Up until about 3 years ago all I could get was dial-up. Cable is still not available where I live, but DSL in now finally available here. My DSL connection comes in over POTS lines. If they got rid of POTS lines, my DSL connection would presumably be gone too.
I have a 1.5 Mb / 800 Kb DSL connection and am totally happy with that speed. A QWEST employee said that 7 Mb DSL should eventually be possible from my location, for a slight extra cost, if they ever get around to upgrading their equipment. I live very close to the nearest switch and can see the little windowless building which the switch is in, when I look out my window. With DSL, the further a person is from the switch, the slower the connection speed will be. I have heard of DSL speeds as low as 250k in some places further from the nearest switch, and beyond that DSL not even being available at all.
Up until about 3 years ago I could not get 56k or even 28.8k dial-up. The local telephone lines in my neighborhood were only good for 26.4k dial-up, even when using a 56k modem.
More recently, I know of a couple of neighbors who get their Internet through an air card. But, I do not know how that compares in cost or speed.
I have a cell phone, but I prefer to use my old fashioned telephone at home and at work because it sounds so much clearer and is less complicated.
I only make about one call per week with my cell phone and do not use it enough to even remember how to adjust the volume. All I want is a cell phone to make calls. Any unnecessary complexity just gets in the way of my remembering how to just make a call or adjust the volume.
I have memorized the several of my most commonly used phone numbers, which saves me from needing to know how to look up a telephone number in the cell phone. I keep a few other less commonly used telephone numbers on a card in my wallet.
I usually do not bring my reading glasses along when hiking or working outside, so I am then unable to see the menus or labels on the buttons. So when I forget which button does what, I have difficulty using the phone. As for the alternative of using voice activated commands when outdoors, I do not use the cell phone enough to ever remember how to use that feature either.
Despite being somewhat of a Luddite about some technology, I have built several of my own desktop computers for use at home over the years, and installed Linux on each of them. I even prefer to do many ordinary tasks such as moving files from the command line instead of using the built-in point-and-click GUI alternatives. But, I was once told by a computer expert, that Linux is too difficult for the average computer user. I have never managed to learn how to properly operate my cell phone, but I have had no building a computer and installing and using Linux. I also managed to easily setup my DSL modem and its firewall, even though the installation CD was not designed to run under Linux. But, using an ordinary cell phone is a much more difficult task which is too complicated for me.
By the way, all that advertising on TV about the minutes used in a plan, is as irrelevant to me as extra cell phone features, since I only use a total of several minutes per month. Cell phone are not designed or marketed towards customers like me.
Perhaps they could allow people to pee into a special bag during the one hour when they must remain in their seats. If they were to allow that, I hope the passengers sitting on each side, would not object.
Whenever I have the time, I now prefer driving instead of flying to a nearby state, as the simpler more relaxing option.
I use ixquick.com which claims to be the only search engine which does not collect your IP address. They have also recently started going by the alternative name name of startpage.com. You can access them by either name or URL.
My guess would be, that employees were probably already probably trying to decide what to do about the loud group of people, before they suddenly spotted the camera. If I understand correctly, a very loud distracting group of people was singing Happy Birthday while a movie was playing in a theater, while other customers were most likely trying to watch the movie. The employee probably suddenly spotted the camera, and thought to himself, "hey, that's illegal."
Already quite angry at the loud disruptive group, the manager was probably in no mood to let the girl off with a warning. So he pressed charges.
The article gives us the impression that they were singing "Happy Birthday" during the movie, but the writer does not seem to think that detail is significant enough to explain more clearly. Did they have the theater rented out to themselves as they were singing during the movie? Were they just singing during the previews, instead of the movie? If so, then there must have still been something distracting which they were doing, that was worth filming, as the movie started.
I also wondered if perhaps this was one of those movies, which was played so loudly, that a small group of people singing "Happy Birthday," could hardly be heard. I am referring the fairly common practice of playing the movie so unbearably loud, that I find myself wishing I had brought earplugs.
I can just barely remember seeing an advertisement about something like that, which I saw about a decade ago. I do not remember if it was in a magazine (or possibly on TV), or what. I just vaguely remember something about some guy selling CDs or DVDs which were supposed to teach elderly people about using their computers. I suppose that must have been the "Video Professor."
Even though I live in the U.S., my recollection is so vague, that I could have used a reminder of who he is and what he has been selling. Was my recollection correct, about it having (at least at one time) been marketed to elderly people who wanted to learn how to use a computer?
My medical insurance has recently gone up to $995 per month, now that I have just recently reached the age of 55. That is almost $12,000 per year that I am paying for medical insurance, just for myself. That is with a $1,250 deductible and no dental coverage.
I once tried to switch to a less expensive plan, but Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona would not let me switch. I have never had any significant health problems, other than being somewhat overweight and having very slight high blood pressure. It was only during the last year, that I finally needed to start taking a mild diuretic to lower my slightly high blood pressure. I am a non-smoker in good health who walks 45 minutes per day, wears my seatbelt, and does not eat junk food. Despite that, I need to pay 1/3 of my net take home income (after taxes) on Medical insurance. How much would I have to pay if I had more significant health problems?
