Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Many people have thunk it. (Score 1) 361

by MisterSquid (#48670073) Attached to: Study: Police Body-Cams Reduce Unacceptable Use of Force

I will admit that I am pretty quick to shout heads up and escalate the verbal stakes (e.g. cursing) when motorists honk if I (for example) legally and quickly take the full lane, but I only do so in the interest of encouraging safer driving and cycling. I have zero interest in provoking a fight.

"Quickly?" In other words, you're riding along the right hand side of your lane, and as a car approaches intending to pass you, you quickly move into the middle or left of the lane to force them to quickly slow down to prevent passing. Doing anything "quickly" that obstructs others is a dick move and you know it. You're an asshole who makes the rest of us cyclists look bad. Only in very rare situations would that "quickly" move promote safety. It's unsafe to anger another driver, both to you and the next cyclist they come upon. You're not doing it to promote safety, you're doing it to express dominance, like a gorilla beating its chest.

Next time you try that, think about this - are you doing it to promote safety, or are you doing it to try to express dominance by proving that you can legally be a dick? Believe me, the other driver doesn't care how big your penis is, so be the better person and don't be a dick or a dumbass to cars when you're on your bike, you're making the rest of us look bad, and it hurts us when we actually want to promote safety or policy changes (who wants their tax dollars to pay for bike lanes for a bunch of assholes like you?)

What's with your attitude? As far as anyone can tell, you're the asshole for all your presumption.

In any case, I do signal before moving from the edge of a lane to the middle, and I do assess if it's OK to do so.

Also, where I live (California), drivers may only pass when there is three or more feet between a cyclist and a driver.

Why don't you take your sanctimoniousness someplace where it's warranted?

Comment: Re:Many people have thunk it. (Score 1) 361

by MisterSquid (#48668773) Attached to: Study: Police Body-Cams Reduce Unacceptable Use of Force

"legally and quickly take the full lane" as long as you are not impeding the flow of traffic, i have no problems.

Where I live, as in many municipalities, motorists must yield to cyclists who may be avoiding hazards that motorists cannot see such as roadside debris, potholes, opening doors, etc.

Additionally, in major metropolitan areas, it's safer to yield to bicyclists who will pass through traffic once they've done taking the full lane as they need.

With regard to cycling safety: when I drive, I think like a bicyclist and when I bike, I think like a motorist.

Comment: Re:Many people have thunk it. (Score 1) 361

by MisterSquid (#48667143) Attached to: Study: Police Body-Cams Reduce Unacceptable Use of Force

Not all motorists are calmed when they see my camera, but it seems many are (for example, they'll ease off tailgating me and shadowing my blind spots).

You are on a bicycle. You have no blind spots.

That's ridiculous.

Just as when driving your blind spots are at 7 o'clock and 5 o'clock. And just as when driving, one compensates by turning one's head or using a mirror.

Comment: Many people have thunk it. (Score 4, Insightful) 361

by MisterSquid (#48666817) Attached to: Study: Police Body-Cams Reduce Unacceptable Use of Force

I cycle in a major metro area and started wearing a highly visible helmet camera for liability reasons.

I also noticed (anecdata!) that the camera tended to have a calming effect on motorists near me as I would (for example) turn to look over my shoulder and the camera profile was visible.

Not all motorists are calmed when they see my camera, but it seems many are (for example, they'll ease off tailgating me and shadowing my blind spots).

I will admit that I am pretty quick to shout heads up and escalate the verbal stakes (e.g. cursing) when motorists honk if I (for example) legally and quickly take the full lane, but I only do so in the interest of encouraging safer driving and cycling. I have zero interest in provoking a fight.

YMMV

Comment: Re: wrong totally (Score 1) 274

by MisterSquid (#48652333) Attached to: Dish Pulls Fox News, Fox Business Network As Talks Break Down

Admittedly with no data to hand, the demographic who watches FOX as a source of news likely anti-intellectual, science-denying, god-fearing, economically disenfranchised, and socially regressive.

It looks like you missed at least three words in this sentence. But that's the problem with calling people dumb over the Internet, isn't it?

I missed one word, an "is" between "news" and "likely".

I called no one dumb, though I did insinuate it by calling people a subset of people who don't get their news from cable TV "smart ones". I stand by that assertion, that people who get their news through the Internet are more literate, skeptical, and open to evidence-based claims than those who get their news through cable TV.

I have no data for my claim, which I admit is a stereotype.

Finally, I don't hate the audience I characterized, though my political differences with that audience may be great.

Comment: Re: wrong totally (Score 2) 274

by MisterSquid (#48650443) Attached to: Dish Pulls Fox News, Fox Business Network As Talks Break Down

I've never heard of a cable package with CNN not on basic cable. You usually get CNN, Fox, and MSNBC. Dish network, the company who we're allegedly talking about, has all 3 on their basic service.

Also, the bonus for doctor's offices and car dealerships doesn't account for the success of Fox's prime time shows. Fox News routinely blows out its competitors in prime time, a time at which most of those businesses are closed and viewers are watching at home.

The people still glued to their TV sets and cable television in the US in 2014 are very likely politically and educationally uniform.

Admittedly with no data to hand, the demographic who watches FOX as a source of news likely anti-intellectual, science-denying, god-fearing, economically disenfranchised, and socially regressive.

But even if I'm mistaken in my gross stereotype of the audience for FOX News, judging the "merits" of a TV network according to the size of the TV audience misses the forest for the trees which is that in 2014 the smart ones aren't really watching any cable TV at all.

