I thought we could leave the "hurr durr, evil M$" stuff behind, considering that today, Microsoft is technically so far behind Google and Apple that it does not even come close to matching them in invasiveness.
That doesn't make any sense... How does having one screwed up system justify another? Maybe we should start paying twice for groceries too, because we pay twice for toll roads and research papers...
My point is, whether or not you pay a fair amount doesn't depend on how many times you pay. Let's say your fair share is $10; $3 goes via taxes and $7 via the other mechanism. Here's a couple of scenarios where it's a good choice:
1) The new road is 60% in the public interest and 40% in the interest of its users, so 60% is paid with taxes and 40% via tolls.
2) Society feels it's reasonable that all children, regardless of family income, should have educational resources. 90% of school is funded by taxes and 10% funded by fees paid by students' families (lunch, field trips, books, etc.).
Both of these are reasonable, as long as the payment is actually covering costs - but in this case the first payment covers some of the costs, and the second payment increases the cost. That is, as a taxpayer I'm paying 1) for the research and also 2) for the extortionate access fees for universities, and as an independent researcher I'm ALSO paying 3) for my own private access to the results. The problem is that the funds from 2 and 3 do not fund the research, they fund the parasites that make 1 more expensive. I have no problem with a two-part payment for things where private benefit and public interest have the relation you describe, but when the secondary payment is a) entirely unnecessary, because the entirety of the work done is funded by the first, and b) feeds disgusting evil parasites that do nothing but harm to society, it's clearly immoral.
> The problem is that the funds from 2 and 3 do not fund the research, they fund the parasites that make 1 more expensive
Speaking generally, paying for someone else's profit is essential to the free market. Without profit, much less would get done.
Speaking about this case in particular, knowledge, at least much of scientific knowledge, should not be sold at whatever prices the market will bear, which is what these publications seem to be moving toward. Imagine the prices you could demand for knowledge of immunizations, relativity, DNA, law, history, etc. (if they weren't already publicly available). Imagine the disruption to science, to the advance of knowledge, and the incredible cost to humanity if only a few with enough money could access these ideas.
Adaptive cruise control is not autopilot. It does not steer for you. It's not in beta, it's been a production feature on high end cars for 10 or so years.
Regular cruise control has always deactivated with a momentary brake tap. Been this way since cruise control started coming on cars.
Based on my experience, when adaptive cruise control is braking, manually braking has unexpected consequences.
A tap can disable the current braking completely, resulting in an unexpected change in velocity. Frequently a bad idea, since the ACC is braking for a reason.
Applying normal braking pressure can add your braking pressure to the existing braking pressure, resulting in an abnormally large braking force, sometimes enough to initiate ABS on dry roads. Very disorientating, and it makes you unpredictable to drivers behind you.
The solution is to tap, then press a second later, but this requires you to be aware of the need to take manual control early in the situation.
The fact that you have to go to Google to search to find Microsoft pricing, and have to already have the knowledge that they have special "startup" pricing is a failure on Microsoft's part.
You know given the title and the bait it presents to a particular kind of people I should have known better than share with people a positive thing about Microsoft and to suggest they think for themselves.
You shared your positive experience about dealing with Microsoft, but you also downplayed the OP's experience. Even though he went through the process he attempted in some detail, you told him he was responsible for the poor customer service he got from Microsoft.
That's why you aren't getting favourable comments.
You're not getting downvoted because you're saying a positive thing about Microsoft, for the simple reason that the thing you're saying about Microsoft isn't positive.
When my grandmother's computer finally died a couple years ago, I bought her a chromebook to replace it... mom liked it so much I gave her one... now about half of my family that I regularly talk to uses them.
You can turn on and off each individual notification. And it also has voice commands built in to control the app. You don't even need the phone's screen on. It can be in your pocket while driving.
And it is relevant to you no matter what lane you are in. If there is a car on the shoulder, someone in the right lane could be not paying attention, and swerve into you to avoid that car. Though you should be always on high alert while driving, having a little extra notification and awareness could save your life.
> If there is a car on the shoulder, someone in the right lane could be not paying attention, and swerve into you to avoid that car.
Then on 101 they'd still be a lane or two away from me, so most of the time it doesn't matter. But someone's car is guaranteed to be broken down somewhere every day, so it just comes up all the time.
BTW, you actually can't turn it off without disabling all Hazards, but the rest of them like "object in lane" seem pretty good.
Wouldn't it be safer to pay attention to the road and notice someone swerving your way than to get an alert, look over your phone to read it, then look up to catch the swerving car?
There was an episode of Top Gear where they dropped a Saab and BMW on their roof from 8 feet in the air. IIRC, the Saab survived, and was able to even open it's doors. The BMW was basically flattened.
The problem I had with it was when it was in my pocket for a couple hours, I would pull it out and it would be off. I'd have to pop the cover and pull the battery to get it to boot back up. If it wasn't for that, it wouldn't have been totally terrible.
Comcast always gets singled out for their terrible customer support, but in my experience, it is no different than other companies of the same size / in the same space. And no, I wouldn't consider their service as bad, it's just what I would expect from a company of that size. And yes, I think as a company's CS is scaled to such a level, you will inevitably see a decrease in support quality. Compare their support to other tech giants of the same size and you will see the same issues.
Except when you're in my blind spot, and your pipes are pointing backwards, I still won't hear you until you're in front of me and I've already seen you. Cars are incredibly quiet inside these days.
I understand that concept that "Your pipes are pointing backwards so the isn't helping with making people aware of you in the front". From my research, it seems that most motorcycle accidents occur with a driver crossing, to the left, in front of the motorcycle and that the decibels, horn, and lights didn't help the driver (of the motorcycle).
I also agree that you don't have to make your bike EXTRA loud to be noticed but there is a perceived safety in sound. And if majority of the sound is exiting towards the back, there might a point to be made that the decibel level should increase to "hopefully" make the person in front of you aware.