I would like to see more willingness for Congress to ignore the lobbyists, and work on the causes of it being so expensive such as tort reform, big pharma, and the insurance industry.
Is this bill going to make my insurance less expensive, or perhaps subsidise my insurance?
Our government is already spending way more than it collects for taxes, so is this something which our country can afford without having to inflate our money supply more or borrow even money from China and elsewhere? I seem to recall Nancy Pelosi claiming that they had found some way to pay for it all. I have not really been following the news closely enough to know about those details.
This article suggests that it is usually not a problem for pedestrians or bicyclists. The photo is of the traffic circle near where I live, which was built to replace the traffic light which had previously been at that intersection.
Most of the motorists only slow down to about 20 - 30 miles per hour while passing through that particular traffic circle, unless someone in the circle with the right of way causes them to slow down more, or momentarily stop. Not very visible in the photo, is a small triangular little island to stand on before attempting to run across the last stretch of the crosswalk, as the cars pop out from behind the mound of dirt.
From a pedestrian standpoint, it seem to me that there are advantages and disadvantages to either type of intersection.
In a conventional stoplight type intersection, I once ended up on the hood of a woman's car while roller blading across a crosswalk. The woman appeared to be slowing as if to stop for the red light. So, when the sign said "walk," I took off. But, she was rolling through the red light with "California" stop, instead of making a complete stop. She only hit me at about 10 MPH, and I was wearing a helmet, knee pads, wrist pads and elbow pads, so I was not hurt.
Here is an article with a photo of the local traffic circle that I mentioned. I have not yet seen anyone try to sail straight through this traffic circle by climbing over the 6 foot high circle of dirt in the center. Your traffic circles must look slightly different.
By a two lanes, I meant one lane going each way on each of the roads. However, I now realise that my vague description does not actually quite accurately describe the the intersection, since entering it from one direction the Highway is 4 lanes (2 lanes each way). Highway 89 going North of Prescott, Arizona is actually 2 lanes each way until a few hundred feet north of the traffic circle, where it funnels back down to 1 lane each way. A few miles north of the traffic circle, the highway goes back to 4 being lanes (2 lanes each way).
The intersecting Willow Lake Road has one lane of traffic going each direction, with significant traffic going and coming from only one direction of Willow Lake Road.
The slight hill on the south side of the intersection may seem insignificant, but when there was a traffic light there, it would take too long to get a stopped truck near the front of the line moving at a reasonable speed again.
The traffic circle is at the intersection of Highway 89 and Willow Lake Road (not Willow Creek Road). It does not use a traffic light for any direction (only yield signs).
Some of the traffic circles in Sedona are only about half the diameter of ones on Highway 89 in Prescott and Chino Valley or on Highway 89A in Cottonwood. The slightly larger traffic circles work best. When buildings already exist close to the intersection, they only have room to build the smaller traffic circles. At less built up intersections, they usually build slightly larger traffic circles.
The two smaller traffic circles at the intersection of Highway 89A and Highway 179 in Sedona are awkwardly small, although the traffic flow is probably better than when the traffic light was there. Not being a resident of Sedona, I can't say for sure. Was originally referring to the traffic circle at the intersection of Highway 89 and Willow Lake Road in Prescott, Arizona, where the traffic light was replaced with a traffic circle. At that intersection, the traffic flow was much improved after the traffic light was replaced by a traffic circle.
I can think of several possible differences, of here vs. elsewhere. For one thing, it is best if the traffic circle is not too small. It was possible to make this traffic circle whatever size the traffic engineers wanted, due to the lack of nearby buildings at the intersection. In built up areas, they can usually only build small tight traffic circles, where there is less time to react to what the other drivers are doing.
Anther factor is the little snow or ice we get, melts quickly at this altitude in Arizona.
One major disadvantage for having a stop light at that intersection, was that there was a small hill on one side of that intersection. Frequently, a moving truck was stopped at the red light, near the front of the line, it took too long to get the slow moving truck moving quickly again. During heavy traffic, that resulted in the light turning red before the people at the end of the line could get through. When it was converted to a traffic circle, the trucks could usually avoid having to make a complete stop, and keep moving.
This traffic circle is at the intersection of a two lane highway and a two lane road. I do not have any experience with how they work on intersecting four lane roads. But at this location, the traffic clearly flows much better during heavy traffic, that it did when the stoplight was there.
Many drivers in the U.S. do not know who has the right of way in a traffic circle. The people in the circle have the right of way (at least here in Arizona). Drivers entering the circle have a yield sign. Divers who mistakenly think they have the right of way, when they don't, have a much less positive experience going through the traffic circles.
I have been very happy with the traffic circle which replaced the traffic light near where I live. It is on a two-lane highway in a smaller city here in Arizona.
I was very sceptical when the state said they were planning to replace the stop light with a traffic circle. But, the traffic circle has been able to handle the traffic much more smoothly than the stoplight did. I rarely need to wait more than a few seconds to get through the traffic circle, even during rush hour. I also usually do not need to make a complete stop, which saves gas and reduces the wear on my clutch.
