Applications cost money; $75 in their case. Since admission is obnoxiously competitive, and the tuition incomprehensibly large, what would be the motivation?
At least you get Pandora, TripAdvisor, etc.. Us Infiniti owners just got a broken promise with our Q50s. The jack wipe managing the Airbiquity Choreo integration (branded InTouch) never bothered to turn on anything other than Facialbook and Google Search. I guess they prefer drivers to fumble with the phones they're streaming from via bluetooth instead.
What's dumb is that my 2015 Infiniti Q50 was dependent upon their 2G service for connectivity to the mothership. It was contractually known by Nissan that the 2G telematics control unit they selected for their brand new Q50 model (2014 first release) was dependent upon a service that'd go dark in 3 years. It wasn't until the 2016 model year that they switched to something newer, even then some of their other 2016 models were being churned out with the 2G TCU for a portion of 2016. Additionally, that 2G service made the connectivity features, e.g. online search, speech recognition, etc. so painfully slow to use as to be worthless. Continuing that tradition of stupid it seems the replacement TCU (which they make you pay for) only supports 3G.
The CDC suggests to help close the gap, health care providers in rural areas can: Screen patients for high blood pressure; Increase cancer prevention and early detection; Encourage physical activity and healthy eating; Promote smoking cessation; Promote motor vehicle safety; Engage in safer prescribing of opioids for pain.
I assume this is a joke. It can't be anything else.
Even if they can afford to go to a health care provider. Even if they did regularly visit a provider for health screening. I would pretty much expect their doc isn't telling them to chain smoke and binge on Twinkies and beer. So even satisfying the really big IFs, these folk are still quite unlikely to listen to their doctor telling them their lifestyle isn't advantageous any more than they will listen to us p**sy liberal socialists from the urban centers of the country telling them their lifestyle/worldview isn't particularly advantageous.
Regardless of the technology behind it and their inherent limitations/problems. The content pushed though them is generally just a bunch of 3-dimensional pies thrown in your face. It doesn't provide value, it isn't employed to immerse you, it's just an add-on gimmick to grab a 3D tax from the audience. I suspect that to do it right would exclude the standard 2D version. I doubt anyone was willing to dare try that.
I would very much like to see solar deploy, wind, tidal, geothermal, etc. researched and deployed with budgets that resemble DoD purses. Energy is a very large control lever affecting many aspects of our existence. It drives wars, it drives the climate, it drives the standard of living, etc..
Making a road out of panels however, makes about as much sense to me as deploying panels on the interior walls of buildings to reclaim otherwise lost energy. It certainly might accomplish a task but the laws of physics demands it be grossly inefficient. This mandated inefficiency unambiguously places it at the back of the line for cost effectiveness.
I can understand pork, but what makes "this" kind of pork more popular than any other alternative placement of solar? It's as if they are purposefully creating a boondoggle such that they can later point back to it as demonstrative proof that solar is a waste of money. Wait. Oh...
Can someone tell us what the benefit of these solar "roadways" is that isn't apparent and justifies the absurd expenditure vs. installation on roofs and open fields? I am truly at a loss to explain why this technology continues to be ramrodded into deployment.
A sizable chunk of resources are consumed protected users from themselves. If we could trust users to not be morons we could create much thinner applications that run on systems not burdened by other components likewise trying to protect the user from themselves.
First, I'd recommend getting a better spec'd computer as the issue will not be going away. Second, the reason for things such as the creation of new tabs taking a significant amount of time to be initialized is due to how browsers are now "sandboxing" them in their own operating environment for security concerns. In many respects you are in effect cold starting a new instance of the web browser for each tab complete with it's own virtual environment. That's not cheap.
If you live in a developed nation and despite opportunity to do otherwise your ambition in life is no greater than to be a surrogate robot producing and/or shuffling commodities why should we care? I would much rather use my money be used to pull people otherwise able and willing up out of their desperate situations. Kind of like those coffee plantation workers living in impoverished nations.
If you want to run a small shop as a hobby--perhaps for your retirement--then go for it. But don't expect people for the sake of a nostalgic era long past to prefer inefficient distribution of commodities to modern alternatives able to offer superior choice and price for everyday needs. Mom and pop shops are a recreational activity for the consumer and should be operated in kind by their owners.
It's funny you should bring that up. I've always been amazed at how the economy and the state of the union in general immediately aligns with the ideology and policies of the presiding president. One would naturally suspect that the former term president's influence would carry on for a bit but its striking how wrong people consistently tell me I am.
