Understatement of the year. This is a sad case of a stupid law intersecting with an incredibly stupid person.
We've actually paid more tax per head, and received less back per head, than England for every one of the last 110 years,
Oh, really? Because Wikipedia doesn't agree with you. Spending per person:
The persistence of per capita public expenditure lower in England than elsewhere continues to attract calls for the formula to be renegotiated. Using figures for the financial year 2006/2007, if a UK-wide per capita average were a notional 100%, identifiable per capita expenditure on services in England would be 97%, in Scotland 117%, in Wales 111% and in Northern Ireland 127% (this does not take account of non-identifiable expenditure, such as defence and debt interest, which are deemed to be for the benefit of the entire UK, regardless as to where the money is actually spent). In cash, this would work out as (per person):
I did read the entire post.
Experience does not change that YOU are not ABLE to judge whether you're reaction times are affected and to what degree - it's a biological impossibility.
No amount of experience will change that. It may change the degree of impact (an assertion you make while offering absolutely ZERO evidence to support it) but even if it did YOU are not qualified to determine that (about YOURSELF you can NEVER be qualified). Those people who study this sort of thing, you know scientifically, have consistently found that driving tired has the same or even worse impacts than driving drunk - and drunk people ALSO always think their driving ability isn't impaired - while thousands of dead innocent bystanders speak to the contrary.
The reality is that I read your entire post, and dismissed it with the sarcasm all of it deserved. You're a danger on the road, an irresponsible citizen and a future inmate on a charge of reckless endangerment and manslaughter.
Citation needed. The offence is "possession," not "viewing."
Actually, the offense is any of taking, making, distributing, showing, or possessing. Merely viewing such pornography, when it is done with intent (ie, you clicked play on a video where you could have reasonably known its contents before you watched it), would constitute a form of "taking".
Yes, I am absolutely certain that you are an unbiased judge of your own mental performance after 4 hours of driving.
I mean nobody else on earth is and study after study have shown that there is literally NOBODY worse at judging somebody's performance at anything than the person himself but I absolutely certain that you are, indeed, the sole exception that has ever existed.
Now what about all the people who are NOT you ?
>Like I said before, the fuel isn't the issue, it's the source of the fuel. Make that source zero CO2 and the need for EVs disappears.
You are aware that burning gasoline is a massive (I mean a SERIOUSLY masssive) source of CO2 in and off itself right ?
>>in my experience
>Your experience is different from my experience.
And THIS ladies and gentlenerds is why anecdotes are scientifically useless - because there is ALWAYS a counter-anecdote that says the exact opposite... ALWAYS.
Why would they talk at all ?
According to the register's review the Model-S has just about the most awesome sound system ever built into a car.
I can tell you, if I had one (and man I want one !) and I was in a super-charger station, I wouldn't be talking to anybody - I'd be cranking up some Twisted Sister at max volume and rocking the damn casbah !
I was thinking the same thing - I'm CERTAIN that building a traditional gas station (including those giant underground storage tanks) takes longer than that !
Twitter suspended dozens of accounts that published the graphic footage while YouTube tried to remove several copies of the video, which was first uploaded on Tuesday night.
Twitter CEO Dick Costolo tweeted: "We have been and are actively suspending accounts as we discover them related to this graphic imagery. Thank you."
The unprecedented social media clampdown came as the Metropolitan police warned that even viewing the video could constitute a criminal offence in the UK.
The force said in a statement: "The MPS counter-terrorism command (SO15) is investigating the contents of the video that was posted online in relation to the alleged murder of James Foley. We would like to remind the public that viewing, downloading or disseminating extremist material within the UK may constitute an offence under terrorism legislation.""
Link to Original Source
With that said, I think governments should use open standards for data, document storage and interfaces where available, and avoid products (proprietary or otherwise) that do not support such standards.
As long as the products really do support the standard and the standard doesn't allow blobs of proprietary data formats.