Re: "...details a plan to build a wall between the United States and Mexico."
That's Ok. The USAians will probably outsource the building and maintenance of said wall to the cheapest bidder - Mexicans?
147 posts • joined 13 Nov 2010
That's Ok. The USAians will probably outsource the building and maintenance of said wall to the cheapest bidder - Mexicans?
Ha! I could do that, no trouble, without the washing up liquid! Just don't ease off for the corners!!
"And an upper limit of 60 as well."
In which case, I suspect you won't get many voting at all!!!
"Progress requires death to proceed."
Really? In this day and age of Health & Safety not to mention litigation?
50 or more years ago I would totally agree. My argument is that if we had the Health & Safety regimes that are in place today back in the day, America would never have been visited (I won't say discovered, as it was already occupied). Ditto for all the 'new' countries such as Oz, NZ, South Africa to name 3. Of course the Romans were there way before the Europeans, eh!!
By the time the planners had written out a 'risk assessment form" the potential crew of the ship (which undoubtedly was the cheapest they could find) would have been press-ganged into the navy or died of boredom.
The bottom line for all these regulations seems to be that 'no-one should die - ever!!" Strange that so many do in the course of living - and comparatively few of them on the roads as opposed to, oh, let me see, illness, old age, had enough of this over-regulated world of ours.
What utter crap!
Jeez, I get utterly sick of people in New Zealand, including the government and Police making this kind of statement when it is just not true.
Exceeding the limit is NOT an accident waiting to happen - provided it is done judiciously. Travelling at the speed limit under all circumstances can be much more dangerous.
I have driven in most of Europe, a lot of North America and a fair few other countries as well, and our roads are up there with most of the others, and sometimes exceeding some of those countries you mention. (proviso .. some roads excepted - same as most countries as well)
Having returned in the last 3 years from an extended stay in the UK, I can tell you that what causes accidents is not speed, but crap driving and stupid police enforcement which is having the reverse effect to what they want. A tolerance of 4 kph over the holidays, which incidentally did not do anything for the road toll, as compared to last year. All the low tolerance does is cause drivers to spend more time watching their speedometer rather than the road as they should be doing. Not only that, it is dangerous as they have instilled the concept that you must NEVER under any circumstances exceed the speed limit, which is rather mixed messages, as if people attempt to overtake a slower driver while following the rule, they finish up taking an absolute age to complete the manoeuvre. When I was taught to drive the idea was that when overtaking you spent as little time as possible on the wrong side of the road, so you put your foot down to get past, then slowed back down.
When they are producing television adverts which show someone driving on a straight road with no other traffic on the road (apparently) doing 105 kph (just 5 kph over the legal limit - that is 3, yes just 3 mph) and then someone pulling out of a side road, causing an accident and then making out the guy doing 5 k over was in the wrong, (he states "I was over the limit, it's my fault!") I'm sorry that is just absolute rubbish. The cause of the accident was the idiot pulling out of the side road. The advert pulls in a lot of emotion as well, as the idiot pulling out says that he has his kid in the car (this discussion is held in a time paused moment just before the cars collide) and "I made a mistake". Yup, YOU made the mistake - not the guy on the road doing a mere 5 kph over. I defy ANYONE to be able to tell whether a car coming towards them is doing 5 kph over or under the limit.
Ditto the ridiculous ad showing a woman exceeding the urban speed limit by a small amount and then having her hit someone who (according to the ad) ran out in the road literally a cars length in front, without looking. With the scenario they show, even someone doing just under the speed limit would not have had a chance of stopping either.
How are they allowed to produce and show such blatant propaganda which doesn't even have the dubious merit of showing something accurately.
BTW we had some visitors from the UK over Christmas who travelled around a bit and were thoroughly impressed with our roads. Most of ours are far wider than B roads (and even some A roads) in the UK. They weren't that impressed with the general driving standards however.
They are also used in New Zealand for steadicam platforms for sports events - especially Rugby.
They troll up and down the sidelines with the operator just using weight transfer to control the Segway. Faster moving than trying to run with a steadicam mounted on you as well, so can follow the action pretty closely.
