Comment Re:meta noarchive (Score 1) 21
Cache is a fallback option, and not needed for the NYT. Follow the link, it sees the referrer is Google.
Cache is a fallback option, and not needed for the NYT. Follow the link, it sees the referrer is Google.
Pay for the article and read it. Don't pay for the article and read it. Or don't pay for the article and don't read it.
Choose to stand for your principles however you like, but all three above alternatives are better than your proposed solution of pretending an interesting and relevant article doesn't exist.
Because (a) Open source/free software doesn't mean free-as-in-beer, and (b) if you need a way around the paywall just paste the URL into Google and follow the link from there to read without the paywall, or read its cached version
We did when it worked. City downtowns are too dense now. Something has to change; this is an example of that change.
Whether or not the object we call Pluto is a full-sized planet or a "dwarf planet" does not change the etymology of the name "Pluto"
whynotboth.jpg
God bless Lili St. Cyr!
Serious? No. I don't seriously expect really safe speed limits to be set up by any democracy that has so many motorists in it. But I do think that's what we ought to do. As a civilisation, we are killing our own children at an appalling rate, just so that motorists can catch up to the back of the next long line of stationary traffic a few seconds faster. In town, slow down.
Look at the scenario you described. A car doing the speed limit towards a marked crosswalk... it's such a familiar scenario that we forget to be horrified. Think about what we're doing here. We have footpaths across the street specifically for people to walk across. And then we have motorists driving straight at those footpaths, at such speed that it would literally be a crime to go any faster at all, at such speed that they couldn't possibly stop should anyone suddenly walk out on the path. These motorists expect everyone else in the world to pay attention, to stay out of their way. God forbid they themselves should slow down! They're 'doing the limit' and that makes it OK.
That limit is obviously much too high. It should come down. Twenty is plenty.
Then let's redesign those footpaths. At the moment there are raised paths either side of the street, and when the path runs across the middle of the street it is lowered. For the convenience of motorists, of course; otherwise they might have to slow down. Well, let them slow down! The path across the street is a pedestrian walkway just like the paths either side, so let's have it at the same height, for the convenience of people using wheelchairs, people pushing infants in prams, people with mobility issues. We'll put a gentle slope to either side of the path so that it isn't a nasty bump for motor traffic. Well, I mean - so that it isn't a nasty bump if the motor traffic is moving at a safe speed.
More like Practically Chrome, Chrome, Chrome, and Chrome
..they just take your money and vereify that you are the first to register and thus would own an invention or process
Until and unless there is a working demo shown or full whitepaper published, roll your eyes people.
The reason it's there is they get 4+ senators (VA, MD, to some extent WV) and local DC interests/lobbyists on their side. It's a smart strategic play by Amazon
It doesn't matter whether technology is involved or not, or what their comedic intent was: stating something about wanting to go ahead with terrorism or murder is going to get the attention of authorities, and they are going to start by doing a full investigation of the threat with no smile or laughter whatsoever.
Kids need to wise up
"Amy Ford, director of communications for the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), says that section of highway cannot easily be widened and is too narrow to support the addition of a guardrail. When accidents do occur there, it’s crucial to alert emergency responders as quickly as possible."
It is easier to change the specification to fit the program than vice versa.