Nope, they are the same. Look at freely, requires copies. How does she look at it when she wants if someone else is looking at it? How does she look at it with an OCR that puts the aggregates into a table without copying it?
And box stuffing is the Republican trick and always has been.
Can't collect welfare or even pick up prescription drugs without ID,
I've never had to present ID for either of those two activities. Have you, or are you only making things up?
not to mention by booze or smokes.
ID is not required for either of those. It may be asked for, but the shops that cater to the poor, don't ask anyone for ID. It's only in white surburbia where every checker must put in a manager code and birthdate.
Poor and minorities use ID's all the time for buying alcohol, cashing checks and getting title loans...all of a sudden they can't find their ID on election day?
Yeah, but what about the poor that don't have an ID? Sure, they can't buy alcohol (really, when was the last time you were carded?), cash checks (many places don't require ID for that, you claim to have been working poor, but apparently were never poor-poor, and look down on those who are), or get title loans on the cars they don't own, and can't vote. If you can't afford the poll tax, we don't want you voting, anyway.
Why can't poor people get the free ID or what possible connection do being a minority have to do with not having an ID?
"Free" IDs require a non-free application process.
And minorty has to do with it because poll taxes, like required ID, were started in the late 1800s explicitly to keep ex slaves from voting. You do realize that most ex slaves were minorities, right? And the minorities are still disproportionately poor, so anything targeting the poor is inherently racist.
And pointing out the truth when someone is being an idiot is a "political defense". I don't like Hillary. I won't be voting for Hillary. But I see her treatment by the conservatives (And the conservative media) as unfair and quite silly. But pointing that out apparently makes me a Hillary supporter, like her eating chicken makes her a beef-hater.
Hillary is evasive because if someone asks her what she had for dinner, and she says "chicken" the conservatives go to the media and talk about Hillary's anti-beef agenda, and then go to the beef lobby for money and support against the evil fascist anti-beef Hillary. So when asked about dinner, she says "food" and is attacked for being evasive.
It doesn't matter what her stance is. So many hate her as a person that her politics don't matter. To the conservatives, this is a personal issue, not a political or ideological one.
Deliberately rude and abrasive isn't the same as honest. Rush Limbaugh has said that he doesn't believe what he says, but it gets the results he wants. I suspect Donald Trump is closer to that than honest. Or he's truly that much of an ignorant hypocrite. Who can better lead us to financial prosperity because no other candidate has declared bankruptcy as many times as he has, who understands the Mexican Menace more than anyone else because he employees more illegal aliens than any of them.
However, it is public in the sense of Uber, not in the sense of socialist.
Public transport requires that it be state run. Mass transit requires that it be shared. Though I see many people interchange those, they are not interchangeable. Are you talking about services like the Van Damn bus from Sense8? That would be "mass transit" but not "public transport". Part of the point of "public transport" is that it's designed to move people where they need to go, not just where they are willing to pay to go.
Try taking public transit between any two cities there.
I think the issue is in the definition of "public transport". I've never heard of someone talking about intercity "publlic transport" before. It's always only been intracity. Unless you are just insane and fabricating lies to justify your provably false opinion about American Superiority.
(I recently inherited an IRA. Between taxes, penalties, and fees, I'll be lucky to get Three Pieces Of Eight. Try very much not to inherit an IRA. Request Cash instead.)
So you cashed out an inherited IRA. That's different than simply inheriting one. An inherited IRA doesn't trigger the 10% penalty, so it's taxed as regular income, as opposed to some other kinds of inheritances that are untaxed. There should have been no penalties. And all that's only if you cash it out. It you retire with the retirement account (I know, insane, right?), it'd have likely been 100% tax and penalty free. So it was your greed, not "the system" that cost you money. http://www.schwab.com/public/s...
Heads up displays are very new and on very few cars but I can see some people finding them annoying.
Have you seen those people use them for a week before complaining? Many people "don't like" something they've never tried. I'd love more HUD. The IR overlay the Cadillac had for a while (no idea if they still have it or not) was a great concept. They just needed to pair it with IR headlights, and a sensor in the camera to exclude hotspots that are also in the visible spectrum (so an oncoming car with the same feature is "blacked out" if they have their headlights on.