"three years ago a car full of teenagers doing about 90mph on a blind bend smashed through the trees and killed all occupants just outside Devizes. The council, in their "wisdom" have responded by making the whole 3 mile stretch a 30mph zone"
Which reminds me of the road just outside Farnborough towards Fleet in Hampshire which had a 40 mph limit. A guy on a motorcycle got himself killed, so the local LibDem goody-goody made a big fuss until the limit was reduced to 30mph.
Now just so we're all completely clear on how this will reduce the road toll, the motorcyclist was apparently doing in excess of 60mph, overtaking 1 or more cars, on the other side of a pedestrian safety island in the middle of the road, and just to cap things off, it was also adjacent to a junction with a side road on the opposite side of the road. Quite what he did to kill himself, I know not, but I'll leave you to guess at the number of different possibilities available to him. If he was a gambling man he certainly knew how to increase his odds!!
Now I don't know about you, but I am little unclear as to how reducing the speed limit to 30mph would have prevented the accident. Oh, he says, the speed limit has been reduced so I'll overtake the cars at just 50, eh!
As I keep saying repeatedly, you can't legislate for idiots.
The bottom line is you can put all of these clever bits in a car, reduce speed limits to where you might as well have a man walking in front carrying a red flag, and STILL, there would be idiots who would manage to kill themselves or other people.
AC and Yugguy
Bullshit yourself. Under 'normal' circumstances I might agree with you, but abnormal circumstances where events happen very quickly despite you being aware of road conditions can still happen.
It doesn't happen very often, but it can happen, in which case, I would not want some stupid car deciding on my behalf to limit what I can do.
@ Lee D
"I'm heavily of the opinion that it's BILLIONS-TO-ONE against the human NEEDING to accelerate in an emergency situation unless they'd be an ABSOLUTE pillock of a driver just seconds before anyway"
Well there I have to disagree with you.
I had an occasion driving late at night on one of Melbournes 'freeways' which are 2 or 3 lanes in either direction. It was about 1 a.m. with very little traffic but raining with a wet road. About 100 or so metres in front of me was a Porsche, the only other vehicle on my side of the road. Both of us were inside the speed limit (it was raining after all) when suddenly the Porsche turned right and slammed head on into the central barrier, and stopped dead hard up against it. I start to slow down, with every intention of stopping to see if the driver is OK. As I am slowing down and within 30 to 50 metres, the Porsche suddenly starts slowly rolling backwards towards the near side lane. The road was slightly banked to the outside. It was too late to brake hard, (I am not sure of the exact distance now, as it happened a while ago, but I do know that it was too close to initiate braking) as I was very likely to just lock up and slide into it, which would have T-boned the driver's door. I dropped it 2 gears and floored it, aiming left. I reckon I cleared both the car and the near side barrier with about inch to spare. If this so-called 'smart car' had initiated a slow down, or enforced braking I would undoubtedly have T-boned the Porsche.
Admittedly, that's the only time I have ever had the need to accelerate to get out of danger, although I could probably put my mind to other situations, but in this one case the last thing I wanted was some idiot car deciding what I should be doing.
As far as I am concerned based on that single incident, that is the end of the argument. I want to be in total control of what the car does, and when it does it
Everything else you state, I am in full agreement with. I don't mind the aids, such as ABS (which might have helped if the car had it, but I'm still not sure I would have entirely trusted it under those circumstances), engine efficiency aids, and even traction control, but forcing actions upon the drive is just plain unsafe.
In most countries, my observation is that courier drivers themselves are a safety issue!!!!!
Not sure whether the icon is apropos or not!!
And there I was thinking of the children. Apparently that's not permitted any longer - even if they are over age!!
@ Tom 7
I really don't feel I actually need a fridge to tell me what I already know by a) looking at milk in fridge, note that it's getting a little low (or otherwise) and b) take a sniff of the milk. If it smells fine, I use it.
Same goes for all other food items in said fridge, and nary a Use By date do I need to look at either.
Ergo, no use for such a fridge.
"Let's put cameras inside every room of every home! Let's issue mandatory ID cards that have to be scanned any time you get on a train or bus (close . . .) or enter a building or purchase anything. We could all wear GPS-trackable bracelets if they like."
