You still should have waited for an ambulance for one very simple reason: if you come in with heart-attack symptoms and self-admit, you are treated as a lower priority for triage than somebody who called an ambulance. There have been cases of people dying in the emergency room waiting for triage because they got bumped by somebody else who came in by ambulance... additionally, the paramedics would have been able to administer oxygen as soon as they got there, where you may very well have had to wait for it at a hospital.

I was going to say no offense in prefix to this, but rethought it... offense intended....

Driving to the hospital when you think you're having a heart attack is one of the most monumentally stupid ideas I have ever heard of in my entire life, and that includes 6 years in the army and several more years working for the government as a civilian. If it's a medical emergency, call an ambulance. That is what they are there for.

And don't try to tell me it was rural so therefore no ambulance service: you yourself said that you had to walk a quarter mile to the front door of the hospital after parking, which suggests a large and mostly full parking lot. This suggests that you were in an urban area.

Recent figures suggesting (very) modest growth in the UK have been greeted with enthusiasm, but I still think as a country we're in trouble, and a big part of that I think is that wages have not in any way been keeping up with the huge rises in house prices over the last 20-30 years.

The government is encouraging banks to lend to house buyers by guaranteeing a portion of the mortgages, but it seems to me to just be encouraging another bubble.

The average full-time, permanent employee salary in the UK is around £24,500; the average house price is around £230,000 and rising; it'll be more in the South and less in the North, but even so, the average house price is nine times the average salary. It's just not sustainable.

When the ads come up on OTA television, I can get up and go to the bathroom or mute the TV and have a conversation with the person sitting next to me.

As for the $4.95 magazine (or the pay TV for that matter), I choose not to pay for the privilege of being advertised at. Ignoring that point, however, the ads on the $4.95 magazine do not pop up and block my page until I tear it away. It also most especially doesn't dance around the page forcing me to chase it in order to find the corner I can tear off to get rid of it. Most of the time, it also doesn't play obnoxious music or video at me when I turn to the page it's on, nor does it play animated blinking clashing colours to try to get my attention. Additionally, the ad I'm looking at in Time Magazine does not know that I also bought a subscription to Popular Science.

Advertisers would have a *lot* more sympathy if they'd stop with that kind of shenanigan. While I understand that the Internet is largely supported by advertising, and that if you choose not to have ads you either need a paywall or to lose money (I have a self-hosted blog running from one of my colocated servers that doesn't have ads), I also understand that advertising as it is today detracts from the overall user experience on the Internet. I would be more amenable to advertising if they'd stop being shitheads.

Awww... muffin....

Maybe they shouldn't have started using full screen flash ads that you have to click through in order to get rid of, or auto-playing noise.... if they'd stayed relatively innocuous, most Internet users probably wouldn't have bothered to find ways to get rid of them.

I do have an eidetic memory, and I still use lastpass. It's easier to share passwords (when needed) with people who don't have a good memory that way. It's also backup/security should I get hit by a bus tomorrow: my family only needs to know one password, which is included in a sealed envelope with my will.

It's perfectly safe as long as you don't use it for anything that has financial implications.

You seem to think it's self-evident that there actually would be millions of armed citizens to take up arms against the government....

A very large majority of the population is, by and large, satisfied with the job the government is doing, and while they may disagree with the party currently holding the power, they do not believe that armed resistance is necessary.

Also, since you seem to be American, I'll remind you that the phrase "well-regulated militia" implies that there's actual training involved. When you can download the plans to make a weapon from the Internet, and buy the ammunition for said weapon from Wal*Mart, that greatly reduces the chance that the people doing so will know what the hell they're doing.

For the record, as a former member of the military, I feel that gun control is a good thing. Weapons that are not being properly maintained, and with which you don't maintain proper proficiency are dangerous, to you and everybody around you. When the general population has the same requirements for recertification and the same penalties for not properly maintaining their weapon that I had when I was in the army, I will support them having the same access to weapons I had.

So... one of the core tenets of libertarianism is "don't be an asshole", and people actually expect that this would work in the real world?

That's almost as naive as the Marxists....

If it had decent quality bluetooth, that might actually be a good buy... but I don't see them gutting their sales like that. That'd be a replacement for tablet as well as phone... half the sales for them.

Most womens' clothing that is sensible to wear at work has enough pocket space to hold a small key for a locker, and even if it doesn't, most women are smart enough to remember a combination to a lock that they use every day.

There's a very easy solution to the problem, which has been suggested higher up the thread. :)

You do realize that the M16 and international variants are essentially .22, right?

5.56mm = .223 gauge. It's quite effective in rifles produced for NATO and allies.

Possibly a question of user incompetence maybe?

I have a 2011 Subaru Impreza and an HTC One V, and no problem with that at all. I paired the phone to the car's bluetooth anyway, for use as a phone. The default setting for bluetooth pairing is to allow audio playback over bluetooth... All I have to do is switch the stereo to the Bluetooth input, and press play on the phone.

Works quite nicely when I pair it with google Navigate on the phone... the phone will lower the volume of the music to give a voice instruction, which comes through the car's stereo speakers.

Given that the HTC One V has the same version of Android on it as the S3, I'd be very surprised if the S3 was any harder to get working than my phone. While I've never bothered with programming Bluetooth on a Lexus stereo, they have the same supplier for their stereos as Subaru does (Clarion), so it should be pretty much the same, though possibly with a different UI. Just press the "talk" button on the steering wheel, say "Setup", and follow the prompts....

It depends on the path the electricity takes.... Generally, if it crosses the heart or the brain, you're in a bad way (still survivable, but much less chance of surviving). If it doesn't cross either, you have a pretty good chance of surviving, though it may cook you pretty well on its way through.

*shrugs* you need a new bank. I would have closed my account and gone to another bank if that was their response.

I also would have cancelled my account over that.