I'd love a full 3D HUD programmable system. I'd put the tachometer across the top, in a 2-inch band running from passenger side to driver side, with the redline just about even with my eyes. The speed would be a round colored circle projected at infinity (focal distance) in front of the driver and down, with a color coded fill in the circle. Green for +-5 or 10 of the limit, and red for above than and amber for below, with the display auto-shutting off at more than 20 under the limit (presuming you are in conditions where the speed limit is irrelevant). I could go on and on about what I'd add to a HUD, but the simple fact is that it would never be allowed, as the average driver won't even look at other's turn signals, let alone a busy HUD.
I have and practice many skills I don't use regularly. When I visited my sister in DC, we were going to go to the Ikea for some furniture, but it'd have been impractical to take the bus, and renting a car was cheaper than a taxi, so we rented a car. I was under 25 at the time, so I was excluded from driving the car. My sister and mother were over 25. My mother drove about 100 yards in DC. Just long enough to get out of site of the rental company, and driving it the last few feet back in. Other than that, I drove it most of the time. Neither of them was willing to attempt to park. And both refused to use a roundabout (and sis lived near Dupont Circle at the time). So, even if you don't use it in your daily life, it's still something that could be very handy sometimes. Today I parallel parked. The shopping center in suburbia had the middle spots perpendicular parking, and a ring around the outside that was parallel. There were better parallel parking spots open because people are apparently afraid of them. Perhaps the reason you never do it is because you fight to never have to? Makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy, not a useless feature.
My TomTom cost me under $175, comes with lifetime maps, and I can move it from my car to the wife's car, to a rental car, or to my parents car when I'm visiting.
But I'm not spending a bunch of extra money for this to be built into my car.
Have basic functionality built in to the car
You realize you are arguing against someone who's arguing against something you are arguing against, right?
GP said "Tom Tom beats a built-in function." P said "nuh uh", and you said "nuh uh, I like mine built in." So the double negative in the thread indicates you support removable GPS, so long as it's not removable. That makes you look silly. To not look silly, you could have gone back to the GP and said "I don't like cell phones either, but I like my GPS built in." Then the separate discussion of built-in vs portable could be discussed, without confusing the issue of "portable one-function GPS" (inbuilt or not) vs smartphone.
Nope, you can turn off all the radios in the phone (cut the wires, if you worry about them listening without permission) and the GPS will still work. The assisted GPS just means it locks faster than your "real" GPS, and works better in cities (where the tall buildings can form valleys that block satellite reception), and other places GPS doesn't work well. Yes, they save money by putting the GPS-only function on cheap chips with cheap antennae, but the assist more than makes up for it. If you don't have any cell coverage to assist with, then the GPS doesn't need to be accurate. You are either on the only road in the area, or you aren't. There aren't too many choices when driving through areas with no cellular coverage.
Only in places where there is a cell phone signal. If you drive somewhere where cellular service is sketchy you'll need a "real" GPS system.
Nope. You set your route while you are on WiFi planning your trip, and download all the maps between here and there. Then, when in the car, you run off cached maps, same as the TomTom. Maps are updated every trip, without having to run a cumbersome USB update. Phones are better in every way.
China, Australia, Singapore are all outside "western Europe and Japan" and have better public transport than the US.
Sure, Africa, Antarctica, and such have poor public transport. But the US is low on the list for "industrialized nations".
Name any other place in the world which is better at public transit than any random place in the US.
I think your list of "random place in the US" is off. The spread out cities, like Dallas and Houston don't have usable public transport. The last time I tried to take a bus in Dallas, it would have been 2 hours (best time) for what was a 15 minute drive (in bad traffic). A bicycle would have been significantly faster than the bus, and running it would have been close to bus time.
What is destroying the car industry is all the hippster douche inept millenial lazy fairies.
I blame their parents for raising them poorly. Nothing pisses off the parents complaining about their children's generation more than blaming them for their failings.
You understood it wasn't right, but not the terminology to define it. An invalid argument can be true, even if it can never be valid. Makes it clearer when discussing the minutiae.
That's why the Academy Awards go so well going the other way. The closed Academy creates nominations, presumably only containing works they would be happy to win. Then the popular vote is taken on those to select the winner. The academy didn't want Hoop Dreams to win, so it was not nominated. They eliminated any possible controversy about it by excluding it from the running.
It may also not be fair, but it's lasted longer than the Hugos with fewer complete meltdowns of this nature.
Slashdot Mirror
When the law is explicitly stated as being a barrier to voting, how is it "victimology" to point out that it's a barrier to vote?
Nope, they are the same. Look at freely, requires copies. How does she look at it when she wants if someone else is looking at it? How does she look at it with an OCR that puts the aggregates into a table without copying it?
