycles to send it through, and had a disposer built in, so you didn't even need to scrape food before putting it in. It did pretty much have only one setting, "dirty" (called Auto). And you let it do its thing. but paying that much, they had other settings and buttons, so you felt like you had all the control in the world, to press Auto, and walk away.
Didn't they do so with cores and co-processors? The hardware was there, but failed a test. So underclock slightly and enable the other cores in software, and you had more processing power. If you were lucky.
Soccer is a British term, invented by the English. That the Americans use "proper" British English and the English don't is ironic. Soccer was short for Association Football. Rugger for Rugby Football. Football wasn't used because it was a class of sport (any sport played on foot - i.e., not no horseback). So Soccer and Rugger were the British English words for those sports. Neither is in widespread use today.
By the time the word was adopted by other counties, futbol and other spellings of football made more sense, as Rugger didn't get as much play, so football was re-translated into English from non-English who adopted it from English. And for England's misuse of language, the US is held as the odd man out for using the more proper term.
Much like aluminum and aluminium. England got that one wrong as well. An Englishman named it Aluminum, as it was alum-like, but he didn't want the regular -ium as it wasn't a metal (it's a transition element that's semi-metalic), so he deliberately mis-named it, but this proper name assigned by the discoverer was ignored (in violation of convention) by the English and renamed. So the English re-named an element appropriately named by the disvoverer, who was also English. So the proper English name is Aluminum (as it was named such by the discoverer, who was an Englishman), but used incorrectly, to this day, by the English, who insist that their error is more correct that the American's non-error.
(Treaties have the force of the Constitution, so are supreme law)
If a treaty and the Constitution conflict, who wins? No, treaties are not supreme law. They are not even law at all. Separate laws must be written to code treaty requirements into law.
You heard a quip you don't understand. You shouldn't repeat it until you understand it.
Yes, secret voting is required by Democracy. That's why the US was founded on open voting. And all representatives still vote openly. The founding fathers were all for open voting, and the first vote ever taken in the (soon to be) US was signing the Declaration of Independence. John Hancock is not known for signing small or using a pseudonym.
Thank God those men enshrined secret voting into the Constitution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Appear (at my glance, I didn't bother to do a statistical analysis) to be more negatively than positively correlated. So the access to guns and the effectiveness of the democracy seems to be an unsupported hypothesis based on confirmation bias and poor research trying to justify the US's stance on guns.
You'd think that on Slashdot, the posters would recognize that the Internet was invented by the US government and, in the US, owned almost exclusively by the US government (or governments of the states thereof) until federal laws were passed to encourage private access to that Internet. And the laws that were passed that opened the private government Internet were, according to Gore, spearheaded by Gore.
He didn't invent the Internet. And never claimed to. He invented the idea of consumers having access to it.
The Swiss citizens are also forced into conscription and brainwashed by the government in boot camp. Would you like a 2 year mandatory re-education by the government in the US? Maybe that level of re-education helps lead to the mono-culture than has things running well.
Sander's policies will cut taxes. The NIH in England pays less per citizen to cover 100% of the country with health care than the US pays per citizen to cover about 15% of the population. Those numbers hold true through many countries with 100% coverage. It's cheaper to cover everyone with high quality care than to have a complicated multi-payer system with only some people covered by paying cash payments to for-profit organizations.
Oh, and before you ask, yes, you can go see a private doctor and get 3rd party medical insurance in the UK, Australia, NZ, Scandanavia, and other places with such coverage.
Get more (much more). Pay less (much less). Why do you hate lower taxes and better services? That's the only question I have for those who demand things like drug tests for welfare. The studies all show that the drug use rate is small, and the enforcement costs are higher than the savings. Why spend all the extra money just to hurt people? When you remove the punitive functions of the government programs, you remove the cost of enforcement, cutting the costs of services while increasing the coverage. Get more, pay less. Not pay more. Pay more is a lie by the haters. You already pay 75% of income taxes for military (and the debt service run up by the military debt), so a few tweaks for social programs won't make a dent. Sadly, at this point, you could cut them all and still not balance the budget. But the Conservative heart would be warm from all the dead children.
And how is that different from taking a selfie with your ballot before casting it? Secret voting is only secret if Bob and Alice both want it secret. If Carol convinces Bob to violate secrecy, Bob can do so without Alice's help today. Your worst-case scenario is still more secure with e-voting, where Alice knows if Bob takes actions required to share the secret with others.
What happens when a boss demands all employees vote the way he wants?
Like the boss getting all the employees an absentee ballot, and filling it out for them and requiring they sign it, and the boss sends it in? And the voter rolls aren't secret, and voting at the polls invalidates an absentee ballot, so the boss could look up the voter rolls and any employee that voted could be presumed to have voted for the other guy.
