Most of the time it backfires, especially if you just left the bar. Cops typically have no problem pulling you in for a blood test, the results are usually higher anyways.
Drunk driving is a very serious problem, considering how loose the laws are at present, I don't think you have anything to worry about in the next several decades. 0% is a bit ridiculous, but the limit as it is now, is way to lenient in my view.
Isn't worth it at present. The problem is that in most cases they get a slap on the wrist and their car keys back within 6 months.
Personally, I'd like them to get the keys back in 3 months, but make them use an interlock device for at least 2 years. It's way too common for somebody to be busted for drunk driving only to be busted again a few months down the road. And even then the penalties around here don't increase much.
I fully expect to see them successfully sue over the violation of their rights. In many states refusing to take the breathalyzer when ordered to is illegal and brings sanctions whether or not your drunk. I suspect what's going on here is that they're speeding up the process.
They probably typically put the person under arrest take them back to the station and pull the blood there. This probably just speeds up the process by not requiring them to be taken in prior to the blood test.
I'm not sure if that's constitutional or if I'm misunderstanding it, but that's what it sounds like.
It's more of a spot check on nights like New Years day when they know that a lot of people are going to be driving drunk. I don't think that they force everybody to take the breathalyzer test without probable cause, but the main purpose is to cause people that are likely to drive drunk to think again.
What you're suggesting sounds questionable, sort of like speed traps.
This is perhaps a dumb question, but does Youtube even have a presence in Italy beyond the ability of people to access the videos? I mean without any sort of presence in Italy, it's a tad hard to raid the offices or compelling Google to do anything about Youtube.
The brokenness was that for a small network it doesn't take much to keep it running, but with a huge network it costs a lot of money. You pay your ISP for access, but somebody on the other end has to pay to provide the other bit of service. For P2P type things that other party is paying their ISP, but for services like slashdot, somebody has to cover the bandwidth and various other costs.
Yes, that was the period shortly before the Holocaust started. People were required to wear patches if they were from a group that the Nazis disliked. Jews would have to wear that yellow Star of David patch, Gays and Lesbians would have to wear a pink triangle and so on. I'd be surprised if there weren't some sort of list to go along with that.
He is right. I know several people that get hassled every single time they fly, because they happen to have a name that's similar to one that's been listed. One of them has a name which is extremely common in Ireland. There aren't any other details included, no way of determining if it's a coincidence or if they've been listed and no way of getting a slip of paper to show to the TSA that you're not that individual.
For an extra 0.0001% secure that's simply not worth it. It might be worth it for an extra 80% or possibly 50%, but fro 0.0001%, it's definitely not worth it.
He's technically correct flying isn't an essential liberty. However, being able to move freely about the country without being forced to undergo invasive searches of ones person and belongings is. There's a reason why the constitution requires a warrant issued upon probable cause in order to conduct searches like that.
It wouldn't and really shouldn't. CDNs are there to ensure that the least amount of infrastructure is used for each request. Meaning that they try to put the server as close to your physical location as possible. If anything, net neutrality would encourage this as it would be easier to have a CDN covering both Qwest and Comcast in a given region or whatever the options are in your area.
That's true. However they do require you to install quicktime in order to get the codecs, unless I'm missing something. And for whatever reason Apple insists on not using any native widgets. Which means that not only are you installing crapware, but it also looks ugly on top of that.
No, a news organization can't have a view point and still be a news organization. Well, not quite, a news organization can't set out to have one and still be a news organization.
I realize that in modern times with Murdoch's influence people no longer believe that, but the fact is that news organizations generally have a view point only by accident. Any reputable journal of opinion is striving to not have one which is based upon anything other than the facts. Sure it's inevitable that they won't be perfect, but organizations like Fox which aren't even trying make a mockery of journalism.
Could be, or more likely it comes in terms of the difficulty of insuring that bugs on one system don't lead to problems playing with each other. Bugs can be a serious problem which lead to people having an unfair advantage. Plus, there's a tendency to tweak the ports to play well on a given system. Trying to test cross platform ends up being tough at times.
More likely what it means is that console players don't know how to play real FPS games. The controllers just don't support any game made from Quake or so on. I remember prior to Quake pretty much everybody played with keyboard only, then quake came out and people started to use keyboard and mouse other wise they were going to get crushed by the competition.
Comparatively speaking the controllers that these games are designed for on consoles fit midway between keyboard and keyboard/mouse combo. They require special tweaks and assistance to work which aren't necessary on PC.