Nah! Don't need all that rubbish.
Everyone is micro-chipped when they are born, and hey presto, you can track everybody!!!
If you don't have, or 'volunteer' to have a chip implanted then you are automatically guilty.
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear and all that crap as well.
Do you think that 5 metres will be enough?
I have often wondered what the benefit was of a keyless car, and what's NOT convenient about carrying a physical key?
I have never had a mechanical key fail. I've misplaced them, yes, but while it's in my possession it just works.
Like dissecting a live (but anaesthetized) frog?
@ Sorry that handle is already taken.
I think what he meant to say, was that, in the past, they didn't have people who were supposedly intelligent beings, running around over-analysing anything that moved, then claiming that disaster was imminent.
They waited until the problem actually started to manifest itself, i.e. their prime waterfront property got inundated with the rising tide (possibly) so they moved inland a bit further.
Of course, also back then, then was no government to whom they could turn and claim that 'they ought to do something about it", like tax someone else to pay for their stupidity/cupidity/arrogance/etc to actually build an expensive house in an area which just might be affected by water/erosion/etc.
Or not actually building on a cliff-top because of the views and then complain when an earthquake drops several megatons of rock-face from their chosen building site.
Of course, that didn't prevent the soothsayers and other (sometimes religious) doom merchants from predicting the worst, especially if the stars were not in alignment or something.
I was going to add the Joke Alert icon, but I'm not entirely sure whether I am joking or not!!!
@ Dave Horn
Sod off with the "70 year old" bit.
Some of us have been playing with computers longer than you have so don't be so fucking patronising.
There are some pretty pathetic 20 year-old out there as well, you know.
@ phil dude
Shit mate, I don't know where you worked but when we were writing Assembler on an IBM mainframe for an airline back in the day before "organised" management came into play, we ALWAYS got all 3 right on target.
It's when the "professional managers" were involved and they brought in all the meetings to report 'progress' and multi-level management of a project that it all got fucked up.
We spent more time on so-called project management which in my experience, simply added more time and expense to the overheads.
I can quote, without mentioning any names, that I was involved in a project involving international companies, which we managed to complete in 6 months for a cost of around a quarter of a mill, while our opposite numbers spent several million and took well over 12 months to complete.
Bullshit costs money!!
Just my humble opinion but then I am now safely retired, and so obviously old-fashioned and 'out of touch' so I MUST be wrong!!!!
Back then Agile wasn't a concept, it was the normal way of working.
Your first paragraph may well be true but has little relevance to this case.
Your second paragraph is pure supposition on your part - and the U.S. Government's as well.
Unless you have some proof of course. Citation perhaps? But not one of the spurious U.S. Government allegations which remain just that, allegations.
Anyone can throw dirt around and some of it will stick. It seems you have bought the dirt big time.
Your analogy is a bit skewed. Possessing stolen goods is indeed a crime, but owning an open system which is used by OTHER people to store things, does not mean that any alleged IP content is in his possession. Google Drive, Dropbox, any other cloudy storage facilities perhaps?
Personally I am getting the impression that the Americans didn't like the competition, so this is their way of ridding themselves of a system to which their law enforcement agencies don't have access.
@ Lost all faith...
Or even worse. they'll do a Microsoft on you.
I'm sorry, we are no longer supporting your operating system as we have a much newer 'better' one. You will need to upgrade your vehicle to the next model.
This will make your car unusable or at risk of hacker attacks.
Good for you.
I can't remember now what I paid for a Panasonic 42 incher OLED HD not long ago here in NZ, but whatever I paid, was probably over-priced for what can be got now, as they can now be bought for NZ$599, around £300. I notice a Samsung 40 incher is dearer at NZ$649 (£325).
I don't know what your Sammie is like for blacks but the Panasonic is very good.
Obviously I don't know your circumstances but personally I think that those sorts of prices are bloody cheap for OLED.
You should really have another look at the latest TVs. They used to a have a problem with blacks, especially compared with plasma, but they've come a long way since then.
And they're a hell of a lot lighter to move!!! Even versus the old plasma screens.
