The kid should be compensated but this is borderline extortion.
Flo can take her device and shove it somewhere
It tracks mileage, hard brakes, and driving times - nobody knows the exact formula. Progressive claims a decrease of 7 mph or more in one second is considered a hard brake. Don't bother living in a major city.
"It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see...."
"You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
"No," said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said Ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in."
how would voting for the other asshole have been any better?
There are more than two options.
Bonus points for whoever added the entry for
Americans who spied on Americans -
Look folks, China is in the #1 spot emitting ~25% of the worlds CO2, and its still a god damned developing nation (about half of the people in China are still subsistence farming.) There is no chance that reducing CO2 emissions here is going to mean anything, ever.
It's really easy to absolve yourself of any responsibility with statements like this. Perhaps looking at your country's contribution per capita would be more helpful.
There are still people actively working on studying how soot, dust, and debris affect CC but from the sounds of it, the models would be rough if particulate data was included at all.
"The distance particulates travel depends on their size, how long they can stay in the atmosphere – gravity comes into play here. For example, soot is a relatively small particulate; it can travel quite far. A fire in Canada can cause soot to travel to Greenland's ice sheet. Scientists suspect that changes to the amount and frequency of forest fires might be affecting how much soot is traveling to glaciers. [...] Similarly, with climate change, dryness is becoming more prevalent and as a result, there's more dust. One study documented increased dust transported to glaciers in the Swiss Alps, which in turn was increasing glacier melt rates." http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/glacier-debris.html
But they are good at processing the current day's weather, and drawing simple patterns based on notable weather anomalies. So that's exactly what they do.
This was one of the techniques encouraged at a talk I attended a year or so ago which was aimed at getting NASA scientists to better interact with a non-scientific audience and media. If I remember correctly, the average person hears that the scientist's data/trend is statistically significant then they take that 95% confidence as being "5% chance that it's all wrong." In all probability, they won't take steps to learn why this is incorrect no matter how many times it's explained. In this case it's helpful to encourage Joe Sixpack to make a mental note of days with a record high or low. In this way he can see for himself how his local climate is shifting and in which direction.