Re: Who makes the extra profit during a surge?
Get really local and add in average taxi fare + estimated time, transit fare + estimated time, and estimated walking time. For many local trips it might be less hassle just to walk.
644 posts • joined 30 Aug 2007
Get really local and add in average taxi fare + estimated time, transit fare + estimated time, and estimated walking time. For many local trips it might be less hassle just to walk.
As I understand it, once upon a time, hospitals and medical facilities charged uninsured patients the lowest rates and those with insurance got the highest bills (which the patients notionally did not see because insurance covered it). Now insurance companies are not paying diddly, and Medicare/Medicaid pay even less, leaving only those without insurance for bilking (which of course makes no sense: if I can not afford insurance, what makes you think I can pay for the machine that goes 'ping'?).
Apparently the great annals of security lore include countless examples of buildings being taken down, and people left reeling in terror, by bicycle tyre pumps and box wrenches. "No, sir, I can NOT lock all this in the trunk of my bike, so where do you want me to check it in?" In a city that warbles on about how great it is for bicyclists, no less. This same security checkpoint, I noted on exit, had also confiscated a 10" inflatable ball belonging to a youth who (with parent) I deduce had some family court business to endure: the youth (maybe eight years old?) had to sign her name that she had in fact received back her confiscated kick ball. Sigh in relief, citizens, you are being protected.
Call your phone, enter a series of prompted passwords, and kablooie. (OK, it'd be more complicated than that, but still ....)
Scuttle the ship, lads, they won't take our data alive! ==>
"When YOU ride your bike twenty miles a day, you can have a pile of cookies too".
Because beer goes nicely after bike rides. ==>
Not too keen on the Karcrashians, but I guess we need some shiny things for the suggestible to follow, as you in your wisdom have no doubt sussed out.
If china-crap-mart and the rest see that the annual cheap-tat flog-a-thon boosts sales figures to an appreciable level, it will be repeated. The consumers get their bread and circuses all under one roof. Win-win, right? Alas, I don't see this turd being shoved back whence it came.
Installed it on my XP box (yeah, yeah) late last year, and it always took a while to launch and get up to speed, but once up and running it was generally OK (even on bloated pig websites like Fecebook). The project that spurred the Chrome install ended, and I stopped using it but recently I had to fire it up and it took over ten minutes (wall clock time) to get from launch to a useable state; two windows (one regular, one incognito) opened a half-dozen separate processes, and my machine was more or less locked up for the duration. Just to go to one website that refuses to work with Opera or Firefox. I had heard that once upon a time Chrome was a lean, mean, snappy browsing machine, but I am not seeing this at all. I always clear all browser history "since the beginning of time" on exit, only have two extensions (ghostery and a no-script thingy) installed, so I am a bit flummoxed. Forced ten-minute breaks should be welcome but are mostly inconvenient. Pah.
My amigo is left-handed. Extremely left-handed. Many lefties simply make due with using their right hand for most tasks, however suboptimally, but my amigo does not. So imagine my surprise to hear that the iWatch is not designed to be ambidextrously used: the crown and magic button are both on one side (instead of the crown centered on one side, the button centered on the other opposite, and the display able to be flipped 180 degrees). Granted, extreme southpaws are likely only a small fraction of the potential market, but for a company known for its attention to the UI experience and whose trademark is "it just works" this seems an odd oversight.
as anyone looking for a job decides to run for president. The old lottery ticket jingle -- "all you need is a dollar and a dream" -- may need some adjusting ("all you need is a fat donor list and a delusion") but is generally still apt. Cushy chair and bucket of popcorn at the ready, awaiting the starting gun.