As you mentioned, no electricity, computers or electronics are needed. It keeps working just fine, whenever the power occasionally goes off after a summer thunderstorm, for a few minutes.
People here in Arizona, also do it that way whenever some traffic lights have gone out after a thunderstorm. A bunch of people will go through from one direction until somebody stops, and then a bunch of people will go through from the other direction. Theoretically, when the traffic lights are flashing red in both directions, they are supposed to treat it like a 4-way stop sign. But of course, they don't.
I have never seen any accidents, where I live, resulting from the traffic lights being out for a little while.
Summer thunder storms frequently cause power outages which occasionally knock traffic lights out for up to a couple of hours, in some parts of the country. Presumably, that also happens in larger cities. I do not seem to recall hearing about any Mad Max situations resulting from that. However, I have wondered what would happen if much of our complicated technology and the power grid itself or the economic system were to collapse all across the country for a few weeks. Then, we might be in a Mad Max situation.
A few years ago, the traffic light on the highway nearest to where I live, was replaced by a traffic circle (also known as a roundabout). One nice thing about a traffic circle is that there are is no longer a traffic light to fail during summer thunder storms or computer problems. There are only yield signs for traffic entering the circle. So hopefully, that Mad Max scenario you describe, would apply slightly less to my neighborhood.
Surprisingly, the traffic circle has also been able to handle much more traffic than the old traffic light did. This on a two lane highway, in a small city, in the mountains in Arizona. With the old traffic light, people at the end of the line sometimes failed to make it through the green light before it changed. With the traffic circle, it is rare that anyone needs to wait more than a few seconds before passing through the traffic circle.
I am suggesting that we should have been building more traffic circles and less traffic lights. But of course, most Americans are unfamiliar with using traffic circles, and think of them as those weird confusing European things. Traffic circles are not dependant on computers, fancy electronics or electricity.
It has actually been 240 volts and 120 volts in most parts of the U.S. for the last several decades now. At least that has been true here in Arizona for many years. People frequently say 110 Volts out of habit, because that what they remember it being roughly 40 or 50 years ago. They article claimed that the U.S. only uses 110 volts. Besides that minor error, nearly every home or business built within the last 40 years, has had the newer style 3-prong outlets with hot neutral and ground.
The higher the voltage, the smaller the wires can be, for the same amount of loss or a certain distance. However, our "wimpy" lower outlets are somewhat safer, from an electrical shock standpoint. With 120 volts or less, I have heard of electricians occasionally working on a circuit without shutting the power down first. I know of two instances where electricians stood on a very dry piece of wood, for insulation while working on the hot wires with their bare hands. In one case the electrician got a very slight electrical shock, that he described as being about like licking a small 9-volt smoke detector battery, to see if is still good. I doubt that they would try that with 220 volts or 240 volts. Electricians usually also have special soles in their shoes.
By the way, I am not an electrician or an expert on any of that.
In the early 1960s, I lived in a house which only had those old style 2-prong outlets. Ever since then, every house, apartment or business that I have lived or worked in has had the newer style 3-prong outlets with hot, neutral and ground.
In the last few years, I have read that all bathroom outlets in the U.S., are now required to be GFI outlets. Ground fault interrupter (GFI) outlets quickly switch off if a ground fault is detected. Those outlets usually have a reset button in the center.
For many years now the voltage in the U.S. has been 120 Volts AC, instead of the 110 Volts AC which the article mentions.
Over the years, when going to an annual family reunion, I have had an 85 year old female relative riding with me, who tends to talk to me while I am changing lanes or making a turn. She does that even if I am in extremely heavy traffic in an unfamiliar city. Sometimes that has also been while also driving a car other than my own, which has very poor rearward visibility out of the mirrors and windows.
I have repeatedly politely asked her not to do that at moments like that, but she keeps on doing that anyway. Well, fortunately I only have that person (and her husband) as a passenger, on a long trip, about once a year.
P.S. it just occurred to me that with most vehicles, I would not actually need to remove the key, I could probably just move the key to a different position.
I should check sometime, to see if that would actually work when my truck is moving slowly. Of course, just pushing in my clutch would would be faster and easier.
Owners of Toyota vehicles affected by that problem, should regularly remind themselves that they have the option of putting the vehicle in neutral. They should mentally rehearse that option until they are confident that they will not forget.
My pick-up truck has a 5-speed stick shift. So I would have the option of either pushing in the clutch or putting the gear shift lever in neutral.
I learned to drive back in about 1969 or 1970. With cars back then, the key could be removed from the ignition without causing the steering wheel to lock-up, or having to put an automatic transmission in park first. When learning to drive back then, I was told to remove the key if the throttle ever stuck. Just now, it has finally occurred to me that in a modern car or truck, removing the key would cause the steering wheel to lock up and cause the vehicle to crash. Of course, with an automatic, it would not even be possible to remove the key, without putting it in park first.
My pick-up truck once had a hidden anti-theft kill switch under the dash. For me that would have also been a good option.
In my neighborhood, many of the cars and trucks have had reoccurring problems with pack rats building nests in the engine compartment and chewing on wires. A "drive by wire system" sounds like it would just be more wires for the pack rats to chew on.
