Microsoft 'Confirms' Windows 7 New Monthly Charge

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 12:46:17 -0500, nospam
wrote:
123456789 wrote:
Not in my state (AZ/US):

(d) Unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian control signal as
provided in section 28-646, a pedestrian facing a steady red
signal
alone shall not enter the roadway.


yes in your state:
https://www.azleg.gov/ars/28/00792.htm
28-792. Right-of-way at crosswalk
A. Except as provided in section 28-793, subsection B, if traffic
control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the
driver...

That code is for a MID-BLOCK crosswalk. Notice where it says "if
traffic control signals are NOT in place". 28-645 which I quoted
above applies to crosswalks at traffic lights.

In article , Wolf K
wrote:


Pedestrians do NOT have the right of way against a red light at a
traffic light controlled intersection!!! Where in hell did you get that
idea.

the motor vehicle code.

although, anyone stepping in front of a moving vehicle does so only
once. it's a problem that solves itself.

Varies by jurisdiction.

yep, but in general, motor vehicles must yield. bad things happen when
they don't.

In article , Wolf K
wrote:

Ontario is big. 1,096,395 km^2. Only Alaska and Quebec are bigger.

I found it an interesting fact that Sudbury Ontario is farther south
than much of Washington State.


True, in fact most Canadians live south of the 49th parallel. However,
we have a continental climate over most of the country, so Washington
State is balmy compared to most of Canada.

not last week, when they got hit with a lot of snow...

Wolf K wrote:
On 2019-02-12 13:40, notX wrote:
On 2/12/19 8:43 AM, Wolf K wrote:

[snip]

Ontario is big. 1,096,395 km^2. Only Alaska and Quebec are bigger.

I found it an interesting fact that Sudbury Ontario is farther south
than much of Washington State.




True, in fact most Canadians live south of the 49th parallel. However,
we have a continental climate over most of the country, so Washington
State is balmy compared to most of Canada.

But Washington state I'd say has two climates. I think you're referring to
the coastal one, then (when you mention balmy), and not the climate that
applies to center or eastern WA, which is dry (with cities like Yakima or
Spokane).

In article , Wolf K
wrote:

anyone that is in a position where they must 'slam on the brakes' to
avoid hitting someone or something is not paying attention and also
driving too fast for conditions.

Methinks you haven't driven that much. I've driven well in excess
1,000,000 miles, and I can tell you that the sudden appearance of
objects in your drive path can happen whether or not you are paying
attention.

of course they can. what you miss is that if a driver can't avoid such
events, they were not paying attention and/or driving too fast for
conditions, and i'll add to that, and/or driving while intoxicated.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

nospam wrote:
In article , Wolf K
wrote:

anyone that is in a position where they must 'slam on the brakes' to
avoid hitting someone or something is not paying attention and also
driving too fast for conditions.

Methinks you haven't driven that much. I've driven well in excess
1,000,000 miles, and I can tell you that the sudden appearance of
objects in your drive path can happen whether or not you are paying
attention.

of course they can. what you miss is that if a driver can't avoid such
events, they were not paying attention and/or driving too fast for
conditions, and i'll add to that, and/or driving while intoxicated.

According to accident reconstruction studies, the average braking
reaction time (i.e. "event" - "apply brakes") is about 2.2 seconds.

A car-length is approximately 15 feet (177 inches).

Standard roadway in the busoness districts around here is 25 MPH (36
feet per second). Assuming an average driver, that means any "sudden"
change in conditions within 6 car lengths will result in either slamming
on the brakes, or an accident.




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAlxjOs oACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooEzZQf/RP2xLi2RtR2R4NN1+HmNr4srFVkKITVTIE33/ivfyR3nLrpLiMpQiG6L
j2fKzsvr0CljM9nFTC34KDYmxtg7NYVMB5vQqWF3GdWl+7/vXktJ+p7VrYh/YVlh
my8m49WRFKR2nrnnflvmtJUfrq1N1hR2qjo2VLWJsYDnUKk7uj zkEvksJj6HUA2S
cXZ1SWHw16V29cQHbwh67EAv7x0vjEx4aA9qkukMMYeYqZfS6L StanRD08+aZYW9
FtVS4r5XkeSApjoSx+HJBJv/9/IT53abr5b/vDJyGtFLBxcLWRPWhRew7Okuob3m
hdD4y+eJQu28cWXOu73eFW/ciuGB/A==
=9Zcv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

In article , Dan Purgert
wrote:

anyone that is in a position where they must 'slam on the brakes' to
avoid hitting someone or something is not paying attention and also
driving too fast for conditions.