That's today. That's doable.
So your "worst case" scenario for a change is something that's 100% possible today. That doesn't sound like a reason to hate change.
Nobody can coerce your vote while in a private booth.
But they can stand outside it and require you take a selfie in the booth with your ballot, and kill you if you spoil your ballot or vote for the wrong guy.
Paper ballots are kept and can be re-counted, which is not uncommon in tight races.
Worked so well for Florida in 2000, didn't it?
Actually some vote counting machines do give you a chance to make sure your paper ballot is read correctly.
Where? I've seen ones that verify the ballot is "valid" but never report how you voted, that'd violate the "secret" nature. If someone hacks the punch-card ballot so that the holes line up for Gore counted as Bush, Bush counted as Browne, and Browne counted for Gore, how could that ever be discovered after the polls closed? Especially if the hackers hacked 80% of the Voting machines? Changing all the votes won't work, 20% are valid, and you'd break those. And you can't trace the ballot to the machine.
There are millions of ways to hack the current system that are untraceable. In the extraordinary effort to find an untraceable vote, we've made lots of untraceable fraud. For the first 100 years, we had open ballots, and they worked fine, up until the Civil War, and the country was no longer stable. We should go back to open ballots. It's not perfect, but it's much better than what we have now.
So "not awful" is the same as "great"? You need a larger vocabulary.
And I'd submit that China is awful, and about the same as the US. Or do we not count US slavery, slaughter of indigenous, concentration camps (retconned into "internment camps"), Gitmo, extraordinary rendition, and a variety of medical experiements done by the US government directly (not just funded) that they are stuff of conspiracy theory: Tuskegee Syphilis, MKUltra, and others.
No, if we ignore all that, and the invasion of Vietnam by Eisenhower to block democratic elections because we feared the outcome of fair democratic elections, then yes, we count China as worse.
But when you look at the sum of the evil done by both, I can't pick a clear winner.
At least we have free speech, unless McCarthy ruined your life without due process.
So you are arguing over a few percent from "not awful" to "awful". Where is the line drawn? Will the US be "awful" at 97% conviction rate? Or will China become "not-awful" at 97%?
What say do you have in your government? I went to a city council meeting and spoke. About 90% of the people who spoke were on one side of the issue. The 10% side carried the vote. The US allows you to "speak" then does the opposite. China just is more efficient by discouraging the speaking, so the elite can do what they want. Both are similarly awful. It's just that the HighAndMighty USA won't recognize any flaws in itself.
Hack the results? So if you ran a report of the last election and say wour vote was for Kang, when you voted for Kodos, you'd not tell anyone? You'd not care?
No, you'd make a federal case out of it.
Note that with the current system, you could case a vote for Kodos and have it counted for Kang, and you'd never know. Why do you prefer unaccountable fraud to identifiable and correctable fraud?
Slashdot Mirror
Uses a LOT less water than a dishwasher. A lot less noise, too.
A dishwasher uses less water and power than hand washing. And a good dishwasher is quiet. If you can hear it, it's your fault for not buying the quiet one. Much less sound than the sound of running water.
My old '50s dishwasher I grew up with used the house hot water, but the higher end dishwashers use cold only. They have more control of the water temp, and use less power than using hot water, and didn't get hot hot water when plugged into hot water anyway, for the reason you mention.
Do they plug into hot anymore? Even the last cheap one I looked at was cold only.
Cloudy glasses is an issue of water and soap quality. And you use less water and power with a dishwasher.
Eco for mine has no drying cycle. It's drip dry only. You have to be there when it ends, and crack the door when it finishes, or they get musty and moldy smelling, as the colder eco wash doesn't do a good job sanitizing. Unless I'm planning on being there when it ends and opening the door, and am in no hurry from the longer, colder wash, I won't use it.
You learn what your soap/machine doesn't handle and adjust. My current budget model has never failed to get a casserole dish clean. I don't wash much solidified grease, but eggs, and other things dried on wash off without issue. Unless you bought the top of the line with a disposer, you should be scraping anyway. Not a pre-clean, but scraping off the chunks. And even the top of the line won't wash "everything". Plates of spaghetti won't work. The noodles will wrap around the other dishes and racks, rather than going down. But they'll be clean noodles when done. But scrape off what you can, and the 1" and smaller pieces dried to the 2-week old plate will wash off fine. I've never had problems with peanut butter. And the kids have bowls of it all the time. Sometimes straight, sometimes with crackers. I've even tried sometimes without scraping.