FOI isn't free, and you will be billed for FOI requests.
Can't collect welfare or even pick up prescription drugs without ID,
I've never had to present ID for either of those two activities. Have you, or are you only making things up?
not to mention by booze or smokes.
ID is not required for either of those. It may be asked for, but the shops that cater to the poor, don't ask anyone for ID. It's only in white surburbia where every checker must put in a manager code and birthdate.
Poor and minorities use ID's all the time for buying alcohol, cashing checks and getting title loans...all of a sudden they can't find their ID on election day?
Yeah, but what about the poor that don't have an ID? Sure, they can't buy alcohol (really, when was the last time you were carded?), cash checks (many places don't require ID for that, you claim to have been working poor, but apparently were never poor-poor, and look down on those who are), or get title loans on the cars they don't own, and can't vote. If you can't afford the poll tax, we don't want you voting, anyway.
Why can't poor people get the free ID or what possible connection do being a minority have to do with not having an ID?
"Free" IDs require a non-free application process.
And minorty has to do with it because poll taxes, like required ID, were started in the late 1800s explicitly to keep ex slaves from voting. You do realize that most ex slaves were minorities, right? And the minorities are still disproportionately poor, so anything targeting the poor is inherently racist.
And pointing out the truth when someone is being an idiot is a "political defense". I don't like Hillary. I won't be voting for Hillary. But I see her treatment by the conservatives (And the conservative media) as unfair and quite silly. But pointing that out apparently makes me a Hillary supporter, like her eating chicken makes her a beef-hater.
Donald Trump has filed for bankruptcy 4 times. More than any other candidate, from any party.
Donald Trump has had many employees of his come forward as illegal aliens. No other candidate has had any do the same.
Hillary is evasive because if someone asks her what she had for dinner, and she says "chicken" the conservatives go to the media and talk about Hillary's anti-beef agenda, and then go to the beef lobby for money and support against the evil fascist anti-beef Hillary. So when asked about dinner, she says "food" and is attacked for being evasive.
It doesn't matter what her stance is. So many hate her as a person that her politics don't matter. To the conservatives, this is a personal issue, not a political or ideological one.
Deliberately rude and abrasive isn't the same as honest. Rush Limbaugh has said that he doesn't believe what he says, but it gets the results he wants. I suspect Donald Trump is closer to that than honest. Or he's truly that much of an ignorant hypocrite. Who can better lead us to financial prosperity because no other candidate has declared bankruptcy as many times as he has, who understands the Mexican Menace more than anyone else because he employees more illegal aliens than any of them.
However, it is public in the sense of Uber, not in the sense of socialist.
Public transport requires that it be state run. Mass transit requires that it be shared. Though I see many people interchange those, they are not interchangeable. Are you talking about services like the Van Damn bus from Sense8? That would be "mass transit" but not "public transport". Part of the point of "public transport" is that it's designed to move people where they need to go, not just where they are willing to pay to go.
Try taking public transit between any two cities there.
I think the issue is in the definition of "public transport". I've never heard of someone talking about intercity "publlic transport" before. It's always only been intracity. Unless you are just insane and fabricating lies to justify your provably false opinion about American Superiority.
(I recently inherited an IRA. Between taxes, penalties, and fees, I'll be lucky to get Three Pieces Of Eight. Try very much not to inherit an IRA. Request Cash instead.)
So you cashed out an inherited IRA. That's different than simply inheriting one. An inherited IRA doesn't trigger the 10% penalty, so it's taxed as regular income, as opposed to some other kinds of inheritances that are untaxed. There should have been no penalties. And all that's only if you cash it out. It you retire with the retirement account (I know, insane, right?), it'd have likely been 100% tax and penalty free. So it was your greed, not "the system" that cost you money. http://www.schwab.com/public/s...
Heads up displays are very new and on very few cars but I can see some people finding them annoying.
Have you seen those people use them for a week before complaining? Many people "don't like" something they've never tried. I'd love more HUD. The IR overlay the Cadillac had for a while (no idea if they still have it or not) was a great concept. They just needed to pair it with IR headlights, and a sensor in the camera to exclude hotspots that are also in the visible spectrum (so an oncoming car with the same feature is "blacked out" if they have their headlights on.