I am not suggesting that pack rats have anything to do with Toyota's sudden acceleration problem. But, in general, I would prefer less wires for the pack rats to chew on. Personally, I would trust a "drive by wire" car or truck, which had pack rats living under the hood. I would also prefer that important wires be surrounded by a thick plastic or steel rat resistant shield, or outer layer.
On two occasions, I have discovered a large nest of sticks, dry oak leaves and cactus thorns under my pickup truck's air cleaner. I smelled the problem when the dry oak leaves started to smolder against the hot exhaust manifold, while driving. What was unusual, was that my old pickup truck did not actually experience the wiring problems which some of my neighbors have had. I have sometimes heard the claim that the wiring on certain brands of cars tastes better to the pack rats.
I also once had problems with pack rats building a nest inside the air filter on a diesel powered backhoe. It made the engine smoke badly until the nest was cleaned out. Fortunately, that was on an old diesel engine with a purely mechanical fuel injection and no electrical ignition system. Unlike newer vehicles, the pack rats could not do much to that decades old backhoe.
Kubuntu 9.10 is working fine for me. I did a fresh clean install of Kubuntu Karmic Koala 9.10 onto another partition, several days ago. I kept my old copy of Debian 5.0 on the other partition, so that I can dual-boot between either Linux distro, while deciding which one I like best. Actually, I can triple boot, because I also have Slamd64 12.2 Linux on yet another partition on the same hard drive.
I have a several year old desktop socket 939 type AMD-64 X2 4200+ computer which runs at 2.4 GHz and has 2 GB of RAM. The motherboard uses the older nVidia nForce3 chipset. My video card is a rather ordinary old fanless AGP type video card which uses the nVidia GeForce FX 5200 chipset.
I used the alternate install version of the 64-bit version of Kubuntu 9.10. I chose to format the partition as EXT3, instead of EXT4, which would have been the default choice.
KDE 4.3 probably uses significantly more resources than the Xubuntu, which you use. But, despite that the computer still feels like a fast stable new computer. The only slight performance issue that I have noticed is an occasional rare, approximately 10 second delay, when when asking Firefox to try to open an HTML file on the hard disk or save something to the hard disk. That annoying hesitation does not happen most of the time, it just does so occasionally.
Earlier tonight, I removed the PCI card which provided an extra Ethernet port, which I do not actually use. When booting up, Kubuntu 9.10 was not consistent about which Ethernet port to designate as eth0, and which to designate as eth1. That inconsistency was confusing the Firestarter firewall which I had installed, so I solved the problem by removing the PCI card. I also mentioned that minor problem in another post.
I meant to say virtual desktops instead of virtual terminals. I was happy to be able to install separate wallpaper for each virtual desktop (not a terminal). The article about KDE 4.3 in the current November 2009 issue of Linux Format magazine briefly describes how to do that on page 22. It is the current issue, with the rocket powered penguin on the cover.
Windows users probably have absolutely no idea what multiple virtual terminals are.
So far, I am quite happy with the Karmic Koala version of Kubuntu. However, setting it up on my several year old desktop computer was probably slightly easier than on a notebook or laptop computer. For instance, I do not use wireless networking and my hardware is old enough to be well supported (but not obsolete). If my extra Ethernet port is a problem, I can just open the cover and remove my PCI Ethernet card.
This several year old 2.4 GHz AMD 64 computer still feels like a fast stable new computer, when running the Karmic Koala version of Kubuntu. The varied selection of my favorite wallpaper, in each of the virtual terminals, looks great on my 20-inch flat screen monitor. I am happy.
Being somewhat cautious, I chose to format my new Kubuntu partition as an EXT3 partition instead of the default choice of making it an EXT4 partition. My thinking, is that EXT3 is an older more proven technology, which was working just fine for me.
I did a clean install of Kunbuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala and it seems to be working good. I kept my old copy of Debian 5.0, which uses KDE 3.5, on another partition, so I would have the option of going back to that, if necessary. I put Kubuntu 9.10 on another new partition on the same hard disk.
My computer is a several year old AMD 64. I used the alternate install version of the 64-bit version of Kubuntu. I also chose the option of doing my partitioning manually.
The only minor issue that I ran into, relates to the fact that my computer has two different Ethernet ports. When booting up, it is varies each time, as to which one is eth0 and which is eth1. That unpredictability creates a problem for my Firestarter firewall, because it expects me to be consistently connecting to the Internet through through the same port each time. I plan to solve that problem by removing the extra unneeded Ethernet card.
I am very pleased that Kubuntu is now once again possible to have separate wallpaper for each virtual terminal. I have an attractive girl in shorts as my background in one, an outer space scene in another, an outdoor scene in another, and a world map in another. The ability to do that had existed in KDE 3.5, but was lost with KDE 4.0, but is now possible once again. Re-enabling that capability is easy, but could hardly be less obvious.
Slashdot Mirror
Up until about 3 years ago all I could get was dial-up. Cable is still not available where I live, but DSL in now finally available here. My DSL connection comes in over POTS lines. If they got rid of POTS lines, my DSL connection would presumably be gone too.
