Is that you, Mike?

Still, we try.

Is that few enough for ya? ;)

Mike, is that you?

They have found a way to game the system, and then found others who will finance and follow their criminal model. Eventually with time and money the foam rises to the top of the septic tank...

It's now the non-pay camera system works. They take every car's picture, usually driver and license plates, then discard the snaps after you successfully pay and clear the booth. That way if you decide to stop and feign paying or take off, they already have your picture rather than trying to snap a quick shot as you bolt out of the gate...

No, people started doing that long before those days. Since the early 1980's, I would always avoid checked baggage so it would make the airport arrival much less of a hassle, not having to go to baggage claim and wait for the suitcase-go-round. Also, then I could go out the "Departures" level which was completely un-crowded when all the traffic was at the "Arrivals" area level, and jump into my prearranged ride. Unless I had a very large suitcase, for a trip of over a week, I would never check luggage. Plus, it avoided the "lost luggage" horror completely that way.

Of course, eventually that led to jerk-offs trying to bring their entire baggage as carry-on, even if they had 3-4 bags per person. This led to over-stuffed bins and extended boarding and leaving sessions, so after it got to a certain obnoxious level, the airlines started first limiting the size and number of carry-ons, then eventually charging for them.

You're talking to one now. A long time ago, back in the 1980's, I went to San Mateo, and my luggage went to San Jose. That sucked - it took the airline about 3 days to track down, find my suitcase, and deliver it to my hotel. Luckily, I was staying 2 weeks, and I had (very little) extra cash to go buy a pair of underwear and socks, a toothbrush and a coat (it was a bit cold in the evenings at the time). I used to travel frequently back then for work, and this was the only time in hundreds of flights they ever got it wrong, but holy crap, what an inconvenience!

I'm guessing that due to economies of scale, the more popular and longer routes are run more, so since there's more of them and more competition, they drive the prices down on them. The shorter in-between flights aren't as popular so they are more "Specialized" and cost more?

Me neither.

"Steaming" would be more appropriate for this turd...

(Waves Hand)

These are not the assholes you are looking for...

So they weren't as malicious as possible, that gives them a pass somehow?

"If you don't do what we want, we WON'T do it again!"

There, FTFY.

Awww, you're so cute when you're trying to act all grown up like that.

I'll name one thing wrong - you posted at all. People like you do nothing but exacerbate problems. You take a joke and turn it into seething political flamebait, spewing the Fox News Greatest Hits soundbytes as you go. Do you think YOU added anything but bile and hate to the conversation? It was about astronomy, in case you forgot and were distracted by your own stupid, unnecessary commentary.

Spare us next time you get the urge to post, and just fuck off, AC troll.

OK, that makes more sense - thank you. Then again, what did I expect from an article with "lakes of water that is methane"? I am a fan of exoplanetary research, so I am familiar with most of what you said. However, the "full of oil" came out of left field and threw me momentarily...

Also what makes them think there's oil there? Would that not have required having life there that died and rotted away and got buried for centuries??

The Fox News runs deep within this disciple. Let the hate flow, flow, let it consume you so your descent into the dark side is complete...