Came to post same, no mod points or you'd get them.

Are we just making up new names for established characters now?

Can I call "E" "Wibbly" or how about redefining "3" as "Wobbly".

One Two Wobbly Four

To an extent, but as another poster replied, it's more down to simply how the designer's brain works, can't blame them for that, but it doesn't make life easy.

I think at the bottom of it is the common problem that CSS was developed by programmers, not designers, and the programmers didn't understand that the designers don't think like they do, and that they can't think like they do.

As a result, it's just not a good fit for designers, so they use it badly.

CSS is great when used properly (although, somewhat hereticly, I would kill for definable constants a-la 'color: PRIMARY_WEBSITE_COLOR;' without resorting to dynamically writing the CSS ).

Unfortunately graphic (website) designers are completely shit at using it. Even simply understanding when they should use an ID and when they should use a class seems to a'splode their brain, "huh, what is wrong with using this same id a bajillion times in the page". Don't even try telling them that "redtext" is not a good classname. Heck half of the time it's ".span1"!

They don't even know (even after telling them half the time) that you can use multiple classes on a single element, let alone combine selectors, everything is a single ID or classname to them. The amount of copy-paste in most web designer's stylesheets is simply offensive, all because their brains don't allow them to modularise their desires into useful reusable CSS classes. Cascade? Inheritance? These are foreign words to the average website designer.

There is no point telling a designer how they should can make their CSS better, they just won't understand. Worse, if the programmer, who does know how to use CSS as it was intended, attempts to fix their stylesheets (or worse, cut up their photoshops into proper HTML and CSS), the original designer just won't understand how to do anything in the stylesheet anymore.

"The William J. Hammer Collection is located at the Smithsonian Institute, Researchers are denied access: Hammer Collection archival note denying access to researchers"

you would think that they would at least make copies available. What good are the photos if they are locked away in a vault where nobody can ever look at them?

"The problem with these guesses about salt is our kidneys have specifically *EVOLVED TO* actively and precisely maintain homeostasis of certain key ions"

Fixed.

5 years ago, maybe. But with the rapid increase in availability, affordability and desirability of easy to fly aircraft (quadcopters especially), more and more, well, idiots, are playing with them. Even FPV with extreme long distance is well within the reach of amateurs now (legal or not).

These "new" people playing, are doing just that, playing, they don't realise that they are operating aircraft, piloting, and are subject to aviation rules, airspace, and other restrictions on where, when and how they can operate their aircraft.

> "If you do that without disengaging the clutch/shifting to neutral, the results at 125 mph could be disastrous."

Engine braking. Try it sometime.

I don't know why manufacturers of modern computer controlled cars don't simply install a kill switch, either disconnecting the ignition like a motorcycle does, or mechanically shut off the fuel supply with a solenoid.

Hit the kill switch, engine stops. You still have all electrical power and control so just roll to the side of the road.

Solenoids to control shut off fuel are not even novel, my early 80s car has a solenoid to shut down the fuel supply at the carburettor when you turn off the key (anti run-on).