I have a 1.5 Mb / 800 Kb DSL connection and am totally happy with that speed. A QWEST employee said that 7 Mb DSL should eventually be possible from my location, for a slight extra cost, if they ever get around to upgrading their equipment. I live very close to the nearest switch and can see the little windowless building which the switch is in, when I look out my window. With DSL, the further a person is from the switch, the slower the connection speed will be. I have heard of DSL speeds as low as 250k in some places further from the nearest switch, and beyond that DSL not even being available at all.
Up until about 3 years ago I could not get 56k or even 28.8k dial-up. The local telephone lines in my neighborhood were only good for 26.4k dial-up, even when using a 56k modem.
More recently, I know of a couple of neighbors who get their Internet through an air card. But, I do not know how that compares in cost or speed.
I have a cell phone, but I prefer to use my old fashioned telephone at home and at work because it sounds so much clearer and is less complicated.
I only make about one call per week with my cell phone and do not use it enough to even remember how to adjust the volume. All I want is a cell phone to make calls. Any unnecessary complexity just gets in the way of my remembering how to just make a call or adjust the volume.
I have memorized the several of my most commonly used phone numbers, which saves me from needing to know how to look up a telephone number in the cell phone. I keep a few other less commonly used telephone numbers on a card in my wallet.
I usually do not bring my reading glasses along when hiking or working outside, so I am then unable to see the menus or labels on the buttons. So when I forget which button does what, I have difficulty using the phone. As for the alternative of using voice activated commands when outdoors, I do not use the cell phone enough to ever remember how to use that feature either.
Despite being somewhat of a Luddite about some technology, I have built several of my own desktop computers for use at home over the years, and installed Linux on each of them. I even prefer to do many ordinary tasks such as moving files from the command line instead of using the built-in point-and-click GUI alternatives. But, I was once told by a computer expert, that Linux is too difficult for the average computer user. I have never managed to learn how to properly operate my cell phone, but I have had no building a computer and installing and using Linux. I also managed to easily setup my DSL modem and its firewall, even though the installation CD was not designed to run under Linux. But, using an ordinary cell phone is a much more difficult task which is too complicated for me.
By the way, all that advertising on TV about the minutes used in a plan, is as irrelevant to me as extra cell phone features, since I only use a total of several minutes per month. Cell phone are not designed or marketed towards customers like me.
Perhaps they could allow people to pee into a special bag during the one hour when they must remain in their seats. If they were to allow that, I hope the passengers sitting on each side, would not object.
Whenever I have the time, I now prefer driving instead of flying to a nearby state, as the simpler more relaxing option.
I use ixquick.com which claims to be the only search engine which does not collect your IP address. They have also recently started going by the alternative name name of startpage.com. You can access them by either name or URL.
http://ixquick.com/
http://startpage.com/eng/protect-privacy.html
My guess would be, that employees were probably already probably trying to decide what to do about the loud group of people, before they suddenly spotted the camera. If I understand correctly, a very loud distracting group of people was singing Happy Birthday while a movie was playing in a theater, while other customers were most likely trying to watch the movie. The employee probably suddenly spotted the camera, and thought to himself, "hey, that's illegal."
Already quite angry at the loud disruptive group, the manager was probably in no mood to let the girl off with a warning. So he pressed charges.
The article gives us the impression that they were singing "Happy Birthday" during the movie, but the writer does not seem to think that detail is significant enough to explain more clearly. Did they have the theater rented out to themselves as they were singing during the movie? Were they just singing during the previews, instead of the movie? If so, then there must have still been something distracting which they were doing, that was worth filming, as the movie started.
I also wondered if perhaps this was one of those movies, which was played so loudly, that a small group of people singing "Happy Birthday," could hardly be heard. I am referring the fairly common practice of playing the movie so unbearably loud, that I find myself wishing I had brought earplugs.
I can just barely remember seeing an advertisement about something like that, which I saw about a decade ago. I do not remember if it was in a magazine (or possibly on TV), or what. I just vaguely remember something about some guy selling CDs or DVDs which were supposed to teach elderly people about using their computers. I suppose that must have been the "Video Professor."
Even though I live in the U.S., my recollection is so vague, that I could have used a reminder of who he is and what he has been selling. Was my recollection correct, about it having (at least at one time) been marketed to elderly people who wanted to learn how to use a computer?
My medical insurance has recently gone up to $995 per month, now that I have just recently reached the age of 55. That is almost $12,000 per year that I am paying for medical insurance, just for myself. That is with a $1,250 deductible and no dental coverage.
I once tried to switch to a less expensive plan, but Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona would not let me switch. I have never had any significant health problems, other than being somewhat overweight and having very slight high blood pressure. It was only during the last year, that I finally needed to start taking a mild diuretic to lower my slightly high blood pressure. I am a non-smoker in good health who walks 45 minutes per day, wears my seatbelt, and does not eat junk food. Despite that, I need to pay 1/3 of my net take home income (after taxes) on Medical insurance. How much would I have to pay if I had more significant health problems?