Have you performed a calculation and comparison of what kind of income would be required to live at the standards of the 50's and 60's in the modern age? Until you normalize standards of living you really cannot perform an honest comparison. Hint: the bourgeoisie of the 50's and 60's would more closely fall in alongside those in many of the modern developing nations.
I know it's true that you do, but I still find it hard to grasp that people like you exist. You'll believe and repeat everything you hear from your favorite talking heads with no regard for how much it defies logic. How is an interest bearing loan repaid in full a taxpayer handout while a tax break which is to say, they get to put fewer dollars into the government coffers, not a handout?
Why people like to compare past households with present day households to suggest the economy was better in the 50's, 60's is incomprehensible. They're apples and oranges. The economy was not better, the standard of living was lower. At no time in the history of the United States has there been a time when the average citizen has been as materially wealthy as they are now. We don't build 1000sq. ft. mid-century modest homes, we build 2000+ sq. ft. McMansions. We don't drive those unreliable, antiquated tanks on wheels, nor is there just one per family. Today the average passenger car would be seen as fit for the 1/10th of the 1% back then. Today the average person owns vastly more cloths and of that those of materials that would have been exclusive to the elite. Imagine sitting down in the evening to a 15" manual-tune grayscale VHF tube TV the size of a significant chest of drawers today. People back then couldn't even comprehend the existence of the personal electronics the average person owns today let alone possessing them themselves. The quality and kinds of food readily available and affordable today would be seen as scandalously extravagant. The service industry of which everyone presently avails themselves was bit a tiny mote of what it is today. These comparisons can be made for nearly all facets of life with great similarity of result.
To suggest that people would be better off with the economy of the 50's and 60's is preposterous. If we lived now as we did then, then Walmart would absolutely be the employer of bourgeoisie.
Limited by governing software like nearly all production street cars. What's actually possible absent the governor is quite likely much more. What would be more interesting is comparing how long they can respectively sustain these speeds.
Slashdot Mirror
Applications cost money; $75 in their case. Since admission is obnoxiously competitive, and the tuition incomprehensibly large, what would be the motivation?
People fiddle-fsucking with their cell-phones, hamburgers, and makeup are a far larger problem.
At least you get Pandora, TripAdvisor, etc.. Us Infiniti owners just got a broken promise with our Q50s. The jack wipe managing the Airbiquity Choreo integration (branded InTouch) never bothered to turn on anything other than Facialbook and Google Search. I guess they prefer drivers to fumble with the phones they're streaming from via bluetooth instead.
What's dumb is that my 2015 Infiniti Q50 was dependent upon their 2G service for connectivity to the mothership. It was contractually known by Nissan that the 2G telematics control unit they selected for their brand new Q50 model (2014 first release) was dependent upon a service that'd go dark in 3 years. It wasn't until the 2016 model year that they switched to something newer, even then some of their other 2016 models were being churned out with the 2G TCU for a portion of 2016. Additionally, that 2G service made the connectivity features, e.g. online search, speech recognition, etc. so painfully slow to use as to be worthless. Continuing that tradition of stupid it seems the replacement TCU (which they make you pay for) only supports 3G.
Not going to a doc for annuals is a lifestyle choice.
The CDC suggests to help close the gap, health care providers in rural areas can: Screen patients for high blood pressure; Increase cancer prevention and early detection; Encourage physical activity and healthy eating; Promote smoking cessation; Promote motor vehicle safety; Engage in safer prescribing of opioids for pain.
I assume this is a joke. It can't be anything else.
Even if they can afford to go to a health care provider. Even if they did regularly visit a provider for health screening. I would pretty much expect their doc isn't telling them to chain smoke and binge on Twinkies and beer. So even satisfying the really big IFs, these folk are still quite unlikely to listen to their doctor telling them their lifestyle isn't advantageous any more than they will listen to us p**sy liberal socialists from the urban centers of the country telling them their lifestyle/worldview isn't particularly advantageous.
...nonmetropolitan areas might have characteristics that make deaths harder to prevent, such as long travel distances...".
I believe that falls under the "less access to healthcare" bit.
Regardless of the technology behind it and their inherent limitations/problems. The content pushed though them is generally just a bunch of 3-dimensional pies thrown in your face. It doesn't provide value, it isn't employed to immerse you, it's just an add-on gimmick to grab a 3D tax from the audience. I suspect that to do it right would exclude the standard 2D version. I doubt anyone was willing to dare try that.
I would very much like to see solar deploy, wind, tidal, geothermal, etc. researched and deployed with budgets that resemble DoD purses. Energy is a very large control lever affecting many aspects of our existence. It drives wars, it drives the climate, it drives the standard of living, etc..