Doesn't mean that console FPS can't or aren't fun, but it does mean that they're the equivalent of arcade race games to the PC's race simulators.
Film is great, I personally have a soft spot for Fujifilm, but I absolutely hate it in terms of having to guess at how the developer is going to handle it and what exactly I'm going to end up with. Sure it depends a lot on technique and the developers tend to do it a fixed way, but it's a challenge to find a place which will actually make any promises about how they turn out.
Plus, I'm not personally thrilled with having to hand over that portion of the process to somebody else to handle. And I haven't got the money to develop my own color film.
Right, and the other problem is that since Kodak discontinued the film a while back and film has a finite shelflife he'd run out of people with film to develop in the near future.
That's only because they can't buy those films through more reasonable means. Buying anything off eBay is a somewhat risky proposition even when dealing with honest sellers.
Color film is great, but for most purposes digital at this point can meet or beat it for most uses. That being said, I have a soft spot for Fuji films. Reala and IIRC provia. Fuji does a really good job with films and technologies for portrait photography. Even now, if you want to take portraits, Fuji should be near the top of your list for equipment because their sensors tend to give much more realism to flesh tones.
Quite possibly. That was quite a while back and I wasn't particularly versed with the system. I seem to recall most 8 tracks being plagued by problems with the player eating the tapes. Something which didn't happen a lot with cassettes.
8 tracks are still around. The father of an acquaintance of mine has a very small recording studio that uses them. It's less a studio and more a recording booth, but he's still using 8 tracks, or at least I assume he is, that was a decade or so ago that I saw it. But if he'd held out that long, I'd be surprised if he wasn't still using it.
We used to have that here in WA state, but the parties got that thrown out as being unconstitutional. Several years later, we finally got to use our new system. It's a top two where the top two can be of any combination of party that ran in the primary. It's a good system and tends to give the opposing party a say that they wouldn't normally have. And we have yet to elect the more extreme of the two candidates in any district since we changed primary systems.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of the time it backfires, especially if you just left the bar. Cops typically have no problem pulling you in for a blood test, the results are usually higher anyways.
Drunk driving is a very serious problem, considering how loose the laws are at present, I don't think you have anything to worry about in the next several decades. 0% is a bit ridiculous, but the limit as it is now, is way to lenient in my view.
Isn't worth it at present. The problem is that in most cases they get a slap on the wrist and their car keys back within 6 months.
Personally, I'd like them to get the keys back in 3 months, but make them use an interlock device for at least 2 years. It's way too common for somebody to be busted for drunk driving only to be busted again a few months down the road. And even then the penalties around here don't increase much.
I fully expect to see them successfully sue over the violation of their rights. In many states refusing to take the breathalyzer when ordered to is illegal and brings sanctions whether or not your drunk. I suspect what's going on here is that they're speeding up the process.
They probably typically put the person under arrest take them back to the station and pull the blood there. This probably just speeds up the process by not requiring them to be taken in prior to the blood test.
I'm not sure if that's constitutional or if I'm misunderstanding it, but that's what it sounds like.
It's more of a spot check on nights like New Years day when they know that a lot of people are going to be driving drunk. I don't think that they force everybody to take the breathalyzer test without probable cause, but the main purpose is to cause people that are likely to drive drunk to think again.
What you're suggesting sounds questionable, sort of like speed traps.
This is perhaps a dumb question, but does Youtube even have a presence in Italy beyond the ability of people to access the videos? I mean without any sort of presence in Italy, it's a tad hard to raid the offices or compelling Google to do anything about Youtube.
It's Italy, so the appropriate term is "Berlusconi's bitches."
The brokenness was that for a small network it doesn't take much to keep it running, but with a huge network it costs a lot of money. You pay your ISP for access, but somebody on the other end has to pay to provide the other bit of service. For P2P type things that other party is paying their ISP, but for services like slashdot, somebody has to cover the bandwidth and various other costs.
I don't think that applies to patents. Which is a shame because it would make patent trolling a lot less lucrative.
Yes, that was the period shortly before the Holocaust started. People were required to wear patches if they were from a group that the Nazis disliked. Jews would have to wear that yellow Star of David patch, Gays and Lesbians would have to wear a pink triangle and so on. I'd be surprised if there weren't some sort of list to go along with that.