One guess where those smart people are getting their news. (Hint: the Internet has many, many sources of information where even single individuals can reach millions of people pretty much in real time.)

Comment: Re:Growing Isolation (Score 2) 157

by MisterSquid (#48581965) Attached to: Google Closing Engineering Office In Russia

That's why the price of oil has tumbled. It's collusion to drive Russia further into chaos.

That's why the price of oil has tumbled. It's collusion to drive Russia further into chaos.

It's not collusion; it's strategic economic sanction using market manipulation.

Non-OPEC oil-producing nations have increased their oil production thereby glutting the market. Once the oil market tumbled, Russia's bid to annex Ukraine to secure oil supply not only became moot. It also became a liability.

Now that the fallen Russian economy is forecast to fall even further, Putin's political machine is trying to counter the historical record provided by international journalism with Russia's homegrown Internet propaganda machine, which is part of the reason Google is being forced out of Russia.

That is, at the same time Russia ramps its efforts to pollute the historical record with Internet trolls, it needs to eject the (mostly, ha!) politically neutral search results provided by Western Internet companies such as Google.

Comment: Re:Shakedown (Score 3, Informative) 127

by MisterSquid (#48553261) Attached to: Civil Rights Groups Divided On Net Neutrality

What confuses me is how Net Neutrality could do anything but help the urban and rural poor because Net Neutrality aims to prevent ISPs from discriminating between the sources and destinations of packets meaning that the traffic of non-profits (for example) and will be equally served by ISP networks in the US to the users of those networks.

Am I missing something here?

My suspicion is that the advocacy groups don't have a good understanding of how Net Neutrality will protect all users and content providers from ISP exploitation and that these advocacy groups have been given misinformation by advisors who, in fact, are in the back pocket's of the ISPs.

Is this what's going on?

Comment: Re:Got you, Mrs. Sampson (Score 1) 80

My 8th grade English teacher told us that books were written in the third person, and sometimes the first person. I raised my hand and asked about books written in the second person. She told me there was no such thing. The next day, I came in with "The Mystery Of Chimney Rock" and got a frown from Mrs. Sampson. She had what I found in later life to be a common reaction from the literati when they encounter an inconvenient truth: she disparaged it as garbage literature and said it didn't count.

Mrs. Sampson, you really disappointed me. Here was a chance to learn something new, and you refused because it threatened your existing view of what literature is.

Unfortunately, many teachers become interested in "education" not because they want to learn and explore but because they want to "master" a field of knowledge. They want to swallow truth whole and digest it so that it will embiggen them. They often don't consider that the domains which constitute knowledge will grow and change as long as there are things that can be known.

More directly concerning the question of second-person Literature-with-a-capital-"L" Literature, Jay McInerney's Bright Lights, Big City is written in the second-person and is well-regarded by many teachers of creative writing and professors of Literature.

Comment: Re:my thoughts (Score 1, Troll) 372

by MisterSquid (#48218541) Attached to: NY Doctor Recently Back From West Africa Tests Positive For Ebola

There is a huge difference between being in a room with someone with early stages of ebola for a few minutes and working in a hospital. Here are some factors when working in a hospital with ebola patients; 1. Much longer contact periods. Many health workers in Africa work 18 hour days. 2. Much closer contact. Health workers touch ebola patients much more often than the general public. 3. Contact later in the disease progression. Ebola is transmitted by bodily fluids. As the disease progresses more bodily fluids are secreted, it is a hemorrhagic disease, and more pathogen is present in the excretions.

If one works long hours and their suit is covered in ebola laden fluids it is quite probable that a small mistake can cause infection. Even the fatigue factor may cause errors in protocol.

The nurses in Texas who contracted Ebola from Duncan, do you believe that they had "prolonged" contact with him?

The Ebola virus spreads through bodily fluids including saliva (aerosolized when sneezing) and sweat. I think it is easier to spread than is currently believed, especially because fluids are more readily spread than is understood even by health experts.

Also, the Ebola virus apparently can live outside the body for several days if encapsulated in body fluids.

Anyone can verify these facts about about Ebola on the US CDC FAQ about Ebola.

Comment: Re:Just tell me (Score 1) 463

by MisterSquid (#48148871) Attached to: Positive Ebola Test In Second Texas Health Worker

So far we have a small handful of US infections - mostly related to one guy who brought it in the country and the healthcare workers who didn't follow appropriate protocols while working with him. (Some of that blame might lie on the CDC and the hospital's management - not all of it on the nurses.)

Contrast this with the 5% - 20% of people in the US who get the flu every year and the 200,000 who are hospitalized with flu-related complications. (Source)

Can we please stop comparing Ebola to the flu?

For starters, Ebola apparently has a 70% mortality rate. Additionally, Ebola kills people who are otherwise perfectly healthy. The flu does not.

The flu is a health concern, yes, but widespread infection of Ebola is a nightmare that would make (in Sierra Leone, "makes") most years' flu seasons look like a sneezing fit.

Comment: Re:Everybody Panic! (Score 2) 421

by MisterSquid (#48124661) Attached to: Texas Health Worker Tests Positive For Ebola

well no, I bet a dollar there was a tear in his suit. Simplest explanation is always right.

My favorite part about this is how it gives the lie to all the xenophobic rationalizations that people in various African nations were contracting Ebola because of $DANGEROUS_TRIBAL_FUNERARY_CEREMONY.

Ebola is transmitted through bodily fluids including sweat and aerosolized saliva (produced by sneezing). Containing bodily fluids in a social context—especially saliva and sweat—is virtually impossible and probably makes Ebola a lot more contagious than the talking heads are letting on.

What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon.

Working...