Nope. Modern dishwashers shouldn't have that requirement. I had a Bosch with a disposer. You could put anything you wanted in there. Make up a nice Christmas meal, and put the plate, uneaten in the dishwasher, along with 15 more just like it. They'd come out sparkling. Provided the green beans didn't get caught sideways somewhere outside the disposer.
My current budget machine will take care of a casserole dish without issue. No soaking or pre-washing needed. Scrape and wash. Nothing has come out dirty since. Though, if you block the spinning sprayer (can happen if something falls down from the top, or sticks up from the bottom) it doesn't do a good job. But aside from that physical interference, it's never failed to clean anything put in it.
Nope, washing by hand uses more energy and water than a dishwasher.
I grew up with a dishwasher that didn't really work. So all dishes had to be pre-washed. The dishwasher was a rinse cycle with detergent.
I know lots of older people who still pre-wash. They only need the "light" cycle. The regular cycle on my current dishwasher will wash a burned casserole dish on "regular", so no idea what someone would need heavy duty for. Maybe if they use their diswasher to wash car wheels. The Eco on mine saves 25% power, but washes quicker at a lower temp, and skips the dry cycle. If I'm there when it ends, and can wait, mostly clean dishes wash fine, and I open the dishwasher at the end for overnight drying of the dishes, using the dishwasher rack as a drying rack. But that energy savings is rarely used, as I'm often starting it as I go to bed, or just waking up, both times when they cycle doesn't work.
I usually set it on Auto, and let it go. But I like having the 9 other settings, in case I'm doing something unusual.
I once owned a Bosch like you describe. It had an IR laser that shot through the waste water sensing contaminatns to determine how many cycles to send it through, and had a disposer built in, so you didn't even need to scrape food before putting it in. It did pretty much have only one setting, "dirty" (called Auto). And you let it do its thing. but paying that much, they had other settings and buttons, so you felt like you had all the control in the world, to press Auto, and walk away.
Didn't they do so with cores and co-processors? The hardware was there, but failed a test. So underclock slightly and enable the other cores in software, and you had more processing power. If you were lucky.
Soccer is a British term, invented by the English. That the Americans use "proper" British English and the English don't is ironic. Soccer was short for Association Football. Rugger for Rugby Football. Football wasn't used because it was a class of sport (any sport played on foot - i.e., not no horseback). So Soccer and Rugger were the British English words for those sports. Neither is in widespread use today.
By the time the word was adopted by other counties, futbol and other spellings of football made more sense, as Rugger didn't get as much play, so football was re-translated into English from non-English who adopted it from English. And for England's misuse of language, the US is held as the odd man out for using the more proper term.
Much like aluminum and aluminium. England got that one wrong as well. An Englishman named it Aluminum, as it was alum-like, but he didn't want the regular -ium as it wasn't a metal (it's a transition element that's semi-metalic), so he deliberately mis-named it, but this proper name assigned by the discoverer was ignored (in violation of convention) by the English and renamed. So the English re-named an element appropriately named by the disvoverer, who was also English. So the proper English name is Aluminum (as it was named such by the discoverer, who was an Englishman), but used incorrectly, to this day, by the English, who insist that their error is more correct that the American's non-error.
(Treaties have the force of the Constitution, so are supreme law)
If a treaty and the Constitution conflict, who wins? No, treaties are not supreme law. They are not even law at all. Separate laws must be written to code treaty requirements into law.
You heard a quip you don't understand. You shouldn't repeat it until you understand it.
Yes, secret voting is required by Democracy. That's why the US was founded on open voting. And all representatives still vote openly. The founding fathers were all for open voting, and the first vote ever taken in the (soon to be) US was signing the Declaration of Independence. John Hancock is not known for signing small or using a pseudonym.
Thank God those men enshrined secret voting into the Constitution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Appear (at my glance, I didn't bother to do a statistical analysis) to be more negatively than positively correlated. So the access to guns and the effectiveness of the democracy seems to be an unsupported hypothesis based on confirmation bias and poor research trying to justify the US's stance on guns.
You'd think that on Slashdot, the posters would recognize that the Internet was invented by the US government and, in the US, owned almost exclusively by the US government (or governments of the states thereof) until federal laws were passed to encourage private access to that Internet. And the laws that were passed that opened the private government Internet were, according to Gore, spearheaded by Gore.
He didn't invent the Internet. And never claimed to. He invented the idea of consumers having access to it.
The Swiss citizens are also forced into conscription and brainwashed by the government in boot camp. Would you like a 2 year mandatory re-education by the government in the US? Maybe that level of re-education helps lead to the mono-culture than has things running well.
But note, petitioning the government means talking to your representative, not passing a binding referendum or Amendment.
The US lead that globalization. So if that globalization was bad, the US has the US to blame for it.
