For people driving too close, I suggest a few 1" steel ball bearings in your pocket. When bounced off the ground next to you, they should hit the windshield of anyone driving too closely behind and let them know of their error.
I hear this a lot. Which is quite the rational response.
Standard terminology for people in steel cages on the road. You've not heard it before?
Oh we've heard it. We've heard it every damned time some motorcyclist likes to bring up the fact that they ride a motorcycle. We get it. You are free, like a bird... one that isn't in a cage, unlike you, who are not free like a bird that isn't in a cage as you are unfree like a bird in a cage because you are in a car. It has a frame, and that frame is a cage. A cage of your soul.
It's ridiculous. Expecially on Slashdot as I imagine some 300 lb neckbeard riding a 150CC kawasaki and raging about all the 'cagers' threatening his life.
no, you can't hold the phone in one hand talk to someone on it and drive at 80mph. you just can't ok,
You must have a very interesting definition of "can't". I can vouch that you most certainly CAN drive at 80mph while speaking on a cell phone. Most people DO have that physical capability.
The problem is, if something is not notable in the USA, then it is not notable for Wikipedia at all.
There is an article on my last name. 0.0001% of the population of the USA shares my last name, which is Aramaic. Hell, most people trip over the spelling/speaking of it since two of the letters in it are never seen in that order in any English word. (Even though it's only 6 letters long, it really trips up people due to that reversal)
But again, it's certainly not of ANY real relevance to the US, other than the few of us who live here. All wikipedia references to it are of foreign sites/people.
Good luck here, in AZ where I live, it has been at least 2 years since I saw a police officer driving without a cellphone to the ear. I would like them to pass a law against just to see how the officers react.
The officers will react in the same way that they react to all other restrictions which are placed on the 'civilians'. They will claim to have special training which makes them perfect examples of whatever activity is prohibited to civilians. This training, which probably consists of less than 2 days per year (if it is even repeated) is enough to ensure that they are perfectly safe and justified in the action while any 'civilian' who tries a similar act is risking the life of hundreds of thousands of people and should be subjected to such extreme punishments so as to never even consider attempting the same maneuver.
They don't have to follow that law, because their training makes them better than you.
We have it in Spain as well, where I am a foreigner. Pretty much anything you do here requires your national ID card, and (being British) I don't have one. I use my passport for some things and my driving licence for others, and have yet to have any problems. Doesn't mean I like it - I accept that it's a cultural difference - but I wonder whether it would really be a nuisance to foreigners in Germany.
I just find it funny that the first two examples of countries who require registration and 'papers' to communicate are two countries who had fascist governments in the not so distant past.
Actually, when you think about it, it isn't that funny at all.
Only matter if the branches have an interest in checking each other. As they are fully in 'scratch each other's back mode' I don't think the checks matter much.
The type of person who will speed up to 105 MPH and not notice a trooper behind him for 10 minutes seems to me the kind of person who would also get distracted by shiny flashy traffic signals.
I have to say, I've never understood this argument. I would regard the loss of my freedom as being as bad as the loss of my life. Are you really going to tell me that the state can repay someone who spent 30 years behind bars for a crime they didn't commit?
They will have a hell of a better chance doing that if you aren't a corpse.
And what do you mean you don't understand it? If it's that horrible for you just go punch the ms13 leader if you can't bear it. Frankly I'm one of the people who would rather fight for thirty years than go with such a nihilistic attitude. Better off dead? Spare us the melodrama.
I honestly think this system is good for consumers in the end because it should decrease the cost of used games.
It is horrible for consumers because it is decreasing the cost of used games by removing value from those items. So right now you have $55 used games for $60 new games and a rebuy of the DLC at $15.
-Used Store adapts and lowers the price to $40. This allows the person to still enjoy a discount. -Publisher responds by increasing the cost of the DLC to $20. -Used store adapts and reduces the price to $30. -Publisher says "You aren't getting the point" Sets 90% of the game to be DLC and raises the price to $70.