He is right. I know several people that get hassled every single time they fly, because they happen to have a name that's similar to one that's been listed. One of them has a name which is extremely common in Ireland. There aren't any other details included, no way of determining if it's a coincidence or if they've been listed and no way of getting a slip of paper to show to the TSA that you're not that individual.
For an extra 0.0001% secure that's simply not worth it. It might be worth it for an extra 80% or possibly 50%, but fro 0.0001%, it's definitely not worth it.
He's technically correct flying isn't an essential liberty. However, being able to move freely about the country without being forced to undergo invasive searches of ones person and belongings is. There's a reason why the constitution requires a warrant issued upon probable cause in order to conduct searches like that.
As for that "friend" he was doing you a favor.
Strictly speaking, isn't that only Senators and only if they're on their way to the Senate?
It wouldn't and really shouldn't. CDNs are there to ensure that the least amount of infrastructure is used for each request. Meaning that they try to put the server as close to your physical location as possible. If anything, net neutrality would encourage this as it would be easier to have a CDN covering both Qwest and Comcast in a given region or whatever the options are in your area.
That's true. However they do require you to install quicktime in order to get the codecs, unless I'm missing something. And for whatever reason Apple insists on not using any native widgets. Which means that not only are you installing crapware, but it also looks ugly on top of that.
No, a news organization can't have a view point and still be a news organization. Well, not quite, a news organization can't set out to have one and still be a news organization.
I realize that in modern times with Murdoch's influence people no longer believe that, but the fact is that news organizations generally have a view point only by accident. Any reputable journal of opinion is striving to not have one which is based upon anything other than the facts. Sure it's inevitable that they won't be perfect, but organizations like Fox which aren't even trying make a mockery of journalism.
No, because the people that watch Fox news think that every other news network is part of some secret hidden political agenda and therefor it's real.
Could be, or more likely it comes in terms of the difficulty of insuring that bugs on one system don't lead to problems playing with each other. Bugs can be a serious problem which lead to people having an unfair advantage. Plus, there's a tendency to tweak the ports to play well on a given system. Trying to test cross platform ends up being tough at times.
More likely what it means is that console players don't know how to play real FPS games. The controllers just don't support any game made from Quake or so on. I remember prior to Quake pretty much everybody played with keyboard only, then quake came out and people started to use keyboard and mouse other wise they were going to get crushed by the competition.
Comparatively speaking the controllers that these games are designed for on consoles fit midway between keyboard and keyboard/mouse combo. They require special tweaks and assistance to work which aren't necessary on PC.
Doesn't mean that console FPS can't or aren't fun, but it does mean that they're the equivalent of arcade race games to the PC's race simulators.
Film is great, I personally have a soft spot for Fujifilm, but I absolutely hate it in terms of having to guess at how the developer is going to handle it and what exactly I'm going to end up with. Sure it depends a lot on technique and the developers tend to do it a fixed way, but it's a challenge to find a place which will actually make any promises about how they turn out.
Plus, I'm not personally thrilled with having to hand over that portion of the process to somebody else to handle. And I haven't got the money to develop my own color film.
Right, and the other problem is that since Kodak discontinued the film a while back and film has a finite shelflife he'd run out of people with film to develop in the near future.
That's only because they can't buy those films through more reasonable means. Buying anything off eBay is a somewhat risky proposition even when dealing with honest sellers.
Color film is great, but for most purposes digital at this point can meet or beat it for most uses. That being said, I have a soft spot for Fuji films. Reala and IIRC provia. Fuji does a really good job with films and technologies for portrait photography. Even now, if you want to take portraits, Fuji should be near the top of your list for equipment because their sensors tend to give much more realism to flesh tones.
Quite possibly. That was quite a while back and I wasn't particularly versed with the system. I seem to recall most 8 tracks being plagued by problems with the player eating the tapes. Something which didn't happen a lot with cassettes.
8 tracks are still around. The father of an acquaintance of mine has a very small recording studio that uses them. It's less a studio and more a recording booth, but he's still using 8 tracks, or at least I assume he is, that was a decade or so ago that I saw it. But if he'd held out that long, I'd be surprised if he wasn't still using it.
We used to have that here in WA state, but the parties got that thrown out as being unconstitutional. Several years later, we finally got to use our new system. It's a top two where the top two can be of any combination of party that ran in the primary. It's a good system and tends to give the opposing party a say that they wouldn't normally have. And we have yet to elect the more extreme of the two candidates in any district since we changed primary systems.