With OLED black IS the new black.
@ Richard 12
Well, guys, all I can say is you are looking in the wrong direction.
I have no idea of the technicalities of LED lights with phosphors, colour shifts or whatever.
I had started replacing bulbs with lower wattage types, including halogen, and had just started using LED bulbs. Expensive yes, but if they last as long as they claim, then that will be fine by me.
All I can say is that I wouldn't have a crap CFL in the house and have just recently replaced 26 down lights, some of which were MR16 halogen (in the kitchen) and the remainder were R80 type.
They have all been replaced by a 10W dimmable sealed LED unit designed by a company here in NZ, and manufactured in China (of course) Not only are they as MUCH better light output than the MR16, they have a better spread, with not so much of a spotlight effect. They are that bright with a good colour that I have had dimmers installed so that I can get some mood lighting going. No problem with colour - they're just a warm white - about 3500 K I believe.
They are warrantied for 40,000 hours which my calculations lead me to believe that if I had them on 5 hours every night they should last me 21 years or so.
SO I guess the reason that Sammy and Philips are no longer interested is that once installed they are unlikely to sell any more bulbs for a great number of years. Diminishing returns with no built in obsolescence. Not a good business model these days.
Sorry Trev, 'guilt' is NOT a verb.
"The search in 8.1 is shit compared to 8"
I find the search in Win 7 is shit compared to the two alternative methods in XP.
Either the search fror the Start menu which I rarely use, or, for me, preferably, the Search obtained from right-clicking on Start. Much more flexible, and it allows me to shorten the search time by starting in a specific level in the path.
Win 7 doesn't distinguish between programs or files, so give me a pile of crap which may or may not include what I really want to search for.
I reluctantly went to Win 7 as that was all that was available other than Win 8, but I still prefer using my XP machine. At least I can still find what I am after in the XP machine.
Finding the program I want is also a hell of a lot simpler in XP, as far as I am concerned.
@Arnaut the less
"the German high command put too much trust in their machines"
You mean there are still people around who do not learn form history!!!
Nothing has changed, has it.
"Oh, OK - Odd, But OK. "
Shit, I do that when I'm completely sober!!!!!
Occasionally my fingers turn all dyslexic. It's the only explanation, as the brain still knows what it wants to say! Mostly.
Or maybe it's just age, and I'm just losing it - in more ways than one!
Oh well, the sun is well and truly over the yard-arm so it's wine time, when I promise I won't make any further comments.
Beer, because there isn't a wine icon, but it's still alcohol.
Oh, and have an up-vote you Sanctimonious Prick. Great Name!!
"I'm braking, why aren't you braking?"
Because, you fuckwit, I have no need to brake because I saw people braking several millenia in front of you, and I have just taken my foot off the accelerator, thus already slowing down and allowing ample room between your vehicle and mine!
If I need to, I will brake, but until then get outta my face.
And also as a consequence, not putting the shits up people following behind causing them to apply their brakes, and so on and so on, thus bringing a whole line of cars to an eventual standstill, simply because everyone reacted to (horrors) brakelights in front of them, and because they were travelling too closely, and/or they were distracted by their phone/stereo/kids/passengers etc, rather paying attention to what they were doing, and watching what the traffic was doing several cars in front of theirs. Admittedly not helped by large vehicles in front like trucks, SUVs, vans etc but if you allow enough space you get better vision ahead and also give yourself time to react if the vehicle in front slows down.
It often amazes me the faith that some drivers have in other driver's attention and reaction time, as they seem to think nothing of just changing lanes in front of other drivers - especially so in wet weather.
Also a great reliance on the braking efficiency/ability of the other driver's vehicles.
"Visit Swindon or Hemel Hempstead."
Or Colchester's Magic Roundabout (Google it)!!! Where you can go either way around the roundabout. One of my worst and scariest ever driving experiences in the U.K. - especially when it's your first time to the area, it's on a winter's night, and it's pissing down with rain and you can't see the road markings!
I couldn't tell who the hell I should be giving way to, so in the end waited for a suitable gap and just went, only to have a car come from my right with horn blaring.