I would like to see more willingness for Congress to ignore the lobbyists, and work on the causes of it being so expensive such as tort reform, big pharma, and the insurance industry.
Is this bill going to make my insurance less expensive, or perhaps subsidise my insurance?
Our government is already spending way more than it collects for taxes, so is this something which our country can afford without having to inflate our money supply more or borrow even money from China and elsewhere? I seem to recall Nancy Pelosi claiming that they had found some way to pay for it all. I have not really been following the news closely enough to know about those details.
This article suggests that it is usually not a problem for pedestrians or bicyclists. The photo is of the traffic circle near where I live, which was built to replace the traffic light which had previously been at that intersection.
Traffic Circle in Prescott, Arizona
Most of the motorists only slow down to about 20 - 30 miles per hour while passing through that particular traffic circle, unless someone in the circle with the right of way causes them to slow down more, or momentarily stop. Not very visible in the photo, is a small triangular little island to stand on before attempting to run across the last stretch of the crosswalk, as the cars pop out from behind the mound of dirt.
From a pedestrian standpoint, it seem to me that there are advantages and disadvantages to either type of intersection.
In a conventional stoplight type intersection, I once ended up on the hood of a woman's car while roller blading across a crosswalk. The woman appeared to be slowing as if to stop for the red light. So, when the sign said "walk," I took off. But, she was rolling through the red light with "California" stop, instead of making a complete stop. She only hit me at about 10 MPH, and I was wearing a helmet, knee pads, wrist pads and elbow pads, so I was not hurt.
Here is an article with a photo of the local traffic circle that I mentioned. I have not yet seen anyone try to sail straight through this traffic circle by climbing over the 6 foot high circle of dirt in the center. Your traffic circles must look slightly different.
Traffic circle photo and article
Here is an article with a photo of the traffic circle that I am referring to:
http://www.dcourier.com/print.asp?ArticleID=55222&SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1
By a two lanes, I meant one lane going each way on each of the roads. However, I now realise that my vague description does not actually quite accurately describe the the intersection, since entering it from one direction the Highway is 4 lanes (2 lanes each way). Highway 89 going North of Prescott, Arizona is actually 2 lanes each way until a few hundred feet north of the traffic circle, where it funnels back down to 1 lane each way. A few miles north of the traffic circle, the highway goes back to 4 being lanes (2 lanes each way).
The intersecting Willow Lake Road has one lane of traffic going each direction, with significant traffic going and coming from only one direction of Willow Lake Road.
The slight hill on the south side of the intersection may seem insignificant, but when there was a traffic light there, it would take too long to get a stopped truck near the front of the line moving at a reasonable speed again.
The traffic circle is at the intersection of Highway 89 and Willow Lake Road (not Willow Creek Road). It does not use a traffic light for any direction (only yield signs).
Some of the traffic circles in Sedona are only about half the diameter of ones on Highway 89 in Prescott and Chino Valley or on Highway 89A in Cottonwood. The slightly larger traffic circles work best. When buildings already exist close to the intersection, they only have room to build the smaller traffic circles. At less built up intersections, they usually build slightly larger traffic circles.
The two smaller traffic circles at the intersection of Highway 89A and Highway 179 in Sedona are awkwardly small, although the traffic flow is probably better than when the traffic light was there. Not being a resident of Sedona, I can't say for sure. Was originally referring to the traffic circle at the intersection of Highway 89 and Willow Lake Road in Prescott, Arizona, where the traffic light was replaced with a traffic circle. At that intersection, the traffic flow was much improved after the traffic light was replaced by a traffic circle.
I can think of several possible differences, of here vs. elsewhere. For one thing, it is best if the traffic circle is not too small. It was possible to make this traffic circle whatever size the traffic engineers wanted, due to the lack of nearby buildings at the intersection. In built up areas, they can usually only build small tight traffic circles, where there is less time to react to what the other drivers are doing.
Anther factor is the little snow or ice we get, melts quickly at this altitude in Arizona.
One major disadvantage for having a stop light at that intersection, was that there was a small hill on one side of that intersection. Frequently, a moving truck was stopped at the red light, near the front of the line, it took too long to get the slow moving truck moving quickly again. During heavy traffic, that resulted in the light turning red before the people at the end of the line could get through. When it was converted to a traffic circle, the trucks could usually avoid having to make a complete stop, and keep moving.
This traffic circle is at the intersection of a two lane highway and a two lane road. I do not have any experience with how they work on intersecting four lane roads. But at this location, the traffic clearly flows much better during heavy traffic, that it did when the stoplight was there.
Many drivers in the U.S. do not know who has the right of way in a traffic circle. The people in the circle have the right of way (at least here in Arizona). Drivers entering the circle have a yield sign. Divers who mistakenly think they have the right of way, when they don't, have a much less positive experience going through the traffic circles.
I have been very happy with the traffic circle which replaced the traffic light near where I live. It is on a two-lane highway in a smaller city here in Arizona.