Sander's policies will cut taxes. The NIH in England pays less per citizen to cover 100% of the country with health care than the US pays per citizen to cover about 15% of the population. Those numbers hold true through many countries with 100% coverage. It's cheaper to cover everyone with high quality care than to have a complicated multi-payer system with only some people covered by paying cash payments to for-profit organizations.
Oh, and before you ask, yes, you can go see a private doctor and get 3rd party medical insurance in the UK, Australia, NZ, Scandanavia, and other places with such coverage.
Get more (much more). Pay less (much less). Why do you hate lower taxes and better services? That's the only question I have for those who demand things like drug tests for welfare. The studies all show that the drug use rate is small, and the enforcement costs are higher than the savings. Why spend all the extra money just to hurt people? When you remove the punitive functions of the government programs, you remove the cost of enforcement, cutting the costs of services while increasing the coverage. Get more, pay less. Not pay more. Pay more is a lie by the haters. You already pay 75% of income taxes for military (and the debt service run up by the military debt), so a few tweaks for social programs won't make a dent. Sadly, at this point, you could cut them all and still not balance the budget. But the Conservative heart would be warm from all the dead children.
And how is that different from taking a selfie with your ballot before casting it? Secret voting is only secret if Bob and Alice both want it secret. If Carol convinces Bob to violate secrecy, Bob can do so without Alice's help today. Your worst-case scenario is still more secure with e-voting, where Alice knows if Bob takes actions required to share the secret with others.
What happens when a boss demands all employees vote the way he wants?
Like the boss getting all the employees an absentee ballot, and filling it out for them and requiring they sign it, and the boss sends it in? And the voter rolls aren't secret, and voting at the polls invalidates an absentee ballot, so the boss could look up the voter rolls and any employee that voted could be presumed to have voted for the other guy.
That's today. That's doable.
So your "worst case" scenario for a change is something that's 100% possible today. That doesn't sound like a reason to hate change.
Nobody can coerce your vote while in a private booth.
But they can stand outside it and require you take a selfie in the booth with your ballot, and kill you if you spoil your ballot or vote for the wrong guy.
Paper ballots are kept and can be re-counted, which is not uncommon in tight races.
Worked so well for Florida in 2000, didn't it?
Actually some vote counting machines do give you a chance to make sure your paper ballot is read correctly.
Where? I've seen ones that verify the ballot is "valid" but never report how you voted, that'd violate the "secret" nature. If someone hacks the punch-card ballot so that the holes line up for Gore counted as Bush, Bush counted as Browne, and Browne counted for Gore, how could that ever be discovered after the polls closed? Especially if the hackers hacked 80% of the Voting machines? Changing all the votes won't work, 20% are valid, and you'd break those. And you can't trace the ballot to the machine.
There are millions of ways to hack the current system that are untraceable. In the extraordinary effort to find an untraceable vote, we've made lots of untraceable fraud. For the first 100 years, we had open ballots, and they worked fine, up until the Civil War, and the country was no longer stable. We should go back to open ballots. It's not perfect, but it's much better than what we have now.
So "not awful" is the same as "great"? You need a larger vocabulary.
And I'd submit that China is awful, and about the same as the US. Or do we not count US slavery, slaughter of indigenous, concentration camps (retconned into "internment camps"), Gitmo, extraordinary rendition, and a variety of medical experiements done by the US government directly (not just funded) that they are stuff of conspiracy theory: Tuskegee Syphilis, MKUltra, and others.
No, if we ignore all that, and the invasion of Vietnam by Eisenhower to block democratic elections because we feared the outcome of fair democratic elections, then yes, we count China as worse.
But when you look at the sum of the evil done by both, I can't pick a clear winner.
At least we have free speech, unless McCarthy ruined your life without due process.
there are still things like a 99% conviction rate of those arrested.
For 2012, the US Department of Justice reported a 93% conviction rate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
So you are arguing over a few percent from "not awful" to "awful". Where is the line drawn? Will the US be "awful" at 97% conviction rate? Or will China become "not-awful" at 97%?
have no actual say in the government operations
What say do you have in your government? I went to a city council meeting and spoke. About 90% of the people who spoke were on one side of the issue. The 10% side carried the vote. The US allows you to "speak" then does the opposite. China just is more efficient by discouraging the speaking, so the elite can do what they want. Both are similarly awful. It's just that the HighAndMighty USA won't recognize any flaws in itself.
Hack the results? So if you ran a report of the last election and say wour vote was for Kang, when you voted for Kodos, you'd not tell anyone? You'd not care?
No, you'd make a federal case out of it.
Note that with the current system, you could case a vote for Kodos and have it counted for Kang, and you'd never know. Why do you prefer unaccountable fraud to identifiable and correctable fraud?