Personally, I don't even think it's a right hand vs. left hand thing, but more about visibility of pedestrians. There's a certain spot near my house where drivers constantly don't see people crossing the road. I've almost been hit on more than a few occasions, even if there's multiple people crossing at the same time. It's not because it's a left hand turn. It's because of the way the stop is constructed. For the vast majority of cars, the part of the car between the windshield and side windows blocks out exactly where people stand waiting to cross. There's another place to cross 300 feet down the road, and I've never had the same problem of drivers not being able to see me. This is probably more likely to happen with left hand turns, but I don't think that trying to eliminate left hand turns is really the solution. We should really be focusing on designing intersections with better visibility of pedestrians. Perhaps give the people in the left turning lane a red light if there are people crossing. A camera system could easily detect if there are people crossing the street. Or perhaps even something less technological, like simply a big warning light when somebody has pressed the button indicated that they want to cross.

I'm not thinking of a broken femur or anything really complicated. Obviously they should send you to somebody more specialized if they don't know how to handle the problem correctly. I just don't think somebody with an MD should really be the first person that takes a lot at it. It's kind of crazy how many people go see a doctor when they have a simple cold, because there really isn't any other choice other than just waiting it out to see if it goes away. Most nurses could probably be trained to at least triage the cases and refer them to a doctor if necessary, but most places don't have this as an option.

Hopefully I can use it to program my old Speak & Spell. Would be awesome to code for this old hardware while eating Reese's Pieces.

But then the lawyers could just lower their prices to compete. Could actually make prices come down over a long enough time.

Personally, I think that we waste a lot of time and money paying professionals to do things that could much easier be accomplished by those who specialize in a very small task. I probably don't need an actual MD to tell me that my kid has an ear infection. It's probably a pretty simple diagnosis. Why not let somebody without an MD prescribe a limited number of medications?

I'm sure people hire lawyers for lots of things that are actually quite simple to somebody who focuses on the rules. You probably don't need a law degree to understand the law in a very limited field.

Some places are starting to catch on. I can get me teeth cleaned by a dental hygienist who owns their own office, no dentist is involved. I can get my flu shot at the pharmacy, no doctor involved. Hopefully someday we won't have to see a doctor to get a cast on a broken limb. You'll just go to somebody who specializes in diagnosing broken bones and getting them fixed, instead of waiting in a doctors office with lots of people with infectious diseases.

Exactly. What's the added value of living 20 minutes from downtown and 20 minutes from work? I live in a similar situation. I bike 15-20 minutes to get to work, and I can walk 5 minutes from my house to pick up groceries. My house was 200K. My life is pretty stress free and I'm glad I don't have to spend 45+ minutes each way commuting to work.

They're going to ruin the fun for the rest of us. I think that Netflix is not doing much about this because there are proportionately not a lot of users do this, and it requires a bit of setup and technical know-how on the user side. If you start having ISPs bake it into the service so that all their customers use this feature, then you can bet that the content owners are going to start to apply quite a bit of pressure on Netflix to clamp down on this sort of activity.

I kind of agree on this. Watching others code can really help you pick up on things you can't get from a book. For instance, VS.Net has a really nice feature where you can Type Ctrl+?, which focuses on the search field. Then you type ">of" followed by a file name. You can do this to open files and edit them. It also has autocomplete so you can find your files faster. I use this functionality for switching back and forth between files all the time. It's often a lot faster than going to the mouse to switch which file you're working on.

I even see a lot of new coders who don't know how to do things like use the debugger. Watching actual coding could be boring, but you could probably pick up a lot of useful tips for how to actually use the tools. Over the years, veteran coders pick up a lot of shortcuts that might not be immediately obvious to many programmers, both old and new.

That proved to be quite the challenge considering the NES only had 10KB of RAM, 32KB of program ROM, 256KB of background graphics ROM, and 4KB of sprite graphics ROM.

While the MS-DOS version isn't anywhere near as limited in terms of resources, it remains to be seen just what corners have been cut in order to get the game working.

Seems funny when I think about games on DOS vs. NES. Most of the time, NES games seemed much better. I guess as time went on, and DOS advanced to games like DOOM and Descent, it left NES behind. But by that time, SNES was already out, and again, the games were much better on SNES for the most part.

At the time, NES didn't seem very limited. IT had plenty of great games that played quite well.

Yeah, people just don't know about them because they are embedded products. There's a lot of routers that use MIPS chips. Intel/AMD x86(64) and ARM are so well known because the chip is one of the bullet points on the marketing materials such as desktops, laptops, phones, and tablets. MIPS chips are put into devices where the processor isn't used as a marketing point. That's not to say it's a bad chip, just stating the way it is.

While you obviously see it as a privacy issue, and I agree it is, many people would probably see what you experienced as great service. The fact that you could close your account and then re-open it and not have to go through the trouble of re-uploading all the data and reconfiguring all your payment information would probably be seen as a great feature by many people.

My cousin lost her phone, and upon getting a new one was very thankful that all her contacts got restored onto the new phone. She didn't care that somebody else has access to her list of contacts. She only saw the plus side. Before the advent of cloud services, losing a cell phone or PDA (when they were still a thing) mean that you would loose your contact list. Being diligent about backing up the list to your desktop was very important so that you didn't lose data. Now all data is instantly synced, making our lives a lot easier.

This deserves an upvote. It's very hard to calculate the total cost of anything. Not only do we need to calculate the number of people who died building the nuclear plant, but we also have to count the number of people who died while mining the uranium including long term indirect health issues like lung cancer from inhaling radon gas.

We also need to discount any positive things from using either technology. What is the value to increased spending money from whichever technology is cheapest for the end consumer? How does that compare to paying more for something that ultimately increases lifespans? Is it better to live a bit shorter and be richer, or live longer and be poorer?

It's really the screen that drains the battery when you're using it as a GPS. Or at least it should be. I've been tracking my bicycle commutes on my phone. And even during my 40 minute ride when I take the long route, the battery doesn't drop more than a couple percent.

  Then again, I have a Windows phone. It's ridiculous how little battery this thing uses if you aren't actively using is. I've finished the day with 80% battery left because I was particularly busy. Even when I use it a lot, I rarely get below 60%.

My previous phone was Android and it would drain the battery to 20% be the end of the day, even if I didn't use it. I basically had to leave it plugged in at work or it wouldn't make it through the day.

I agree with this. People shouldn't discount electric cars based on the fact that they may want to drive far a couple times a year. Especially with so many people owning two cars. Even 100 miles should be plenty for commuting. If you're spending more time than that in a car every day, I wouldn't want to be you. That's way too much time wasting away in a car.

My phone has an HDMI port on it and it also support bluetooth keyboards. Why should I not be able to hook it up to a fullsize screen and keyboard to do a little bit of work if my phone has the capabilities? Phones are coming out with 3GB or more of RAM on them now, and Octocore processors. Probably won't be too long before we just plug our phones into docking stations and use them as a full computer for basic tasks like web browsing or word processing. I plug my tablet into my TV to play games, and I'm quite amazed at the graphics you can get out of that thing.

Still plenty of results on this search term