I was very sceptical when the state said they were planning to replace the stop light with a traffic circle. But, the traffic circle has been able to handle the traffic much more smoothly than the stoplight did. I rarely need to wait more than a few seconds to get through the traffic circle, even during rush hour. I also usually do not need to make a complete stop, which saves gas and reduces the wear on my clutch.
As you mentioned, no electricity, computers or electronics are needed. It keeps working just fine, whenever the power occasionally goes off after a summer thunderstorm, for a few minutes.
People here in Arizona, also do it that way whenever some traffic lights have gone out after a thunderstorm. A bunch of people will go through from one direction until somebody stops, and then a bunch of people will go through from the other direction. Theoretically, when the traffic lights are flashing red in both directions, they are supposed to treat it like a 4-way stop sign. But of course, they don't.
I have never seen any accidents, where I live, resulting from the traffic lights being out for a little while.
Summer thunder storms frequently cause power outages which occasionally knock traffic lights out for up to a couple of hours, in some parts of the country. Presumably, that also happens in larger cities. I do not seem to recall hearing about any Mad Max situations resulting from that. However, I have wondered what would happen if much of our complicated technology and the power grid itself or the economic system were to collapse all across the country for a few weeks. Then, we might be in a Mad Max situation.
A few years ago, the traffic light on the highway nearest to where I live, was replaced by a traffic circle (also known as a roundabout). One nice thing about a traffic circle is that there are is no longer a traffic light to fail during summer thunder storms or computer problems. There are only yield signs for traffic entering the circle. So hopefully, that Mad Max scenario you describe, would apply slightly less to my neighborhood.
Surprisingly, the traffic circle has also been able to handle much more traffic than the old traffic light did. This on a two lane highway, in a small city, in the mountains in Arizona. With the old traffic light, people at the end of the line sometimes failed to make it through the green light before it changed. With the traffic circle, it is rare that anyone needs to wait more than a few seconds before passing through the traffic circle.
I am suggesting that we should have been building more traffic circles and less traffic lights. But of course, most Americans are unfamiliar with using traffic circles, and think of them as those weird confusing European things. Traffic circles are not dependant on computers, fancy electronics or electricity.
It has actually been 240 volts and 120 volts in most parts of the U.S. for the last several decades now. At least that has been true here in Arizona for many years. People frequently say 110 Volts out of habit, because that what they remember it being roughly 40 or 50 years ago. They article claimed that the U.S. only uses 110 volts. Besides that minor error, nearly every home or business built within the last 40 years, has had the newer style 3-prong outlets with hot neutral and ground.
The higher the voltage, the smaller the wires can be, for the same amount of loss or a certain distance. However, our "wimpy" lower outlets are somewhat safer, from an electrical shock standpoint. With 120 volts or less, I have heard of electricians occasionally working on a circuit without shutting the power down first. I know of two instances where electricians stood on a very dry piece of wood, for insulation while working on the hot wires with their bare hands. In one case the electrician got a very slight electrical shock, that he described as being about like licking a small 9-volt smoke detector battery, to see if is still good. I doubt that they would try that with 220 volts or 240 volts. Electricians usually also have special soles in their shoes.
By the way, I am not an electrician or an expert on any of that.
In the early 1960s, I lived in a house which only had those old style 2-prong outlets. Ever since then, every house, apartment or business that I have lived or worked in has had the newer style 3-prong outlets with hot, neutral and ground.
In the last few years, I have read that all bathroom outlets in the U.S., are now required to be GFI outlets. Ground fault interrupter (GFI) outlets quickly switch off if a ground fault is detected. Those outlets usually have a reset button in the center.
For many years now the voltage in the U.S. has been 120 Volts AC, instead of the 110 Volts AC which the article mentions.
Over the years, when going to an annual family reunion, I have had an 85 year old female relative riding with me, who tends to talk to me while I am changing lanes or making a turn. She does that even if I am in extremely heavy traffic in an unfamiliar city. Sometimes that has also been while also driving a car other than my own, which has very poor rearward visibility out of the mirrors and windows.
I have repeatedly politely asked her not to do that at moments like that, but she keeps on doing that anyway. Well, fortunately I only have that person (and her husband) as a passenger, on a long trip, about once a year.
P.S. it just occurred to me that with most vehicles, I would not actually need to remove the key, I could probably just move the key to a different position.
I should check sometime, to see if that would actually work when my truck is moving slowly. Of course, just pushing in my clutch would would be faster and easier.
Owners of Toyota vehicles affected by that problem, should regularly remind themselves that they have the option of putting the vehicle in neutral. They should mentally rehearse that option until they are confident that they will not forget.
My pick-up truck has a 5-speed stick shift. So I would have the option of either pushing in the clutch or putting the gear shift lever in neutral.
I learned to drive back in about 1969 or 1970. With cars back then, the key could be removed from the ignition without causing the steering wheel to lock-up, or having to put an automatic transmission in park first. When learning to drive back then, I was told to remove the key if the throttle ever stuck. Just now, it has finally occurred to me that in a modern car or truck, removing the key would cause the steering wheel to lock up and cause the vehicle to crash. Of course, with an automatic, it would not even be possible to remove the key, without putting it in park first.
My pick-up truck once had a hidden anti-theft kill switch under the dash. For me that would have also been a good option.