Sorry chum, if that oxymoron known as a "road designer" had built a normal roundabout I wouldn't have had a problem. Likewise all those thousands of motorists who travel through it every day but have now got used to it.
Spawn of Satan icon because this roundabout is, and was probably designed by same.
"AM was woefully short of imagination in respect to the Mossie, they didn't believe that a wooden aircraft had any chance in an era of all-metal airframes"
Which is all the more remarkable as I saw that the ME 110 had a wooden frame, at least the rear half of it was which I saw on the remains of one at Hawkinge museum.
I don't know about the ME109's construction, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if it didn't have a similar construction. Does anyone know for sure?
And how is it going to handle stuff which is so past it's 'Use By' date (assuming it even had one) that the contents have now turned to a nasty shade of grey/green. Milk still weighs much the same despite having turned mostly solid!
Joke Alert, as the whole idea is a joke.
I have a far better solution to the problem. I use my eyes and brain - what's left of it after reading this drivel.
Sounds like a techos wet dream - except as an ex-techo, it doesn't even begin to register on my radar as a must have!
"After midnight on the day the rego is due, if not paid the car may only be driven to and from your residence to get your green slip (CTP insurance) ,pink slip (roadworthy) and the motor registry. "
I think the various Australian governments are missing a trick here. They should follow the UKs lead. If you haven't re-licensed/registered by the due date an automatic fine is issued. No grace and possibly no exceptions either.
I'm sorry sir, I was abroad for 3 months, so didn't get the reminder notice - or - well actually |I was in hospital having suffered a serious heart attack. My car got written off but the notification has not made it to the DVLA yet. (or whatever)
I don't know if these are valid 'get out of jail' reasons, or whether you are stuck with it.
Don't know whether anyone who has suffered any of the above can confirm or otherwise.
It always struck me as slightly bizarre, that other 'crimes' such as not paying your TV license fee had to be actually proved (sighting an actual TV on the premises) before you could be fined, and you usually had a grace period to pay up before any penalties applied.
"Tesla is bringing out a budget model next year or so. It won't be long before those start being sold second-hand, and we'll all be buying them."
Oh, that's alright then.
And who amongst the less well-off will be able to afford to buy, or at least maintain all this wonderful technology? Even second or third hand. New battery pack? How much to renew those?
Mind you it's as bad now with a lot of modern cars. It's OK for the first owner, and maybe even the second owner, but when the bits start going wrong, how is the 3rd hand owner to afford that.
$400 to replace a key which allows you to unlock you doors, switch off your alarm, and allow the engine to start. It's a joke.
OK for those on regular, reasonable incomes.Tough if you are unemployed and looking for a job, and no adequate public transport for your region.
"If half of all vehicles switch to electric, you'll have a surplus of petroleum. Guess what can fuel electric generation capacity? Petroleum - and virtually every other fuel on the planet."
I thought that the whole point of the electric vehicle exercise was to reduce the burning of fossil fuels!
"Your figures presume zero capacity left in the batteries of cars that use the facility."
Umm, if you have paid for a full battery, why would you swap it if it wasn't completely or near completely empty?
Jesus! Just what the world needs. More things to distract idiot drivers!
And yes, it looks cool, but really, just no.
Ha! That reminds of a particularly inane advertisement for toothpaste down in this part of the world (much as I would like to, the brand shall remain nameless) in which a woman in a white lab coat was perched on a stool in front of a white (or black) board and announced that, "I'm a scientist, so I know about equations." and then proceeded to tell us why we should buy the toothpaste she was promoting with know further mention of any equations or proof as to why it was better.
Maybe it also killed 99% of all household germs!!!
I would use the joke icon because that is what it was, but they appeared to be serious about it.
Have a beer instead. It's much better for your teeth.
I can remember a few years ago when I had a company and having registered to use government services, I went on-line to pay my VAT for the first time.
While HMRC's website had lots of help, unfortunately at the time that's all I could find. I clicked on links that suggested that they would lead me to a page to effect payment only to get more help. I went around in ever diminishing circles until finally, just before disappearing up my own fundamental orifice, I emailed them asking for some help in circumnavigating their website.
