What do you propose? That the cops start sending tickets to random people in the same town, instead of the owner of the car? The owner is the only piece of information they have, until and unless the owner tells them who was actually driving.
I propose trashing the cameras and adding 1.5 seconds to the yellow light time, which is proven to reduce red light violations by 90%. Its much, much cheaper, and doesn't violate our civil rights. RLC actually INCREASE the number of accidents at an intersection.
What you describe is actually a logical fallacy. Its NOT reasonble to assume the owner of the car was the driver. Anyone can drive anyone else's car as long as they have permission. My dad owned the junker that I used exclusively. I didn't need to ask his permission to even take it, since it was "my" car (but not on the registration).
Further, arguing that you don't agree with some legal loophole doesn't make your point any more valid. They are not even loopholes, they are a perversion of law that shouldn't exist, and saying "that's how it is" doesn't back up your argument.
Re:"The silent majority" is uninformed.
on
Storm Worm Rising
·
· Score: 1
There was a program on last week where they had a collection of self proclaimed grumpy old women listing things they hated about computers - and you know what? Every single complaint was not about computers per se, but about Microsoft software.
Such as what?
That's just silly. People have different convincer strategies. If nothing else, there are people out there who still haven't heard that there's an alternative. There's a lot of meat left on that bone.
And alternatives that don't run the software people want won't function as alternatives.
Re:I don't think we'll ever see a solution...
on
Storm Worm Rising
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
If you're not going to apply it to free software then you shouldn't apply it to everyone. There's only so much vendors can do as well, because a user wants to be in control of their own computer, and may install viruses or bots unknowningly.
Cut the breakline on your car and see if it falls under your car's warranty.
Re:How are these numbers calculated?
on
Storm Worm Rising
·
· Score: 1
When the lock on your luggage was broken and your belongs have obviously been gone throuhg, yes you have lost something. Namely the right to be "secure in your person and belongings." It is very violating.
I've also lots a fair bit of money via taxes. So yes, it does feel like I've lost something everytime I see my paycheck.
Few people are killed in gun accidents in the US and the overwhelming vast majority of those are preventable by slightest bit of common sense and following gun safety rules.
It feels like that we've forgotten what it is really like to be a nation threatend with annihilation. In the 1940s our country nearly didn't make it and we have the United States to thank for that as much as our own heroic airmen.
Don't forget the EC was made to give MORE power to smaller states, otherwise there's not much of a reason for small states to join the union (notice how PR doesn't want to become a state).
The whole point of our system is that each state is supposed to be a largely independant nation, which only a few things at the federal level they need to abide by.
Don't worry about what other states do, just worry about your own state. You may also want to push to get states rights back too, I think that's the best way to reform the system.
Why should health metrics be used at all? Why not just charge people more based on what actual claims they make on the insurance? I'm overweight but pretty healthy. Why should I pay higher premiums just to support some skinny guy with asthma, or some pregnant woman???
If you're overweight, your not healthy. That's some bullshit line that fat people started pushing to make themselves feel better.
You may have a point though, until you come down with cancer (which being overweight gives you a much higher risk of). Then you'll expect insurance to pay.
I think an argument can be made that you CAN do something about fat, colesterol, smoking and brushing your teeth. Someone with asthma can't really do anything about it. Actually that's not quite true, being fat is often a cause of asthma.
Of course, this begs the question, why do we even have insurance at all? Why not just eliminate it and let the healthy people not have it since they don't need it, and the people who do need healthcare will just have to file bankruptcy.
I'd hate to not have insurance if someone hits me with a car. I doubt the driver would be able to afford my medical bills, and I don't think I should foot the bill for it.
I assume this is our perfect capitalist solution, right? Will there be a point when we are done nickle-and-diming people into bankruptcy for health care?
Yes, when you get off your fat lasy ass and start leading a more healthy lifestyle.
So you're saying handheld device that computers body fat percentage is not quick, cheap or standardized? Funny, my gym has one of those devices, and it took about 30 seconds to determine my % bodyfat.
Do you have a reference for that? I doubt it'd be any cause of concern, because you would never know if the person upheld their end of the bargin and voted as promised.
I think the sane argument to reduce carbon emissions (not "stop" global warming) is that whenever lots of carbon appears in the atmosphere, the planet heats for a time, melts the ice and we soon enter an ice age.
In the past, high levels of carbon were pumped out by volcanos and wild fires. Now here we are, also putting out lots and lots of carbon thus causing global warming to increase just as happened in the past. Since our world would be much more difficult to live in an ice age, its probably something we don't want to have happen or cause.
Slashdot Mirror
Can I reasonably prevent someone borrowing my car from commiting a crime? No? Then I guess I'm not responsible.
Yes, they absolutely must let me go, because they don't have PROOF that it actually WAS me. Remember that whole innocnent until proven guilty thing?
Apparently you'd much rather guilty until proven innocent. They have that in some countries.
What do you propose? That the cops start sending tickets to random people in the same town, instead of the owner of the car? The owner is the only piece of information they have, until and unless the owner tells them who was actually driving.
u ery=yellow+light
I propose trashing the cameras and adding 1.5 seconds to the yellow light time, which is proven to reduce red light violations by 90%. Its much, much cheaper, and doesn't violate our civil rights. RLC actually INCREASE the number of accidents at an intersection.
