Sadly, the powers that be disagree.
They would rather have you dead than wounded. It's the reason that there is an international ban on weapons that make you blind or deaf. Wounded soldiers are costly and make people see the real cost of war while dead soldiers are quickly forgotten.
Why not? You allow only half the vehicles on the street today and the other half tomorrow. You have halfed your traffic and brought your pollution levels down. It is quite simple to enforce by number plates. Petrol today and diesel tomorrow on the other hand is difficult to enforce, makes no sense.
What's strange though is that the article makes no mention of an alternating schedule. If it was alternating between odd and even
then this seems like a weird but reasonable solution. Just banning even number plates without alternating is very bizarre. Why not
just ban all the cars?
Oh, and #1 is laptop batteries, but that doesn't really count as they only have about a 1-2 year lifespan.
I usually have to replace the batteries at least once before reaching EOL on my laptops.
With that kind of record, it has to be something to do with your use. Still anecdotal, but I've never had anything but HDD and inverter failures in my laptops (mostly Apple) across multiple models, years, and beatings.
But if laptops failed at your rate across all users, they'd have to cost three times as much to cover warranty repairs.
I've NEVER had a harddrive failure on any system, ever. On laptops, the first thing to go seems to
always be either the keyboard, the fan, or the touchpad in that order. On non-laptops it has always
been the power supply, the motherboard, or a fan in that order. I usually replace a system at the 5-7
year mark and I've been very lucky that I've never lost a harddrive which would obviously be the
hardest to replace as I don't really take many backups.
You realize that even the creators of that episode think they were being stupid about it.
I'm pretty sure that's the definition of satire. They exagerate something stupid to make it sound stupider so people realize how stupid it is.
What if both choices are bad? I actually had that problem once.
Yeah, you're lucky. South Park did a great episode on this where the two choices to vote for were a Giant Duche or a Turd Sandwich.
I always vote but I also continue to "throw my vote away" by voting for a third party because to me voting for the "lesser of two evils"
is no choice at all when for everything I care about the republicans and democrats are virtually indistiguishable. They pretent to be
different but they are usually squabling over a few million here or there while the TRILLIONS they are spending on war, etc... are
virtually the same. They'll brag about a 100 million dollar tax cut on a 4 trillion dollar budget. For anyone who isn't paying attention,
that's the equivalent of bragging that you cut out 1 dollar of expenses from your 40k a year paycheck.
This reminds me of the movie Paycheck: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt03...
The ultimate non-compete because you don't remember what you did.
Basically, I would be in favor of specific penalties for non-compete
Great. "The penalty for violating the non-compete clause is $537 million payable in small bills."
Specific enough?
Great. "The penalty for violating the non-compete clause is $537 million payable in small bills."
Specific enough?
This is exactly why there should be a specific amount.
There is no way I would sign something like that and no sane person should either.
If it went to court, no sane judge should allow it to stand and the person should be
able to claim they signed it under duress as there is no other logical reason someone
would sign something like that.
Great. Then you don't mind if I take a hit out on your life? I mean, its just a contract, the fact its to kill someone doesn't outweigh my liberty to enter into it, does it?
Congratulations, you've just said the stupidest thing I've ever read on the internet. That includes "Where does babby come from".
A hit contract is illegal because murder is illegal and furthermore isn't a contract between two people but rather involves a third person.
A non-compete contract is more akin to a contract that says if you quit, you have to give us back your bonus or a prenumpt agreement.
Yeah, it's a crappy contract and can be really unfair if one of the parties is desperate but I'm not sure if it should be illegal.
I would be curious what the penalty is for a non-compete. If there is no penalty then I don't know how they would enforce it. If it's
that they have to give them back the prior 3 years bonuses then this should be easily enforcable and also probably should be legal.
Basically, I would be in favor of specific penalties for non-compete but not a vague "you can not work under any circumstance" clause.
And yet, strangely enough, millions of people each day arrive at their destinations unscathed. Really really bad at driving? Collisions would be daily or monthly events, instead of rare. My grandmother drove her entire life without a single incident. Even in countries where people really are bad at driving, still to be in a collision is a noteworthy event.
The reason there are not more accidents has alot to do with luck. People on average get to their
destination safely because the route and the other cars are predictable. This is the same reason
that texting while driving doesn't get you immediately killed. But given an unknown like the car
in front of you slamming on it's brakes and people are not very good at responding (even less so
if they are distracted by a phone or something else).
Perhaps because gates primary focus has been charity and philanthropy for almost as long as he was in the microcomputer game.
Why was this flagged -1? Bill Gates is president of one of the largest organizations helping to fight disease in the world.
He has as much validity as the president of Red Cross or any other large relief organization. This is why his opinion
matters. He's also uniquely positioned where he can help bankroll what is needed if necessary where most other large
relief organizations would have a much harder time changing their focus.
a deployable care center that can be flown out to $3rdWorldShitHole in less than 24 hours, and be put to use immediately when an epidemic strikes. Hell, build a bunch of them, include a big pile of needed supplies with each, then pre-position them in or near areas that are most likely to see recurring epidemics.
This is exactly what the summary is talking about. We have "high-quality mobile units ready to be deployed quickly" for military but
we don't have the equivalent on the medical side. It was insane that we did not have deployable quarantine units that could be sent to
the location so instead we attempted to fly them to a quarantine unit elsewhere. To add to the insanity, the only plane that was
capable of transporting an ebola patient could only transport ONE passenger at a time. I'm pretty sure that's the definition of being
grossly underprepared for an epidemic when the solution is to fly people halfway around the world one at a time.
Avoid them like the plague.
Usually their pricing is enough to scare away most of the normal human beings.
Yeah, but if you register with them for 100 years, their prices are only $9.99 per year.
What are they going to learn?
My guess is that they are going to learn what causes accidents and what doesn't cause accidents.
We humans are really really bad at driving. You're basically stating all the bad things that we do.
That is good input for a computer because it can see what causes accidents and remember not to
do that and compare it to what doesn't cause accidents. I'm not sure I would trust a system like
this to drive a car but it could easily be used to grade a computer (or a person) on their driving
style.
Will this app be bought out and buried by the Facebook?
There is no need to buy a piggyback program when it's much easier to just detect and block it.
Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.