And a beer, gotta have beer. ==>
re: "Food is vastly cheaper than it used to be and food only makes up 13% or so of the family budget these days as opposed to 40% in 1900." Respectfully suggest that more of the food in 1900 was "real". Sure, we have made great strides in sanitation and ensuring some sort of purity of the ingredients used, and we have economies of production scale not available then, but a loaf of bread in 1900 had four or five ingredients (water, flour, yeast, salt, sugar) whereas now the average grocery store loaf has a long list of polysyllabic words. Many of these ingredients are of value (added vitamins and minerals) but many are, I suspect, cheap replacements/ filler to compensate low quality main ingredients. Would this be more or less healthy (per gram of product, per dollar spent) than a 1900s loaf? Back to the cost comparison, are the above figures comparing a relatively "real" diet today versus a typically preservative/ filler/ additive- free diet in 1900s? If not, do we have any ideas what it would cost today to have a diet comparable to that of the 1900s?
Beer = liquid bread.
EGON: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes! Volcanoes!
WINSTON: The dead rising from the grave!
PETER: Human sacrifice, seals and penguins living together, mass hysteria!
the Matt Taylor shirt knock-offs. I hope the artist who gave him the shirt (someone above said she made it?) can cash in on the McFuror, some good has to come from the twitstorm. Hells, I'd buy one.
Back when bandwidth was precious and rare, pages were built to load fast (much time spent leaning out JPEGs to find the balance between acceptable image quality and download speed).
Then broadband and other fat pipes got cheap(er), and it appears that web-page jockeys then threw in any and all gew-gaws into webpages without a care to weighing them before setting them live. Video on news sites is important (and beefy), as are security precautions on banking ones, but the rest of the lard? Nah.*
Now my colleague tells me that with the immense usage of mobile devices, webpages must again be writ lean and mean so that the devices' batteries don't get sucked to 'E' trying to load the latest eyecandy to decorate a news article.
This would be a welcome development, but as a quick "view source" on too many pages will show, that day has not yet arrived. When the text of a news article comprises 20 percent of the page code -- the rest of the words being/doing dawg-knows-what -- we have a problem, Houston.
* I don't begrudge publishers putting up adverts to pay their expenses, but I DO object to huge-ass animation and other files that eat up download time without adding anything useful to their message. If I am not in the market for product XYZ, all the blinking bold font on the planet will not help.
Rant over, carry on.
In America, 'liberal' and 'conservative' seem to be more about product branding and/or name-calling than internal consistency, at least as seen from my armchair. Some examples:
- "Liberals" are generally in favor of restrictions on the ability to possess firearms while "conservatives" want guns for all; it seems it should be the other way 'round.
- "Conservatives" who bang on about keeping Big Gubmint out of our business seem quite content to have (nay, urge) same Big Gubmint mucking about in how women oversee and maintain their lady parts.
- Ditto on who can enter into a marriage contract with whom.
- "Conservatives" don't often have much positive to say about conservation -- forest lands are for turning trees into money by campaign contributors, not for the public to access and enjoy.
- Many "liberals" have been branded as NIMBYs ("not in my back yard") who are BANANAs ("build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything"), sometimes with justification and sometimes not.
Caveat that these are gross simplifications, but still, it keeps politics interesting.
Just as we can not have a horror movie without someone doing something stupid ("instead of calling 911 and getting guys with guns over here, I'll go down into the basement in nothing but my pyjamas and a flashlight to see what that loud rumbling and shaking is about"), companies have to also do stupid stuff to keep their names in the news.
No popcorn icon, but beer's better anyway. -->
instead of further enriching the NFL bozos (and now the CNN ones), they might have more luck shifting customers away from Apple and/or newbies to tablets generally. Focus groups and other customer research are not cheap, but 400 mill could likely round up some college students around a keg of beer (or kids around pizza, or geezers like me around double-espressos and donuts) for a discussion of what sucks about Surface, what does not, how could it be better, and so on.
If the guy with the horns is supposed to be the PHB I guess that could be kinda' hellish.
@Henry Wertz 1: I was thinking the same thing. Instead of holding up the entire flight, why didn't someone just track down the hotspot and give the operator a stern talking to? I'm sure some of the more tech-savvy passengers could have done this if the TSA couldn't figure it out.
As Mark 85 said above, a class act. It's always great to hear about people of means using their funds to quietly do amazing stuff instead of being publicity whores.
