I know you're being facetious, but the car itself has a helmet. It's called a "roof" and the federal government has various requirements regarding the strength of the roof. If you don't have a roof, there are other safety regulations requiring rollbars and the like.
Now, if you think the federal government should also be involved in setting safety standards for bicycles...
He might not have died, but I feel pretty secure in saying he would have suffered a brain injury. Personally, I'd rather not spend the rest of my life drooling at the ceiling because I can't think.
First off, no, a helmet is not a suit of armor. There are limits to how much it will protect you. A few years ago, a professional cyclist in the Tour de California was traveling about 40 MPH when he wiped out and hit a tree. He died. And, yes, he was wearing a helmet. So if I'm cycling along a street and a car hits me traveling 40 MPH, whether I'm wearing a helmet or not will probably make no difference. I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment.
The arguments against helmets mostly remind me of the arguments against seat belts. Yes, there are stories of people who survived a car accident because they were ejected from the car. Yes, there are stories of people who were trapped in their car because they were wearing a seatbelt and were injured or killed. But for the majority of situations, people survive car accidents that would have killed or seriously injured them had they not been wearing their seat belts. It's a similar situation with bike helmets.
(As an aside, you can certainly argue the whole, "I don't need no gummint tellin' me what to wear in my own damn car," and I can certainly understand that argument.)
Like I said above, they're not suits of armor. But I've also flown over the handlebars a few times and hit my head and have been very happy to have worn that helmet. I would argue that the chances of a helmet saving you injury or death is about 90%. The chance of a helmet making no difference is about 9% and the chance of a helmet actually injuring you is about 1%.
So if a helmet is going to help most of the time, make no difference occasionally, and cause injury rarely, I think it's probably better to wear one than not.
I was a kid back then and you are right, things were more implied than spelled out.
Well, it was the late 60s. According to lore, the Brady Bunch was the first prime-time network television program to feature a married couple sleeping in the same bed. That was 1969. So, no, you're not going to see Jim Kirk boffing hot alien babes. The best you would get is a kiss.
The only exception I can think of is the episode "By Any Other Name." This is the episode where the Kelvans take over the Enterprise and Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Scotty corrupt the Kelvans and convince them to stay with the Federation.
There's a scene where Jim is seducing one of the Kelvan babes. It cuts to another scene and, when we come back, Jim is putting on his shirt and the woman in question is saying something about her hair being a mess.
I may have the wrong episode, though. But I do remember that scene.
True. And if you know you're going to get paid in 16 days, not a huge deal.
Try this exercise: Imagine your employer stopped paying you, sent you home, and said, "At some point in the future I'll bring you back and pay for the lost wages."
You don't know if he's going to call you back tomorrow or in three months. You have no income coming in. You're really going to call that "a vacation"?
forget the fact that the democrats have 40 job creation bills [majorityleader.gov]they haven't acted on.
Check out some of these "Job Creation Bills"
H.J. Resolution 37, where, "“Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission relating to the matter of preserving the open Internet and broadband industry practices" Yup, real job builder there.
House Resolution 2018, which seeks "to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to preserve the authority of each State to make determinations relating to the State's water quality standards, and for other purposes." Wow, that'll create a bunch of jobs right there!
Actually, from what I've read, it's true. More people dislike "Obamacare" than like it. On the other hand, the "Affordable Care Act" seems to have quite a bit of support--and this government shutdown has actually improved it's support especially among those who didn't know anything about it.
How would online options really help with determining what has good feel/performance for a customer.
Depends on how much the customer cares about feel/performance. There are people out there who want basic transportation and aren't all that concerned with the other stuff. When I had a short commute, I didn't really care. When I had a long commute, I bought a new car because if I was going to spend an hour-and-a-half somewhere, I was going to enjoy it.
That said, I agree. However, look at Tesla--they have showrooms where you can check out the cars. They do test drives, though you might have to arrange it in advance--I'm not sure you can just walk in and say, "Hey'd I'd like to test drive a roadster!" So they keep a model or two around for the test drive. You don't need acres and acres of land to park a bunch of cars that you hope to sell.
the House [...] are allowed to "defund" any part of the government they wish.
Actually, that's correct. And if the Senate and President approve it, it's defunded.
Way back when, Bill Clinton normalized relations with Vietnam. There were those in this country who thought this was a bad thing to do. They complained to their representatives. Now, their Representatives don't really have a say in this matter--that's up to the President and the Senate. So they refused to allow money for an embassy to be built. Perfectly legit thing to do. It survived the Senate and President and for the first few years of normalized relations, there was no US Embassy in Vietnam.
