Anyone want a camping reservation on Lovell's Island 7/3 - 7/5?

inecather · 2012-05-25T04:35:44.306482+00:00

Yeah, I just hate this country's laws, which don't allow you to bring a bottle of wine to a picnic. I'm sure there are plenty of then that are unenforced, but I just don't want to run the risk of being hassled because I acted as if I were living in a civilized country.

inecather · 2012-05-24T22:29:03.541208+00:00

Alcoholic beverages are prohibited in all Massachusetts State Parks and Campgrounds.

Who would want to go camping with these sorts of restrictions?

juken · 2012-05-24T20:54:57.192005+00:00

Ah, sorry. The sarcasm did not come through for me. Though given the username of the person you replied to, their comment may not have been serious either.

juken · 2012-05-24T17:53:29.847990+00:00

Or... someone made a mistake. Wrote a script that collected all of the relevant files for an extension, and accidentally include one file that wasn't supposed to be included.

Do you really think that someone did this deliberately?

xeltius · 1 day

There are two main approaches. One is to act like a car. Carefully check to your left, signal, and merge to the left. Keep doing this until you get to a left turn lane, and take the left from there. To do this, it helps to have a mirror, so you can plan for when there will be a good chance to merge to the left.

If this doesn't work (you can't do it safely, or you just wind up at the intersection and realize that you forgot to merge), the alternative is a Copenhagen left. Here you just stay on the right, ride across the intersection, and stop on the other side. Turn your bike 90°, and wait for the light to turn in the other direction. This is one of the advantages of having a vehicle as small and maneuverable as a bike.

meagar · 1 day

Upvote for the gripping hand, and for respecting the family's wishes.

patarck · 2 days

Small wheels mean lower aerodynamic drag. They also mean lower rotational inertia, which means that accelerating is easier.

The step through frame makes mounting and dismounting easier. The space frame keeps the frame stiff despite not having the traditional large diamond design.

Moultons were pioneers in the small-wheeled bicycle world, setting the stage for folding bikes like the Brompton and Dahon. They had some of the earliest suspension systems (which this one doesn't have), as one of the disadvantages of small wheels is a harsher ride.

Now, I'm a little puzzled about this bike. While the frame looks a lot like a Moulton, it is missing some of the distinctive features, like the suspension, and it says "One Off". According to this article, there was a partnership between Moulton and a small framebuilder in Massachusetts known as One Off, but that article claims that they only made one bike, and this is not that bike.

Stereo · 3 days

I am in the US, and I pay a good deal of money for medical insurance for myself and my family. I made the assumption that tunamuffin has insurance, because many people in the US have private insurance (via employers or schools), or in some states, public assisted insurance (though that's not necessarily the case; I myself went uninsured for a few years in my early twenties).

If tunamuffin has insurance, and it's not paying for her bills, I would be interested to know because it would affect how willing I am to pay for insurance.

Stereo · 3 days

Does your health insurance not cover your medical bills?

emoray · 3 days

But, you can do that without the bartending by just busking. The question is, how is this more useful than any other form of juggling; the title implies that juggling isn't otherwise useful.

maxwellhill · 3 days

No. I am opposed to technologies which attempt to control what I can do on my own computer. You can stream video without restricting what I can do with that video stream once I receive it. Lots of people do. Heck, that's how TV used to work; they broadcast it, and anyone who could receive it was free to record it.

Hollywood tried to sue to prevent people from being able to make recordings of broadcast TV in their homes; the case went all the way to the Supreme Court, which held that you have the right to record videos in the privacy of your own home, as that constitutes fair use.

However, since then DRM has worked to limit acts which would otherwise be considered fair use; and the DMCA has given it the force of law, by making it illegal to produce devices that can circumvent DRM, even if everything you do with it is otherwise lawful.

This is a serious infringement of liberty. There are problems ranging from concerns about censorship, suppression of new business models for distribution of content, and simply removing the freedom of people to tinker with and control their own equipment.

So no, I am not opposed to "any video being streamed." I am opposed to video being streamed that is protected by DRM, which is by definition user-hostile and seriously infringes on personal liberty.

maxwellhill · 3 days

Youtube's HTML5 player doesn't actually use any DRM. They obscure the source of the stream a little bit; you can't just right click and download it. But the stream itself is unencrypted and you can save it and play it back later if you want to.