I also suggested (reasonably politely under the circumstances) that their website should have links to the actual functions from which help could be sought IF NEEDED and only then. Not the other way around as they had it.
Having said that, they were exceedingly prompt in getting back to me with a direct link into the requisite page. Maybe it was because I mentioned that I was desperate to pay them some MONEEEEYYY!
I don't know if they ever changed it but I am REALLY glad that I don't have to go through that any more.
Who designs these websites anyway. I was always of the opinion that you make a function easy to get to and use, and only supply help if explicitly asked for. The HMRC gave screeds of 'useful' advice. Unfortunately, that's all I managed to find despite trying every damn link on every page I came to. It just seems that someone forgot the purpose for which the pages existed
"The advice from the police is that your phone should be switched off and out of reach when driving"
These would be the same police who use hand held microphones for radios in their cars would it?
Unless they are now using hands-free microphones these days.
Once again people, you are all falling into the same old trap of blaming 'something'.
As been pointed out numerous times, it is distraction that is the problem not an individual device. The phone is irrelevant. It could just as easily be a sat nav, radio, or numerous other distractions, including looking at your passenger as you speak to them, stopping the kids fighting etc, etc.
The problem is purely yours as a driver. If you allow yourself to be distracted by anything, then the problem is totally yours, not anybody else, or any device.
From a safety point of view, it makes me laugh, in view of this conversation, about all the new technology been put into cars these days. I have just seen the latest advertisements claiming that they had a touch screen to control just about everything - which of course, having no knobs to even start to be able to control things by feel, you will have to look at to operate. Safe? I think not. And neither is voice activated technology, probably, when the damn thing refuses to recognises what you are saying as was demonstrated on Top Gear.
Here's a thought. Technology does NOT necessarily solve anything but can quite often exacerbate existing problems.
Nah, I prefer the old saying -
"Don't piss on my boots and tell me it's raining!"
Beer, 'cos if you drink too much of it, it could happen.
WTF is a hunta? I suspect you mean junta - pronounced "hunta", as it is originally (and probably still is) a Spanish word.
@ Phil O'Sophical
Indeed. Sadly this idea of a company phone has it's drawbacks - like the fuckwit who answered his in the middle of a movie in a theatre, without bothering to leave. Having not even bothered to switch it to silent or vibrate, he then proceeded to have a loud conversation, until I asked him to either shut up, or leave, to which he replied "I'm on call!"
My mind has never been so boggled.
No apologies that he might just have annoyed the shit out of the rest of the patrons who had gone along expecting to see a movie without external commentary.
Even more sadly, none of the staff bothered to intervene to ease other customer's annoyance at said dick-head.
As far as being contacted out of hours. My philosophy was always " I am quite willing to contribute my time in hours of need, but, at the same time, don't push your luck. I have signed a contract with the company for 40 (or whatever) hours per week, and that's all you get unless it suits me, which it quite often did, but just don't expect, as of right, that I will be contactable at will."
Companies are all too keen to insist that we abide by the contract provisions, but I found that some managers really did push their luck. I guess it made them look good to the higher ups - at our expense of course.
Having said that, many is the time that I have been called in when the shit hit the fan, and worked for possibly 24 hours straight (along with the rest of our group) to correct, a serious problem, sometimes even recreating data manually.
Really? What research have you uncovered that suggests that. Or is this just a case of you opening your mouth (figuratively speaking) and spewing any old garbage out into the ether to justify your own personal choice.
Personally, I don't even like the Win 7 Start menu. Mainly because I no longer can find the things I want to use, easily and quickly, as they have renamed some functions or buried them as a sub-task under some other name which doesn't bear any resemblance to what I am looking for and I don't like the concept of pinning stuff to the desktop or taskbar.
Call me old fashioned if you like, but I still use MS Office Toollbar on my old XP laptop as that is the way I have organised my stuff. I have several customised toolbars in there so I can go to the stuff I use most of the time in 2 mouse clicks. And that can be programs or folders or even specific web pages, and having got myself organised I don't really feel inclined to change my organisation just to suit you or Microsoft.