Where is the check of power on the House?
It is in the Senate and President, who have to approve these things as well. Eventually, there was a US Embassy built in Vietnam.
The concept, of course, is that all involved will work together, give and take, and eventually come up with an appropriate budget. This is not happening due to procedural issues in the House. A few years ago, the speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, created what is known as the "Hastert Rule" that basically said that a bill will come to the floor only if it has support of a majority of the majority party. Thus, any attempts to bring a so-called "Clean" budget resolution up for a vote are being blocked because it is quite possible that a majority of the majority party would not support it.
Let me begin by saying I Hate You. Don't worry, it's entirely due to jealousy. If you had the roadster, I'd probably be coming after you with a knife.:^D
That said, I'm somewhat curious what happens when you have mechanical problems with your car? I'm not defending the dealer network but are there "Tesla Certified" car-repair places? It's kind of pricey to ship it back to Fremont. I'm sure there's a way to deal with it--I'm just curious what it is.
I don't agree that the ratings are pointless. As I parent, I have a responsibility to try to manage what my kids do. Ratings like this, while imperfect, are helpful for doing that. Much like the movie ratings--if my kid wants to go see an 'R' rated movie, I'll at least do a bit more research into the movie and decide whether I think it's an appropriate film for them to see.
See? This proves NASA is staffed with incompetent government employees! Why, if we gave it over to private industry, I'm sure they'd find water and methane! NASA is just a useless jobs program!
(The above is sarcasm, for those who are sarcasm-deficient)
Slashdot Mirror
I know you're being facetious, but the car itself has a helmet. It's called a "roof" and the federal government has various requirements regarding the strength of the roof. If you don't have a roof, there are other safety regulations requiring rollbars and the like.
Now, if you think the federal government should also be involved in setting safety standards for bicycles...
He might not have died, but I feel pretty secure in saying he would have suffered a brain injury. Personally, I'd rather not spend the rest of my life drooling at the ceiling because I can't think.
First off, no, a helmet is not a suit of armor. There are limits to how much it will protect you. A few years ago, a professional cyclist in the Tour de California was traveling about 40 MPH when he wiped out and hit a tree. He died. And, yes, he was wearing a helmet. So if I'm cycling along a street and a car hits me traveling 40 MPH, whether I'm wearing a helmet or not will probably make no difference. I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment.
The arguments against helmets mostly remind me of the arguments against seat belts. Yes, there are stories of people who survived a car accident because they were ejected from the car. Yes, there are stories of people who were trapped in their car because they were wearing a seatbelt and were injured or killed. But for the majority of situations, people survive car accidents that would have killed or seriously injured them had they not been wearing their seat belts. It's a similar situation with bike helmets.
(As an aside, you can certainly argue the whole, "I don't need no gummint tellin' me what to wear in my own damn car," and I can certainly understand that argument.)
Like I said above, they're not suits of armor. But I've also flown over the handlebars a few times and hit my head and have been very happy to have worn that helmet. I would argue that the chances of a helmet saving you injury or death is about 90%. The chance of a helmet making no difference is about 9% and the chance of a helmet actually injuring you is about 1%.
So if a helmet is going to help most of the time, make no difference occasionally, and cause injury rarely, I think it's probably better to wear one than not.
Though you did have a "Kitty Cadet"...
I was a kid back then and you are right, things were more implied than spelled out.
Well, it was the late 60s. According to lore, the Brady Bunch was the first prime-time network television program to feature a married couple sleeping in the same bed. That was 1969. So, no, you're not going to see Jim Kirk boffing hot alien babes. The best you would get is a kiss.
The only exception I can think of is the episode "By Any Other Name." This is the episode where the Kelvans take over the Enterprise and Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Scotty corrupt the Kelvans and convince them to stay with the Federation.
There's a scene where Jim is seducing one of the Kelvan babes. It cuts to another scene and, when we come back, Jim is putting on his shirt and the woman in question is saying something about her hair being a mess.
I may have the wrong episode, though. But I do remember that scene.
Sounds like they're following the old maxim, "It's easier to ask forgiveness than permission."
True. And if you know you're going to get paid in 16 days, not a huge deal.
Try this exercise: Imagine your employer stopped paying you, sent you home, and said, "At some point in the future I'll bring you back and pay for the lost wages."
You don't know if he's going to call you back tomorrow or in three months. You have no income coming in. You're really going to call that "a vacation"?
forget the fact that the democrats have 40 job creation bills [majorityleader.gov]they haven't acted on.