Yes, I am opposed to any technology which attempts to subvert my ability to use my computer the way I want to, including restricting me from copying content. And I oppose services which only deliver content over such technologies.

newarchivist · 4 days

Mass Ave in Cambridge can also get pretty dense with bikes. Never been to Portland so I can't compare to that.

maxwellhill · 4 days

It is DRM if people are implementing features that prevent you from using functionality of your computer in order to restrict what you can do with media that it is displaying. For instance, without DRM, I could save the stream and play it back later, just like I could with a VCR.

And it's a moral issue because it speaks to the issue of who controls our own property. I own my computer; that means that I should control it. But some people think that just because Hollywood is worried about its profits when anyone can copy files easily and cheaply, that I should no longer be in control of my own computer, but instead the manufacturer or provider of the operating system should provide tools to let Hollywood control what I can do with my computer.

Knapkin · 4 days

Oh, dear. That is terrible, and I wish him a speedy recovery.

Reading one of the witness descriptions in this thread, something caught my eye:

Fortunately there were a LOT of people right there on the street who were also calling 911 and helping to move the man off the street.

If you ever come across someone injured in an accident, and they are not conscious, do not, in any circumstances, try to move them off the street. If you are concerned about traffic, then put your car in front of them with flashers on, or get in front of them and direct traffic. If the victim has a spinal injury, and you move them, you could sever their spinal cord, paralyzing or killing them. Leave them for the EMTs to immobilize and move.

maxwellhill · 4 days

I would gladly purchase content legally through a channel such as those. However, all of those channels use DRM, which I am morally opposed to. Also, much of the content I am interested (for example, A Game of Thrones) in is not available via those channels.

sirquine · 4 days

That looks like it's from Juggling Lab, a juggling simulator written in Java. For instance, 94507 in Juggling Lab (requires Java applet support). It looks like the original post is based on a slightly lower throw height than the default; if you use the full interface, you can set it to 6 beats per second which looks like about what OP used.

Incompatibert · 5 days

It reduces the opportunity. Some people are not out there with tools trying to steal something; they just walk by, see something relatively valuable and easy to grab, and grab it.

Yeah, someone dedicated to stealing bike parts could carry an allen wrench around and strip bikes that they find. But it doesn't happen nearly as often as just grabbing something that they can quick-release.

Incompatibert · 5 days

It's never been a problem when I've done it.

I suppose if it ever became all that common a problem, you could start locking your wheel to the rack.

zarus · 6 days

Because the point of Bitcoin is to be decentralized, without any single point of control that can be corrupted by a single entity? If you have time tracked by a centralized service, then whoever runs that service can cheat by setting the clock back and generating a new block chain.

And, they do distribute the coins according to an algorithm. That algorithm is based on who puts the most work in to help secure the system; the more people who put their resources into solving the proof-of-work problem get the coins.

Now, that's not to say that there aren't some dubious aspects of Bitcoin. The fact that it's deflationary is one; that the rate of production of new coins will fall to zero, making it so much more valuable to have done mining earlier.

But other than the deflationary aspect, as far as I know, Bitcoin's proof of work system is the best out there, in large part because people are motivated to do the work to keep the block chain safe because they will get something of economic value for it.

zarus · 7 days

OP called it "BS", indicating that he thinks something is wrong with it, without specifying what he thinks is wrong our what he's looking for. So, no, there's nothing wrong with curiosity; but it would help if he elaborated on what he's looking for.

lobzo · 8 days

Or also "I put it up on its kickstand next to this canal, I wonder why it's not still here?"

Matterplay · 8 days

Do you have any evidence for this, that shows an effect other than prescriptivists getting annoyed? I've never found someone harder to understand because of how many "likes" (or "ums" or "uhs" or other filler words) they use. I do find people hard to understand based on them being unclear in other ways; and when someone is trying to describe something and having trouble, they may use more fillers to vamp. But I don't think that the fillers themselves actually impede understanding. That's just a hunch, though; I'd be interested to see evidence (beyond anecdotal) either way.

day465 · 9 days

The sad fact is, he isn't the first, nor will he be the last, to be revealed to be wrongfully executed, and yet the practice continues.

Cameron Todd Wilmington was executed for setting fire to his house and killing his children. But it turns out, the forensic evidence demonstrating that it was arson was completely unscientific, and it was likely an accidental fire.

How many innocent men do we need to kill before we decide that killing someone, when we have the option not to, is barbaric?

day465 · 9 days

We Americans could fix this, very easily.

Amend the Constitution to forbid the death penalty.

That we don't do so, and continue to allow states to do kill people, limited only by the courts interpretation of "cruel and unusual punishment", speaks volumes.

annodomini

TROPHY CASE

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Best Link 2009-12-10

annodomini

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login