Have another pint, sir.
Sounds like the same old w(h)ine in a different bottle: besides pretty window dressing (red ribbons for HIV/AIDS, pink ribbons for breast cancer, &c) what will the new stuff do that the existing stuff does not?
@ma1010: Agreed on CCW permits in states where permit-holders are required to take a safety class and show proficiency. However, at least Arizona (and possibly other states) now has greatly reduced the requirements for a CCW permit -- no safety class or proficiency test required, IIRC. Does not sound like a step in the right direction, but, as has been pointed out, the batshit criminal element wouldn't bother with no steenkin' permit either way.
Hammer don't hurt 'em!! (Can't touch this.)
... be aware that most clothes designed for vagina people have either no pockets or little details that are pockets in name only (they may hold two coins and a lipstick, but nothing useful like a wallet or celphone). Presumably this has something to do with wanting nothing so cumbersome as a moneyclip to detract from the wearer's natural form, but it is still surprising that so few items of female clothing have functional pockets -- not everyone is a supermodel every waking hour.
Sure, he was a dopey idiot to unsheath his blade for the camera, but unless he got voted into office vowing to smite all such activities from atop his moral high horse (and there's a hypocrisy angle), what is the news value? "Prime Minister does something stupid, film at eleven" doesn't exactly make one reach for the TiVo, does it.
Looks of similar dimensions to a whiskey (or whisky) flask to me, should fit nicely into a jacket stash pocket (see illustration -->). Sounds like a decent piece of kit, looking forward to further reviews when it's been put through its proper paces.
... now it's fallen a bit. Hope whatever money they saved by not doing more pre-launch testing was worth it. [* casts apprehensive glance at my iPad, which has just upgraded to 8, and hopes '8' is not interweb-speak for 'ate' *]
when we have put people in a space station (and brought them back -- alive), we're still hung up on pee-pees? Brown eyes, blue eyes; white skin, brown skin; left-handed, right-handed; vagina, penis -- honestly, who cares?
*snrk* Nah, I'll leave the stunt- cycling crashes to those with gold-plated insurance policies. ;)
In my area, an incident doesn't happen unless a cop sees it (or if there is too much resulting damage to ignore) and video footage of yet another near-miss might convince TPTB that the dodgy intersection of Zig and Zag needs more patrolling (or better signage or something). Such is the hope, anyway.
As stated above (by Dave 13), having video of the impact would be VERY helpful since too many scum/ perps simply drive away and cyclists don't always have the wherewithal (or ability) to note the license plate number as they greet the concrete. I'd also suggest considering an option for continuous (or "slap on/ slap off") video during a ride: there are MANY incidents wherein drivers will cut across the bike lane in front of cyclists (or do other stupid stuff) that causes the cyclist to swerve (and curse and use sign language) but does not cause an impact. While likely not prosecutable, such evidence would be useful in suggesting where police could be more effectively deployed (if it can be demonstrated that a large number of such incidents happen at such-and-such location), whether any signage or street striping would help reduce these incidents, et cetera. Yes, this is likely beyond the scope of what these brilliant interns have devised (thumbs way up, guys!), but might be a "next phase" option.
... but perhaps if she didn't act like such a silly git so often her press coverage would not be so ego- bruising? She certainly has the right (some would say "obligation") to act in ways that provoke media coverage, but it is disingenuous at best to feign shock -- shock, I say! -- that some of the resulting coverage has been less than positive. Such is the price of celebrity. (Caveat, of course, that one can lead a saintly life of good works and still get busted down by some internet troll.)
@KeepRefrigerated, re: "Of course 'Governments should work for their people' unfortunately does not quite sound so dramatic."
Problem is, for /which/ people should my government be working? We the people who elect our representatives? Or them the people who fund the campaigns? Very occasionally these two constituencies have concerns in common, but ....
Missed opportunity to educate moviegoers on even a dumbed down version of the science? Check.
Overemphasis on romance (yawn)? Check.
So I'll likely either give it a miss or wait for my library to get it on DVD.