Used store goes out of business.
The used market doesn't exist anymore. The only thing people could sell at that point would be the entire damned 'Xbox Live' profiles. And that would probably get you cut off by the publisher in a week.
No, it's not the same at all. The StarCraft second-hand purchaser is only denied his online play if the seller commits fraud. The XBox 360 second-hand purchaser cannot, under any circumstances, get online play without paying the game publisher a second time for the same thing. Those are two completely different situations.
I wish I had mod points because you hit it right on the head here.
The DLC that this kid didn't get is completely unessential.
Until it is. And in fact, it pretty much IS.
You can argue that certain parts of the game are not essential, but that wouldn't make any sense. Terms like essential simply do not fit with video games. Nothing is essential in video games. You could make the color red a DLC item and still not call it essential. The terminology just doesn't work when applied to video games.
Right now I have a copy of ME2 that has features built into it which I cannot access. What if those features were the last 2 levels? In this case, I think that it's characters I don't have access to.
A family on $100,000/yr pays a $1500/yr levy on their tax and is gaurenteed never to pay more than $1200/yr for medicine, I hear it costs almost 10X as much to fully insure a family in the US.
Probably $500-$1000 a month doesn't seem out of line for the US for an entire family if paid completely by the family and not part of a larger group. (I'm paying as a single payer for my sister and she gets fair coverage for $80/month with a moderately high deductible)
Your family would pay at most 2700, ten times that is $27,000 and that is FAR more than most families would pay in insurance in the US. When I was with Lockheed, I think the total paid by me and my company was somwhere between $2-4k per family. (I only paid about $1000 iirc.)
Having driven on a road more than once, I know that there is a certain hill/turn where traffic backs up. I can anticipate the backup, and adjust my speed early. (The backup happens on the other side of the hill). It is impractical, if not impossible, to build that type of cognition into a vehicle's AI.
I despise this website, but I COMPLETELY agree with this proposed amendment:
"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators or Representatives, and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."
They would claim they apply equally, you just choose to subject yourselves to the more invasive treatment by choosing to fly Commercial instead of picking a private charter.
Actually, surgery on yourself with a local anaesthetic is very much possible for a lot of parts of the body. It's a lot easier for things to go badly wrong than if you're doing it on someone else though, which is why it's not done very often. Possible and sensible are two very different things.
I was out and about once, and ended up with a chipped/partially shattered bone in my foot. It started to show signs of infection so I removed the bone chip and cleaned it up the best I could. Taking care to keep everything clean and the wound area sterilized and dressed regularly. The swelling and inflamation went down over the next two days and I was able to get out and have it treated by a regular doctor (with actual antibiotics). If it wasn't already getting infected, I probably would have left it alone, but it was becoming too painful to walk on and I wanted to give it a shot before it got too far and I couldn't walk.
Infection was the scariest part for me. I knew I could remove the bone fragments, but I wasn't sure how bad it would get infected if I couldn't get access to real antibiotics. I got lucky and the infection was minor and was going down when I got back, but I could certainly see it getting worse. There was just no walking on my foot until the shards came out though.
Slashdot Mirror
For people driving too close, I suggest a few 1" steel ball bearings in your pocket. When bounced off the ground next to you, they should hit the windshield of anyone driving too closely behind and let them know of their error.
I hear this a lot. Which is quite the rational response.
Standard terminology for people in steel cages on the road. You've not heard it before?
Oh we've heard it. We've heard it every damned time some motorcyclist likes to bring up the fact that they ride a motorcycle. We get it. You are free, like a bird... one that isn't in a cage, unlike you, who are not free like a bird that isn't in a cage as you are unfree like a bird in a cage because you are in a car. It has a frame, and that frame is a cage. A cage of your soul.