For more info: http://www.motorists.org/search/search.php?zoom_q
The rest of your post is pure drivil filled with poor logic.
What you describe is actually a logical fallacy. Its NOT reasonble to assume the owner of the car was the driver. Anyone can drive anyone else's car as long as they have permission. My dad owned the junker that I used exclusively. I didn't need to ask his permission to even take it, since it was "my" car (but not on the registration).
Further, arguing that you don't agree with some legal loophole doesn't make your point any more valid. They are not even loopholes, they are a perversion of law that shouldn't exist, and saying "that's how it is" doesn't back up your argument.
There was a program on last week where they had a collection of self proclaimed grumpy old women listing things they hated about computers - and you know what? Every single complaint was not about computers per se, but about Microsoft software.
Such as what?
That's just silly. People have different convincer strategies. If nothing else, there are people out there who still haven't heard that there's an alternative. There's a lot of meat left on that bone.
And alternatives that don't run the software people want won't function as alternatives.
If you're not going to apply it to free software then you shouldn't apply it to everyone. There's only so much vendors can do as well, because a user wants to be in control of their own computer, and may install viruses or bots unknowningly.
Cut the breakline on your car and see if it falls under your car's warranty.
I think they mean 1,250,000 systems..
Opps... the other poster pointed out I read your statement too fast. Sorry about that.
Perhaps he means Windows 2003, or Windows Server 2003, on which IE7 does in fact run.
When the lock on your luggage was broken and your belongs have obviously been gone throuhg, yes you have lost something. Namely the right to be "secure in your person and belongings." It is very violating.
I've also lots a fair bit of money via taxes. So yes, it does feel like I've lost something everytime I see my paycheck.
Few people are killed in gun accidents in the US and the overwhelming vast majority of those are preventable by slightest bit of common sense and following gun safety rules.
Isn't that kinda the definition of "accident?"
It feels like that we've forgotten what it is really like to be a nation threatend with annihilation. In the 1940s our country nearly didn't make it and we have the United States to thank for that as much as our own heroic airmen.
Don't forget to thank the Soviets too.
Don't forget the EC was made to give MORE power to smaller states, otherwise there's not much of a reason for small states to join the union (notice how PR doesn't want to become a state).
The whole point of our system is that each state is supposed to be a largely independant nation, which only a few things at the federal level they need to abide by.
Don't worry about what other states do, just worry about your own state. You may also want to push to get states rights back too, I think that's the best way to reform the system.
The EC doesn't give or take power from political parties. Other election laws do, but they are the state laws, not the EC.
It doesn't matter if congress knows or not; the PEOPLE have a right to know what their government is doing.
Provide evidence that stores "by and large" don't enforce such rules.
Why should health metrics be used at all? Why not just charge people more based on what actual claims they make on the insurance? I'm overweight but pretty healthy. Why should I pay higher premiums just to support some skinny guy with asthma, or some pregnant woman???
If you're overweight, your not healthy. That's some bullshit line that fat people started pushing to make themselves feel better.
You may have a point though, until you come down with cancer (which being overweight gives you a much higher risk of). Then you'll expect insurance to pay.
I think an argument can be made that you CAN do something about fat, colesterol, smoking and brushing your teeth. Someone with asthma can't really do anything about it. Actually that's not quite true, being fat is often a cause of asthma.
Of course, this begs the question, why do we even have insurance at all? Why not just eliminate it and let the healthy people not have it since they don't need it, and the people who do need healthcare will just have to file bankruptcy.
I'd hate to not have insurance if someone hits me with a car. I doubt the driver would be able to afford my medical bills, and I don't think I should foot the bill for it.
I assume this is our perfect capitalist solution, right? Will there be a point when we are done nickle-and-diming people into bankruptcy for health care?
Yes, when you get off your fat lasy ass and start leading a more healthy lifestyle.
So you're saying handheld device that computers body fat percentage is not quick, cheap or standardized? Funny, my gym has one of those devices, and it took about 30 seconds to determine my % bodyfat.
Not true; you can get a handheld reader that computers your body fat percentage. Not as accurate as displacement, but it gives you a quick estimate.
He has been in some incredibly violent movies, but minors are not allowed to buy those movies.
Huh? No there's not. Stores may have policies regarding it, but its not enforced by any laws.
I don't see any reason why minors should be allowed to buy incredibly violent video games.
Hmm, you seem to forget that 15 and up are considered minors as well. Perhaps parents should be in charge, instead of you drawing an arbitrary line.
Bullshit. Typical mindless bashing of a system you don't understand. If you dont' like how your state divides the electoral votes, work to change it.
l college.asp
That's the great thing about state rights: you have MUCH more control over your state than the federal government.
Here's an explaination of why the EC was created: http://www.maitreg.com/politics/articles/electora
Do you have a reference for that? I doubt it'd be any cause of concern, because you would never know if the person upheld their end of the bargin and voted as promised.
And yet you still come here and post.
I think the sane argument to reduce carbon emissions (not "stop" global warming) is that whenever lots of carbon appears in the atmosphere, the planet heats for a time, melts the ice and we soon enter an ice age.
In the past, high levels of carbon were pumped out by volcanos and wild fires. Now here we are, also putting out lots and lots of carbon thus causing global warming to increase just as happened in the past. Since our world would be much more difficult to live in an ice age, its probably something we don't want to have happen or cause.
Russian government was communist, not fascist. Fascists and communists hate each other.