However, if a "Hawking for dummies" flick piques people's interest in his work and prompts them to seek it out (and accidentally learn something), maybe it's not entirely a bad thing.
Keeping the beastie anonymous(e) for future missions? This is not the cat you seek ....
AC motorbike: perhaps if you precariously set a trayful of clattery things (pot lids, tin cans) on the seat and tank of the bike, the monster will upset them when she/he/it jumps on the bike and might get enough of the bejabbers scared out of it that the problem is solved. Not the most aesthetically appealing solution, but one of the more humane ones. Good luck!
Well placed, that.
Double your pleasure, double your fun.
Might need to vulcanize it, though. -->
Walking in 6" heels will exercise muscles you never knew you HAD, girlfren'. ;)
... the Russkies have seen our Snakes on a Plane and raised us Reptiles on a Rocket.
Ayuh ... what should be a simple "Find ______________ and search by [ ] name [ ] parcel/ case ID" form (text box + radio selector) form on almost any public information site is a raft of pages and pages of who- knows- what. Some sites that were designed a while ago are still fairly simple, lean, and fast, while many newer ones seem to have used the latest canned bullshit from the "Need to build a website? Have no HTML skills? Have we got the product for YOU!" snake oil sales vermin who get a kickback on whatever click-through and/or other tracking bullshit is buried in the aforementioned who- knows- what. Hangin's too good for 'em.
T-shirt is NOT faded, it's, um, DISTRESSED, all us hipsters wear 'em, you know ....
The Pacific volcano lair is being remodeled with upgraded shark tanks and other evil accoutrements, so we relocated to the Siberian summer lair for the duration.
Someone in Delaware might have gotten some shrimp burrito, or maybe it was beefsteak, the article didn't go into detail.
Cerveza to wash down the burrito, mi amigo. -->
re: "fiddling their expense accounts" -- or their interns, although I don't think anyone cares much about that anymore either.
The _Atlantic_ article states, in part: "The backlash [against the research methodology] in this case, seems tied directly to the sense that Facebook manipulated people -- used them as guinea pigs -- without their knowledge, and in a setting where that kind of manipulation feels intimate." The outrage, then, seems to be hinged on people thinking that fecebook does NOT manipulate people, that a company whose revenues derive in no small part from adverts would not manipulate its users. Hokay. Not sure how this is different to measuring the effectiveness of said adverts (using illustration A, 24% of viewers clicked the link, while using illustration B only got 15% of viewers to click") -- viewer sees stimulus, viewer takes action, fecebook keeps track, and correlations are hypothesized -- as someone posted above, if a service is free you are not the customer you are the product. Having said that, if fecebook does manage to gets its hands slapped this time, hallelujah.
looks like a less, um, complicated sex toy -- pure coincidence, right? Just wow. Now I fear the adult version of Hello Kitty -- Hello Pussy -- is not far behind, eeeeeyuuuughhh.
In theory, everyone is "in" on public parking -- first come, first served, luck and happenstance dictate when a space opens up in front of you. If I am trawling for a parking space, and one opens up in front of me, happy day, I wave to the departing driver in thanks, and life is good. If I am trawling and see someone in the front seat of a parked veehickle not move until a blue XYZ model with plate number 123 shows up out of nowhere so the XYZ-123 can park there even though I've clearly been waiting longer and visible to the driver of the parked car, how is that fair? I pay the taxes that make the public parking available as much as anyone else, yet the open-to-all crapshoot that is finding parking in any downtown now has the dice loaded for some and not others.
That'd be the U.S. Supreme Court -- http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/25/supreme_court_ruling_mobile_search_needs_warrant -- d'oh! Which means it applies nationwide, not just in one state or judicial circuit, does that sweeten the deal?
Y'all really bought a pig in a poke, didn'cha.
Although it was just decided in one of our courts (don't recall which) that police need a warrant to search cellphones, the reason being that they often hold more personal data than one's home. So not entirely useless, eh? Eh? Where'd you go ...?