Methinks you haven't driven that much. I've driven well in excess
1,000,000 miles, and I can tell you that the sudden appearance of
objects in your drive path can happen whether or not you are paying
attention.

of course they can. what you miss is that if a driver can't avoid such
events, they were not paying attention and/or driving too fast for
conditions, and i'll add to that, and/or driving while intoxicated.

According to accident reconstruction studies, the average braking
reaction time (i.e. "event" - "apply brakes") is about 2.2 seconds.

human reaction time is generally about 0.3 seconds.

those with slower reaction times tend to crash.

A car-length is approximately 15 feet (177 inches).

Standard roadway in the busoness districts around here is 25 MPH (36
feet per second). Assuming an average driver, that means any "sudden"
change in conditions within 6 car lengths will result in either slamming
on the brakes, or an accident.

i was taught to follow at least 3 seconds behind.

of course, that never happens in the real world, which is one reason
why there are so many crashes.

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 16:42:04 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Dan Purgert
wrote:

anyone that is in a position where they must 'slam on the brakes' to
avoid hitting someone or something is not paying attention and also
driving too fast for conditions.

Methinks you haven't driven that much. I've driven well in excess
1,000,000 miles, and I can tell you that the sudden appearance of
objects in your drive path can happen whether or not you are paying
attention.

of course they can. what you miss is that if a driver can't avoid such
events, they were not paying attention and/or driving too fast for
conditions, and i'll add to that, and/or driving while intoxicated.

According to accident reconstruction studies, the average braking
reaction time (i.e. "event" - "apply brakes") is about 2.2 seconds.

human reaction time is generally about 0.3 seconds.

those with slower reaction times tend to crash.

A car-length is approximately 15 feet (177 inches).

Standard roadway in the busoness districts around here is 25 MPH (36
feet per second). Assuming an average driver, that means any "sudden"
change in conditions within 6 car lengths will result in either slamming
on the brakes, or an accident.

i was taught to follow at least 3 seconds behind.

of course, that never happens in the real world, which is one reason
why there are so many crashes.

Maybe if you'd slow down you wouldn't have "so many crashes".

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 15:39:13 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Wolf K
wrote:

anyone that is in a position where they must 'slam on the brakes' to
avoid hitting someone or something is not paying attention and also
driving too fast for conditions.

Methinks you haven't driven that much. I've driven well in excess
1,000,000 miles, and I can tell you that the sudden appearance of
objects in your drive path can happen whether or not you are paying
attention.

of course they can. what you miss is that if a driver can't avoid such
events, they were not paying attention and/or driving too fast for
conditions, and i'll add to that, and/or driving while intoxicated.

Utter and complete nonsense. Have you ever driven?

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 15:26:37 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Wolf K
wrote:

Ontario is big. 1,096,395 km^2. Only Alaska and Quebec are bigger.

I found it an interesting fact that Sudbury Ontario is farther south
than much of Washington State.


True, in fact most Canadians live south of the 49th parallel. However,
we have a continental climate over most of the country, so Washington
State is balmy compared to most of Canada.

not last week, when they got hit with a lot of snow...

Person A: "It was sunny yesterday!"
nospam: "not last night, it wasn't!"

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 11:04:48 -0800, Gene Wirchenko
wrote:

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 11:31:11 -0600, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 11:38:27 -0500, nospam
wrote:

[snip]

although, anyone stepping in front of a moving vehicle does so only
once. it's a problem that solves itself.

Not really.

And this, because of the efforts of many motorists. Many
pedestrians are horribly oblivious.

Drivers, too.

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 12:32:10 -0600, Mark Lloyd wrote:

On 2/12/19 3:37 AM, KWills Shill #3 wrote:

[snip]


I pay $40/month for unlimited data and text. But at a cost of
only 100 minutes a month. And they don't roll over. For me, this has
not been an issue.
Oh, after a set amount of data, it goes from 4G LTE to 3G. But
there is no additional cost for me. I've yet to reach the limit, so
this is also not an issue for me.

I'm on Verizon. They say they're going to eliminate 2G and 3G at the end
of the year (voice calls will use VOLTE). I wonder what they're going to
then.

