I posted a link. You could maybe start there.
Similarly, having bike commuted for decades, asking directions and being told by a motorist that something is 20 minutes away, is useless.
The depressing tendency of transit riders and motorists to measure distance in minutes is something that has sprung up almost un-noticed over the years, but which only makes sense in s specific circle of reference.
But if you're driving a car, the fastest route may be longer than the fastest cycling route, because you can take advantage of high-speed roads (highways) that cyclists aren't allowed to use, even if that adds a few miles to the route.
Not being allowed to use a highspeed route that adds miles is not an issue for cyclists, whose speed and distance is limited by physical stamina rather than posted speed limits.
Other than that, I don't necessarily agree that it is all that much different for a transit commuter than a bike commuter as far as their knowledge of the map. They each know different maps. Transit users know transit maps, bike commuters know their own route maps, and may be totally ignorant of locations and routes one street away from the route they follow. Ask them how to get to 127 Maple street, and they may be clueless, unless it happens to be a street they use.
Having bike commuted for almost 30 years, I can tell you there is a lot of time to think on a bike, and yet large portions of the route are done on autopilot, and you have virtually no recollection of traveling that portion. You remember traffic intensive routes, lane change areas, busy intersection, and bad pavement, but you can often arrive at your destination with no more awareness of what you passed along the way than the transit rider.
The male tendency to not ASK directions is likely due to the male tendency to OFFER directions that are useless, and often wrong. Males also tend to have a buffer queue of exactly 4 items deep, and anything beyond that we need paper and pencil. Which again is genetically engineered to hold only the useful number of items, because any beyond that are increasingly vague and wrong. Men know they suck at giving directions, which is why they don't trust directions given by others.
Reminds me of the old saying: Directions that are least explicit often end with "you can't miss it".
They also tended to shutdown BART stations near the Occupy movement when it was still going on to any extent. Handy if you are trying to stop a zombie outbreak as well, I guess.
Excellent observation, and insightful juxtaposition of Occupy and Zombies.
Well played, Sir!
But it has never been standardised by any commitee.
That's true only as long as you are willing to totally ignore the SD Association.
This is one of those cases where the industry is way ahead of the so called "standards" organizations.
The SD Association offers a formatter for SD/SDHC/SDXC cards but only for Windows and MAC. It may format a card in such a way that some devices can't use it.
Please reread what I wrote.
Put your glasses on, and try reading the bold sentence that you quoted, but still some how never even noticed.
This isn't about the constitution.
Congress could have passed the original SOPA act.
Congress could have passed the original PIPA act.
The President could have and would have signed both.
Once signed they both would have been LAW.
Public protest caused both to be withdrawn.
But if you put key features of these into a Treaty, the House of Representatives is out of the picture, and 60 Senators is all it takes to approve a treaty, and the president will sign it, and they are LAW.
Since neither act directly violated any provision in the constitution, the whole constitutional question is moot.
Its distressing and a bit depressing that you don't understand this. Your low Slashdot ID suggests you should be out of junior high by now.
Please re-read what I wrote. You are churning.
This isn't about the constitution.
True, but bringing it back to the topic at hand, poster 123456 above stated that if you "can't get a law passed in your country, you convince other governments to make it part of a treaty".
And s/he is perfectly correct in this assessment, and that is exactly what the Trans-Pacific Partnership proponents are trying to do, and, as I pointed out, if ratified, this treaty becomes law (because it does not directly contradict the constitution).
You replied that it was "Not quite that simple". But it is EXACTLY that simple.
1) Get defeated in congress.
2) Draft a treaty
3) Get treaty ratified
When the SOPA protest caused the bills to be pulled, it was most effective in the House of representatives.
So Chris Dod and friends, are end-running the house all together. They get no say about a treaty.
It's not quite that simple. In the U.S., it still has to be ratified by the Senate, AND even if they do, it is not law if it conflicts with the Constitution.
That's hardly the point.
The constitution mentions nothing about unlocking cell phones or copyright length.
Those are merely provisions in US LAW.
Treaties can and DO override US Law all the time.
When the President and two thirds of the Senate concur that a treaty can invalidate some sections of US Code, that code is toast, unless the treaty tried to override the amendments 1 thru 8 which specifically limit federal power.
In spite of the 10th amendment, it is clear that the founders intended the Federal Government to acquire additional powers under the Treaty power, and specifically mentioned in "The Necessary and Proper Clause" of Article 1.
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Treaties do have major implications under U.S. domestic law. In Missouri v. Holland, the Supreme Court ruled that the power to make treaties under the U.S. Constitution is a power separate from the other enumerated powers of the federal government, and hence the federal government can use treaties to legislate in areas which would otherwise fall within the exclusive authority of the states.
You're right of course.
What I meant to say was that 17.5% of the CASES can be attributed to vaccine failure.
There is no way to determine failure rate without knowing the size of the exposed population.
Read the links.
There is in fact a failure rate, and not all of it is genetic.
Really? Because as soon as VP8 was hinted at, and before it was actually released, MPEG LA immediately put out a call to form patent pool to attack it. BEFORE its specs were even released.
Does that sound like a group of people simply seeking an easier way to cross-license? Or does it seem like a Troll?
It took the US DOJ looking into MPEG LA's practices before they backed down.
It goes without saying that the moronic get what they deserve, though sadly, when herd immunity is compromised, sometimes the innocent (those who cannot be inoculated) pay the price too.
Lets be clear here, the current hysteria is about some 175 cases, vs 60 last year.
Hardly a herd immunity issue.
Also, only 90% of those 175 cases were NON vaccinated, which means that there is a significant vaccine failure rate of around 17.5 percent.
So yeah, there are too many doubters out there who endanger their children. But the numbers we are talking about are already extremely low. More people are killed by bee stings each year.
How come? It was God's will that you became ill. Who are you to go against it? You will burn in hell for that.
If its God's will you should get hit by a car, who are you to stay out of traffic on a busy street?
Seriously, I suspect you were joking, but why feed such nonsense to the same bunch of people that are too dumb to get their kids in for a free measles shot?