It's ridiculous. Expecially on Slashdot as I imagine some 300 lb neckbeard riding a 150CC kawasaki and raging about all the 'cagers' threatening his life.
no, you can't hold the phone in one hand talk to someone on it and drive at 80mph. you just can't ok,
You must have a very interesting definition of "can't". I can vouch that you most certainly CAN drive at 80mph while speaking on a cell phone. Most people DO have that physical capability.
My company decide to listen to me...
I can imagine that you would be disappoint if they did not.
The problem is, if something is not notable in the USA, then it is not notable for Wikipedia at all.
There is an article on my last name. 0.0001% of the population of the USA shares my last name, which is Aramaic. Hell, most people trip over the spelling/speaking of it since two of the letters in it are never seen in that order in any English word. (Even though it's only 6 letters long, it really trips up people due to that reversal)
But again, it's certainly not of ANY real relevance to the US, other than the few of us who live here. All wikipedia references to it are of foreign sites/people.
I'd love to RTFA, but the site is down.
It's their stress test of their nearly silent datacenter. Right now it is surpassing their estimates and running totally silent.
Good luck here, in AZ where I live, it has been at least 2 years since I saw a police officer driving without a cellphone to the ear. I would like them to pass a law against just to see how the officers react.
The officers will react in the same way that they react to all other restrictions which are placed on the 'civilians'. They will claim to have special training which makes them perfect examples of whatever activity is prohibited to civilians. This training, which probably consists of less than 2 days per year (if it is even repeated) is enough to ensure that they are perfectly safe and justified in the action while any 'civilian' who tries a similar act is risking the life of hundreds of thousands of people and should be subjected to such extreme punishments so as to never even consider attempting the same maneuver.
They don't have to follow that law, because their training makes them better than you.
We have it in Spain as well, where I am a foreigner. Pretty much anything you do here requires your national ID card, and (being British) I don't have one. I use my passport for some things and my driving licence for others, and have yet to have any problems. Doesn't mean I like it - I accept that it's a cultural difference - but I wonder whether it would really be a nuisance to foreigners in Germany.
I just find it funny that the first two examples of countries who require registration and 'papers' to communicate are two countries who had fascist governments in the not so distant past.
Actually, when you think about it, it isn't that funny at all.
balances AND checks.
Only matter if the branches have an interest in checking each other. As they are fully in 'scratch each other's back mode' I don't think the checks matter much.
Distraction?
The type of person who will speed up to 105 MPH and not notice a trooper behind him for 10 minutes seems to me the kind of person who would also get distracted by shiny flashy traffic signals.
Do us a favor and take a bus next time.
Helicopters are a bit more like airplanes than most people think. Hovering is expensive in terms of fuel use and it is less stable of a platform.
Helicopters can move 'forward' longer than they can hover. (short rough, wine-addled answer)
I have to say, I've never understood this argument. I would regard the loss of my freedom as being as bad as the loss of my life. Are you really going to tell me that the state can repay someone who spent 30 years behind bars for a crime they didn't commit?
They will have a hell of a better chance doing that if you aren't a corpse.
And what do you mean you don't understand it? If it's that horrible for you just go punch the ms13 leader if you can't bear it. Frankly I'm one of the people who would rather fight for thirty years than go with such a nihilistic attitude. Better off dead? Spare us the melodrama.
I honestly think this system is good for consumers in the end because it should decrease the cost of used games.
It is horrible for consumers because it is decreasing the cost of used games by removing value from those items. So right now you have $55 used games for $60 new games and a rebuy of the DLC at $15.
-Used Store adapts and lowers the price to $40. This allows the person to still enjoy a discount.
-Publisher responds by increasing the cost of the DLC to $20.
-Used store adapts and reduces the price to $30.
-Publisher says "You aren't getting the point" Sets 90% of the game to be DLC and raises the price to $70.
Used store goes out of business.
The used market doesn't exist anymore. The only thing people could sell at that point would be the entire damned 'Xbox Live' profiles. And that would probably get you cut off by the publisher in a week.