For the rest I resort to the normal program list.
How I organise my computer is surely up to me, not to you, not to MS nor anybody else.
The search facility in Win7 sucks as far as I am concerned. I still prefer the 'right click menu' Search as being far more usable.
I have yet to meet anyone in the real world who actually prefers Metro versus a Start menu, so can I use that fact in saying you are talking crap.
Perhaps you should leave it to other people to voice their own opinions, rather than trying to foist yours on them.
You don't have to like my opinions or agree with them, but perhaps you would be good enough to allow us to have them.
Incidentally, for the record I have been in IT since the early 60's, writing software using Assembler as well as higher level languages, through mainframes and pcs, and all the various guises of Windows. I have never had any problem transitioning from one version to the next until we got to Vista, which fortunately I only had a fleeting look at and disliked at first sight. I am now retired and simply can't be bothered trying to learn something I have no interest in other than a system which works for me.
There used to be a saying that 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' now seemingly replaced by 'change for changes sake.'
@ Ole Juul
Only common usage in the U.S. I wager. I've never heard it used anywhere else.
This may be a naive question, or an easily answered one, but why does a vehicle taking photographs/video of locations in streets need to record wi-fi traffic?
Have I missed a past discussion or explanation?
No, it's a legitimate copy but I just don't fucking NEED most of the stuff you mentioned. So fuck off you patronising bastard!!
Don't let your prejudices get in the way of an actual debate!
Actual cash is supposedly outdated now (by some) but it still hangs around as it it still has it's uses.
You and MS may consider it outdated code, but if it does all that one needs, then it's not actually outdated - is it!!
Indeed! When I started reading your post I was about to tell you (rudely) what I thought of your initial sentence. Fortunately, however, I read it all before ranting! LOL.
So have an upvote!
I have been in IT since the early 60s from mainframe through to pcs.
I have now retired.
Why in hell would I want anything more than XP and Office 2000 at home. It does me nicely for what I want to do and I have no intention of paying MS for product(s) I don't want or need.
I have just bought a new Win7 laptop as I thought my XP one had died, (it hadn't, it was just the screen which is now replaced) so now I am stuck with it.
I grant you that Win7 is probably/possibly a more secure OS and it might even be a lot better, but I hate the UI (and I don't use the term 'hate' lightly) as I can't find anything I want as in their wisdom MS designers have renamed functions, or placed them in places where it was not before.
Fortunately I discovered that I could get an XP type view of the Control Panel, but even with that, I still find there are things I can't find. If you are using it every day for work, that may not be a problem but for just doing emails and the odd letter at home, a likttle bit of photo tweaking and some music, and not a great deal more than that I just don't need it
Not to mention that I have some old programs running under XP which again does what I want them to, so I have no intention of upgrading (at a cost) to newer version which will run (possibly no better either) on WIn 7 or whatever.
I realise that I could use Libre Office or similar, and whilst I have loaded it, there is some functionality in Word and Excel which doesn't exist in Libre Office.
If MS offered ongoing support at a modest fee per year as outlined in the article, I would certainly consider that.
In short I just plain can't be bothered learning new UIs when I don't need 'em to do what I do.
I am investigating the possibility of going to a version of Linux, but I will certainly not be upgrading to more MS stuff. Sadly a lot of my programs don't have a Linux version. On the other hand I believe that one can run XP under Linux in a virtual box, so that may be the way to go.
I am still trying to get Virtual XP to work properly under Win 7. Mostly OK, but it won't see either my network or printer at the moment. The whole exercise is just bloody frustrating, and a huge time waster - especially as I am pretty computer literate.
Whatever happened to the idea of 'it just works'! Maybe I'm dreaming and it never was like that, but I do believe that was the dream we were sold
Have a beer. I am, as I need to cool off now.
So I am videoing a nice vista and accidentally film someone while panning. I would more than likely, not even notice, as I am looking at the view.
So now I'm a potential criminal am I?
This is heading for the same stupidities that happened in English playgrounds where the happy parents are filming their kids on swings, slides etc and they get pinged for filming kiddies.
Paedos and/or stalkers abound and we must be protected!! <sarcasm>