Making a road out of panels however, makes about as much sense to me as deploying panels on the interior walls of buildings to reclaim otherwise lost energy. It certainly might accomplish a task but the laws of physics demands it be grossly inefficient. This mandated inefficiency unambiguously places it at the back of the line for cost effectiveness.
I can understand pork, but what makes "this" kind of pork more popular than any other alternative placement of solar? It's as if they are purposefully creating a boondoggle such that they can later point back to it as demonstrative proof that solar is a waste of money. Wait. Oh...
Can someone tell us what the benefit of these solar "roadways" is that isn't apparent and justifies the absurd expenditure vs. installation on roofs and open fields? I am truly at a loss to explain why this technology continues to be ramrodded into deployment.
A sizable chunk of resources are consumed protected users from themselves. If we could trust users to not be morons we could create much thinner applications that run on systems not burdened by other components likewise trying to protect the user from themselves.
First, I'd recommend getting a better spec'd computer as the issue will not be going away. Second, the reason for things such as the creation of new tabs taking a significant amount of time to be initialized is due to how browsers are now "sandboxing" them in their own operating environment for security concerns. In many respects you are in effect cold starting a new instance of the web browser for each tab complete with it's own virtual environment. That's not cheap.
White males hate a powerful women. Hillary just happens to fit that description. Obama was their "this far and no further."
I really have it bad for BBFW and I need to throw some shade before my wife figures it out
If you live in a developed nation and despite opportunity to do otherwise your ambition in life is no greater than to be a surrogate robot producing and/or shuffling commodities why should we care? I would much rather use my money be used to pull people otherwise able and willing up out of their desperate situations. Kind of like those coffee plantation workers living in impoverished nations.
If you want to run a small shop as a hobby--perhaps for your retirement--then go for it. But don't expect people for the sake of a nostalgic era long past to prefer inefficient distribution of commodities to modern alternatives able to offer superior choice and price for everyday needs. Mom and pop shops are a recreational activity for the consumer and should be operated in kind by their owners.
What did the average 1950's apartment look like? What kind of medical maladies could 1950's medicine treat/cure?
It's funny you should bring that up. I've always been amazed at how the economy and the state of the union in general immediately aligns with the ideology and policies of the presiding president. One would naturally suspect that the former term president's influence would carry on for a bit but its striking how wrong people consistently tell me I am.
Have you performed a calculation and comparison of what kind of income would be required to live at the standards of the 50's and 60's in the modern age? Until you normalize standards of living you really cannot perform an honest comparison. Hint: the bourgeoisie of the 50's and 60's would more closely fall in alongside those in many of the modern developing nations.
Consequences can be both negative and positive. Trump just didn't say which direction he was going with that...
I know it's true that you do, but I still find it hard to grasp that people like you exist. You'll believe and repeat everything you hear from your favorite talking heads with no regard for how much it defies logic. How is an interest bearing loan repaid in full a taxpayer handout while a tax break which is to say, they get to put fewer dollars into the government coffers, not a handout?
If only reality were as simple as your high-school macro-econ course.
Why people like to compare past households with present day households to suggest the economy was better in the 50's, 60's is incomprehensible. They're apples and oranges. The economy was not better, the standard of living was lower. At no time in the history of the United States has there been a time when the average citizen has been as materially wealthy as they are now. We don't build 1000sq. ft. mid-century modest homes, we build 2000+ sq. ft. McMansions. We don't drive those unreliable, antiquated tanks on wheels, nor is there just one per family. Today the average passenger car would be seen as fit for the 1/10th of the 1% back then. Today the average person owns vastly more cloths and of that those of materials that would have been exclusive to the elite. Imagine sitting down in the evening to a 15" manual-tune grayscale VHF tube TV the size of a significant chest of drawers today. People back then couldn't even comprehend the existence of the personal electronics the average person owns today let alone possessing them themselves. The quality and kinds of food readily available and affordable today would be seen as scandalously extravagant. The service industry of which everyone presently avails themselves was bit a tiny mote of what it is today. These comparisons can be made for nearly all facets of life with great similarity of result.
To suggest that people would be better off with the economy of the 50's and 60's is preposterous. If we lived now as we did then, then Walmart would absolutely be the employer of bourgeoisie.
Perhaps part of the point is that Tesla's S for instance pulls comparable performance specs but does so while acing government safety tests.
Limited by governing software like nearly all production street cars. What's actually possible absent the governor is quite likely much more. What would be more interesting is comparing how long they can respectively sustain these speeds.