In my neighborhood, many of the cars and trucks have had reoccurring problems with pack rats building nests in the engine compartment and chewing on wires. A "drive by wire system" sounds like it would just be more wires for the pack rats to chew on.
I am not suggesting that pack rats have anything to do with Toyota's sudden acceleration problem. But, in general, I would prefer less wires for the pack rats to chew on. Personally, I would trust a "drive by wire" car or truck, which had pack rats living under the hood. I would also prefer that important wires be surrounded by a thick plastic or steel rat resistant shield, or outer layer.
On two occasions, I have discovered a large nest of sticks, dry oak leaves and cactus thorns under my pickup truck's air cleaner. I smelled the problem when the dry oak leaves started to smolder against the hot exhaust manifold, while driving. What was unusual, was that my old pickup truck did not actually experience the wiring problems which some of my neighbors have had. I have sometimes heard the claim that the wiring on certain brands of cars tastes better to the pack rats.
I also once had problems with pack rats building a nest inside the air filter on a diesel powered backhoe. It made the engine smoke badly until the nest was cleaned out. Fortunately, that was on an old diesel engine with a purely mechanical fuel injection and no electrical ignition system. Unlike newer vehicles, the pack rats could not do much to that decades old backhoe.
Kubuntu 9.10 is working fine for me. I did a fresh clean install of Kubuntu Karmic Koala 9.10 onto another partition, several days ago. I kept my old copy of Debian 5.0 on the other partition, so that I can dual-boot between either Linux distro, while deciding which one I like best. Actually, I can triple boot, because I also have Slamd64 12.2 Linux on yet another partition on the same hard drive.
I have a several year old desktop socket 939 type AMD-64 X2 4200+ computer which runs at 2.4 GHz and has 2 GB of RAM. The motherboard uses the older nVidia nForce3 chipset. My video card is a rather ordinary old fanless AGP type video card which uses the nVidia GeForce FX 5200 chipset.
I used the alternate install version of the 64-bit version of Kubuntu 9.10. I chose to format the partition as EXT3, instead of EXT4, which would have been the default choice.
KDE 4.3 probably uses significantly more resources than the Xubuntu, which you use. But, despite that the computer still feels like a fast stable new computer. The only slight performance issue that I have noticed is an occasional rare, approximately 10 second delay, when when asking Firefox to try to open an HTML file on the hard disk or save something to the hard disk. That annoying hesitation does not happen most of the time, it just does so occasionally.
Earlier tonight, I removed the PCI card which provided an extra Ethernet port, which I do not actually use. When booting up, Kubuntu 9.10 was not consistent about which Ethernet port to designate as eth0, and which to designate as eth1. That inconsistency was confusing the Firestarter firewall which I had installed, so I solved the problem by removing the PCI card. I also mentioned that minor problem in another post.
I meant to say virtual desktops instead of virtual terminals. I was happy to be able to install separate wallpaper for each virtual desktop (not a terminal). The article about KDE 4.3 in the current November 2009 issue of Linux Format magazine briefly describes how to do that on page 22. It is the current issue, with the rocket powered penguin on the cover.
Windows users probably have absolutely no idea what multiple virtual terminals are.
So far, I am quite happy with the Karmic Koala version of Kubuntu. However, setting it up on my several year old desktop computer was probably slightly easier than on a notebook or laptop computer. For instance, I do not use wireless networking and my hardware is old enough to be well supported (but not obsolete). If my extra Ethernet port is a problem, I can just open the cover and remove my PCI Ethernet card.
This several year old 2.4 GHz AMD 64 computer still feels like a fast stable new computer, when running the Karmic Koala version of Kubuntu. The varied selection of my favorite wallpaper, in each of the virtual terminals, looks great on my 20-inch flat screen monitor. I am happy.
Being somewhat cautious, I chose to format my new Kubuntu partition as an EXT3 partition instead of the default choice of making it an EXT4 partition. My thinking, is that EXT3 is an older more proven technology, which was working just fine for me.
I did a clean install of Kunbuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala and it seems to be working good. I kept my old copy of Debian 5.0, which uses KDE 3.5, on another partition, so I would have the option of going back to that, if necessary. I put Kubuntu 9.10 on another new partition on the same hard disk.
My computer is a several year old AMD 64. I used the alternate install version of the 64-bit version of Kubuntu. I also chose the option of doing my partitioning manually.
The only minor issue that I ran into, relates to the fact that my computer has two different Ethernet ports. When booting up, it is varies each time, as to which one is eth0 and which is eth1. That unpredictability creates a problem for my Firestarter firewall, because it expects me to be consistently connecting to the Internet through through the same port each time. I plan to solve that problem by removing the extra unneeded Ethernet card.
I am very pleased that Kubuntu is now once again possible to have separate wallpaper for each virtual terminal. I have an attractive girl in shorts as my background in one, an outer space scene in another, an outdoor scene in another, and a world map in another. The ability to do that had existed in KDE 3.5, but was lost with KDE 4.0, but is now possible once again. Re-enabling that capability is easy, but could hardly be less obvious.