I'd love a full 3D HUD programmable system. I'd put the tachometer across the top, in a 2-inch band running from passenger side to driver side, with the redline just about even with my eyes. The speed would be a round colored circle projected at infinity (focal distance) in front of the driver and down, with a color coded fill in the circle. Green for +-5 or 10 of the limit, and red for above than and amber for below, with the display auto-shutting off at more than 20 under the limit (presuming you are in conditions where the speed limit is irrelevant). I could go on and on about what I'd add to a HUD, but the simple fact is that it would never be allowed, as the average driver won't even look at other's turn signals, let alone a busy HUD.
I have and practice many skills I don't use regularly. When I visited my sister in DC, we were going to go to the Ikea for some furniture, but it'd have been impractical to take the bus, and renting a car was cheaper than a taxi, so we rented a car. I was under 25 at the time, so I was excluded from driving the car. My sister and mother were over 25. My mother drove about 100 yards in DC. Just long enough to get out of site of the rental company, and driving it the last few feet back in. Other than that, I drove it most of the time. Neither of them was willing to attempt to park. And both refused to use a roundabout (and sis lived near Dupont Circle at the time). So, even if you don't use it in your daily life, it's still something that could be very handy sometimes. Today I parallel parked. The shopping center in suburbia had the middle spots perpendicular parking, and a ring around the outside that was parallel. There were better parallel parking spots open because people are apparently afraid of them. Perhaps the reason you never do it is because you fight to never have to? Makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy, not a useless feature.
You sell a car, not by having things people want, or will use, but by having things The Other Guys don't have, or things people think they might use.
I'd bet that most people with ABS, ESP, traction control, and airbags haven't used those either, but I don't see a large call to get those removed.
My TomTom cost me under $175, comes with lifetime maps, and I can move it from my car to the wife's car, to a rental car, or to my parents car when I'm visiting.
But I'm not spending a bunch of extra money for this to be built into my car.
Have basic functionality built in to the car
You realize you are arguing against someone who's arguing against something you are arguing against, right?
GP said "Tom Tom beats a built-in function." P said "nuh uh", and you said "nuh uh, I like mine built in." So the double negative in the thread indicates you support removable GPS, so long as it's not removable. That makes you look silly. To not look silly, you could have gone back to the GP and said "I don't like cell phones either, but I like my GPS built in." Then the separate discussion of built-in vs portable could be discussed, without confusing the issue of "portable one-function GPS" (inbuilt or not) vs smartphone.
Nope, you can turn off all the radios in the phone (cut the wires, if you worry about them listening without permission) and the GPS will still work. The assisted GPS just means it locks faster than your "real" GPS, and works better in cities (where the tall buildings can form valleys that block satellite reception), and other places GPS doesn't work well. Yes, they save money by putting the GPS-only function on cheap chips with cheap antennae, but the assist more than makes up for it. If you don't have any cell coverage to assist with, then the GPS doesn't need to be accurate. You are either on the only road in the area, or you aren't. There aren't too many choices when driving through areas with no cellular coverage.
Only in places where there is a cell phone signal. If you drive somewhere where cellular service is sketchy you'll need a "real" GPS system.
Nope. You set your route while you are on WiFi planning your trip, and download all the maps between here and there. Then, when in the car, you run off cached maps, same as the TomTom. Maps are updated every trip, without having to run a cumbersome USB update. Phones are better in every way.
Sure, Africa, Antarctica, and such have poor public transport. But the US is low on the list for "industrialized nations".
Name any other place in the world which is better at public transit than any random place in the US.
I think your list of "random place in the US" is off. The spread out cities, like Dallas and Houston don't have usable public transport. The last time I tried to take a bus in Dallas, it would have been 2 hours (best time) for what was a 15 minute drive (in bad traffic). A bicycle would have been significantly faster than the bus, and running it would have been close to bus time.
What is destroying the car industry is all the hippster douche inept millenial lazy fairies.
I blame their parents for raising them poorly. Nothing pisses off the parents complaining about their children's generation more than blaming them for their failings.
Somebody selling HP-UX systems should be anti-VAX.
A mental illness is still an illness. So the ADA would still apply.
You understood it wasn't right, but not the terminology to define it. An invalid argument can be true, even if it can never be valid. Makes it clearer when discussing the minutiae.
That's why the Academy Awards go so well going the other way. The closed Academy creates nominations, presumably only containing works they would be happy to win. Then the popular vote is taken on those to select the winner. The academy didn't want Hoop Dreams to win, so it was not nominated. They eliminated any possible controversy about it by excluding it from the running.
It may also not be fair, but it's lasted longer than the Hugos with fewer complete meltdowns of this nature.