No, it's not the same at all. The StarCraft second-hand purchaser is only denied his online play if the seller commits fraud. The XBox 360 second-hand purchaser cannot, under any circumstances, get online play without paying the game publisher a second time for the same thing. Those are two completely different situations.
I wish I had mod points because you hit it right on the head here.
It's not like they're charging money for the game to be playable or completable.
How much of the game are they allowed to remove?
The DLC that this kid didn't get is completely unessential.
Until it is. And in fact, it pretty much IS.
You can argue that certain parts of the game are not essential, but that wouldn't make any sense. Terms like essential simply do not fit with video games. Nothing is essential in video games. You could make the color red a DLC item and still not call it essential. The terminology just doesn't work when applied to video games.
Right now I have a copy of ME2 that has features built into it which I cannot access. What if those features were the last 2 levels? In this case, I think that it's characters I don't have access to.
It's not the same product, and it bothers me.
Ah, but they're dead-set on destroying console gaming with the same sorts of crap.
So, I'm not sure what they think they're accomplishing here.
You are going to have to explain that one. Console gaming is alive and well, and does not seem to be slowing down at all.
A family on $100,000/yr pays a $1500/yr levy on their tax and is gaurenteed never to pay more than $1200/yr for medicine, I hear it costs almost 10X as much to fully insure a family in the US.
Probably $500-$1000 a month doesn't seem out of line for the US for an entire family if paid completely by the family and not part of a larger group. (I'm paying as a single payer for my sister and she gets fair coverage for $80/month with a moderately high deductible)
Your family would pay at most 2700, ten times that is $27,000 and that is FAR more than most families would pay in insurance in the US. When I was with Lockheed, I think the total paid by me and my company was somwhere between $2-4k per family. (I only paid about $1000 iirc.)
Consider this example:
Having driven on a road more than once, I know that there is a certain hill/turn where traffic backs up. I can anticipate the backup, and adjust my speed early. (The backup happens on the other side of the hill). It is impractical, if not impossible, to build that type of cognition into a vehicle's AI.
Fight the power and rage against the machine, Internet Tough Guy.
You have a problem with being consistent in your ideals?
When that 1% is what enables you to make the other 99%, it's not as big a deal. As others have noted, Photoshop is primarily a professional tool.
Sorry I wasn't clear, I was referring to non-professionals. For a professional, $700 for such a robust tool is not too great of an expense.
For us, we can analyze everything. It would require not only seeing the person, but reading their body language to determine what they *might* do
A simple way to describe it:
Humans have billions of years of evolution behind their ability to determine the motives and behaviors of others.
Computers have had less than 100.
I despise this website, but I COMPLETELY agree with this proposed amendment:
"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators or Representatives, and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."
http://arkansasgopwing.blogspot.com/2009/11/amendment-28-proposed-by-citizens-of.html
That's pointless.
They would claim they apply equally, you just choose to subject yourselves to the more invasive treatment by choosing to fly Commercial instead of picking a private charter.
Chalk me up for another person who just listed:
3 Americans live here.
Actually, surgery on yourself with a local anaesthetic is very much possible for a lot of parts of the body. It's a lot easier for things to go badly wrong than if you're doing it on someone else though, which is why it's not done very often. Possible and sensible are two very different things.
I was out and about once, and ended up with a chipped/partially shattered bone in my foot. It started to show signs of infection so I removed the bone chip and cleaned it up the best I could. Taking care to keep everything clean and the wound area sterilized and dressed regularly. The swelling and inflamation went down over the next two days and I was able to get out and have it treated by a regular doctor (with actual antibiotics). If it wasn't already getting infected, I probably would have left it alone, but it was becoming too painful to walk on and I wanted to give it a shot before it got too far and I couldn't walk.
Infection was the scariest part for me. I knew I could remove the bone fragments, but I wasn't sure how bad it would get infected if I couldn't get access to real antibiotics. I got lucky and the infection was minor and was going down when I got back, but I could certainly see it getting worse. There was just no walking on my foot until the shards came out though.