Check out some of these "Job Creation Bills"
H.J. Resolution 37, where, "“Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission relating to the matter of preserving the open Internet and broadband industry practices" Yup, real job builder there.
House Resolution 2018, which seeks "to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to preserve the authority of each State to make determinations relating to the State's water quality standards, and for other purposes." Wow, that'll create a bunch of jobs right there!
Actually, from what I've read, it's true. More people dislike "Obamacare" than like it. On the other hand, the "Affordable Care Act" seems to have quite a bit of support--and this government shutdown has actually improved it's support especially among those who didn't know anything about it.
Just remember that cookies are a sometimes food.
This customer lock in via third parties would evaporate the very instant that Apple gave other handset makers access to their proprietary connectors.
Because I would not drop my iPhone for an Android phone because then I'd have to go out and buy new cables?
I don't think so.
Step 1: Gain Market Share
Step 2: ???
Step 3: PROFIT!
Actually, I'd rephrase that:
Fanboys care about market-share.
Investors care about money-share.
Perhaps you should consider a new computer.
Sure there was some of that [...]
No, it was entirely that. What can we do in space to beat the Russians?
Can't innovate, my ass.
How would online options really help with determining what has good feel/performance for a customer.
Depends on how much the customer cares about feel/performance. There are people out there who want basic transportation and aren't all that concerned with the other stuff. When I had a short commute, I didn't really care. When I had a long commute, I bought a new car because if I was going to spend an hour-and-a-half somewhere, I was going to enjoy it.
That said, I agree. However, look at Tesla--they have showrooms where you can check out the cars. They do test drives, though you might have to arrange it in advance--I'm not sure you can just walk in and say, "Hey'd I'd like to test drive a roadster!" So they keep a model or two around for the test drive. You don't need acres and acres of land to park a bunch of cars that you hope to sell.
Do not taunt the iBall.
the House [...] are allowed to "defund" any part of the government they wish.
Actually, that's correct. And if the Senate and President approve it, it's defunded.
Way back when, Bill Clinton normalized relations with Vietnam. There were those in this country who thought this was a bad thing to do. They complained to their representatives. Now, their Representatives don't really have a say in this matter--that's up to the President and the Senate. So they refused to allow money for an embassy to be built. Perfectly legit thing to do. It survived the Senate and President and for the first few years of normalized relations, there was no US Embassy in Vietnam.
Where is the check of power on the House?
It is in the Senate and President, who have to approve these things as well. Eventually, there was a US Embassy built in Vietnam.
The concept, of course, is that all involved will work together, give and take, and eventually come up with an appropriate budget. This is not happening due to procedural issues in the House. A few years ago, the speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, created what is known as the "Hastert Rule" that basically said that a bill will come to the floor only if it has support of a majority of the majority party. Thus, any attempts to bring a so-called "Clean" budget resolution up for a vote are being blocked because it is quite possible that a majority of the majority party would not support it.
Steve didn't work 80 hours per week and took his kids to soccer practice. The engineers, on the other hand, certainly did.
So if you want to change the world and still get the kids to soccer practice, don't be an engineer at Apple.
Flood? [...] Tornados?
Yes. and Yes.
I order beer by the yard, you insensitive clod!
Let me begin by saying I Hate You. Don't worry, it's entirely due to jealousy. If you had the roadster, I'd probably be coming after you with a knife. :^D
That said, I'm somewhat curious what happens when you have mechanical problems with your car? I'm not defending the dealer network but are there "Tesla Certified" car-repair places? It's kind of pricey to ship it back to Fremont. I'm sure there's a way to deal with it--I'm just curious what it is.
I don't agree that the ratings are pointless. As I parent, I have a responsibility to try to manage what my kids do. Ratings like this, while imperfect, are helpful for doing that. Much like the movie ratings--if my kid wants to go see an 'R' rated movie, I'll at least do a bit more research into the movie and decide whether I think it's an appropriate film for them to see.
Now here's the question: Did they find a snake with eyelids or did they find a lizard with no legs?
I gotta admit, when I read the headline, I thought the same thing: "What do you call a lizard with no legs? A snake."
Of course, I also ask, "What do you call a woman with one leg? Ilene."
Thanks, I'll be here all week. Try the veal.
See? This proves NASA is staffed with incompetent government employees! Why, if we gave it over to private industry, I'm sure they'd find water and methane! NASA is just a useless jobs program!
(The above is sarcasm, for those who are sarcasm-deficient)