[snip]

I believe that should say "voice calls will *still* use VOLTE", (VoLTE,
meaning Voice over LTE), just as they do now. Data will hopefully
migrate to 5G with a fallback to 4G. Good riddance to 3G and 2G. 2G was
obsolete somewhere around 2003 or so, but carriers kept it because of
the hundreds of thousands of telemetry customers who use it, especially
in the trucking industry.

On 2/11/2019 11:58 PM, T wrote:
On 2/11/19 10:19 PM, Mike wrote:
On 2/11/2019 5:49 PM, T wrote:
On 2/11/19 5:15 PM, Mike wrote:
LinuxÂ*hasÂ*notÂ*offeredÂ*aÂ*viableÂ*alternativeÂ* forÂ*theÂ*desktop.

Actually Linux Desktop are a wonderful substitute from Windows.
I run my shop on Fedora Xfce and am tickled with it.

What keep folks away is that Linux does not have but about 5%
of the application base as Windows, if that.

Your second paragraph contradicts your first paragraph.

Linux is a perfect solution for a closed/limited appliance like your
shop.

The missing 95% turns off people with general purpose systems.
Most people are not looking for a hobby fixing linux issues.
They want to get right on to posting pictures of their cat.
It takes only one missing piece to sour the deal.

Linux users are quick to denigrate people with expectations
different from their own.Â* Linux would have far better market
penetration if they'd catered to general users starting 20 years ago.

It is a lot closer now than you think.Â* Those folks I
moved to Linux can't even tell the difference.Â* They
are back to checking out the Cute Cat (no such thing, but
I digress) videos on You Tube in an instance.

As I said, if YOU build them an APPLIANCE that does everything they
want or need now and in the future, linux is a great choice.

Try this. Pick 100 windows desktop-only users who are not gurus,
ordinary people.
Give them a link to distrowatch. Tell them you'll give them $100
if they ditch windows and are using linux EXCLUSIVELY six months from now.
What do you think the outcome will be?

Of course, you'll have a zillion excuses why they won't. And that will
be the definition of what needs to be done to make desktop linux
palatable to the general public. It's not one big thing.
It's many-many little things.


I use windows 7 as my TV time-shifting machine.
Win10 won't do it. There's not much M$ could do to prevent me
using win7 in the future. It's an appliance that does what it
needs to do.
All my other desktop systems have plugin drives and can run win7
in the event that it's required.
But, for most stuff, we're all gonna be using win10 sooner or later.
And we'll all be paying more and more fees for everything they
can nail down so you can't get it for free.

On 02/12/2019 4:48 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 15:26:37 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Wolf K
wrote:

Ontario is big. 1,096,395 km^2. Only Alaska and Quebec are bigger.

I found it an interesting fact that Sudbury Ontario is farther south
than much of Washington State.


True, in fact most Canadians live south of the 49th parallel. However,
we have a continental climate over most of the country, so Washington
State is balmy compared to most of Canada.

not last week, when they got hit with a lot of snow...

Person A: "It was sunny yesterday!"
nospam: "not last night, it wasn't!"



Bang on, Char.

Rene

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 12:46:18 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Char Jackson
wrote:

Another example, A month or so ago I went to the downtown staples for
printer supplies, on coming out I have to cross a busy 6 lane street, As
I am waiting for the red light to turn green a woman texting on her
phone starts walking across the street against the red light and very
nearly got hit by a car who had to slam on his brakes to avoid hitting
her.

pedestrians have the right of way. if said driver had to 'slam on his
brakes' to avoid a collision, then it's the driver who is at fault for
not paying attention.

Pedestrians do NOT have the right of way against a red light at a
traffic light controlled intersection!!! Where in hell did you get that
idea.

the motor vehicle code.

Not true here in the US, AFAIK, though it could be different in your
country.

see links in other post.

I did, thanks. I thought it was interesting that they didn't support
your position.

If you expect to have the right of way as a pedestrian, you'd
better look for a designated crosswalk. There are a few other
exceptions, as well, but generally speaking if you step out wherever you
feel like it, you can be ticketed for jaywalking.

jaywalking might be illegal in some places, but it's the responsibility
of the driver not to hit said pedestrian if in the path of the vehicle.

and in new york city, not jaywalking marks you as a tourist. muggers
like tourists.

although, anyone stepping in front of a moving vehicle does so only
once. it's a problem that solves itself.

Not really.

yes really. they either end up injured and can't walk, or they're dead.

either way, no further occurrences.

Nonsense.