In the past year, I've flown for vacation twice, with delays on one leg of each.
First one, United flight from IAD to SJU, 4-5 hour delay, mechanical issue, with updates from the gate agent every 45 minutes or so, basically keeping us well apprised of the status of our plane (and when that plane was no longer viable, of the replacement plane and then replacement crew). "Flight crew saw a warning light and needs to talk to company" then "company says try again" then "that didn't work, maintenance crew coming to look at it" then a few more similar updates. No, there was nothing we could do with the info, but it was nice to know the problem was being worked - at least made me feel less out of control.
Second one, Aer Lingus from DUB to IAD, 4 hour delay, mechanical issue, no updates from the gate agent beyond "so sorry, we're delayed another hour" every hour or so. I found this much more frustrating. No, there was nothing I could do either way, but it would have been nice to know a bit more about what was wrong, who was working the problem, etc. This felt more out of control, and more frustrating.
That's fair, but the United announcements had enough detail and were timed with obvious crew movement (flight, gate, mechanical), so all seemed plausible enough. Maybe they were just blowing smoke up our collective ass, but a few details make a difference (for me, at least).
Like the sibling said, you have to look at large monitors or commercial displays. But both tend to cost a lot more for similar features (due to not having ad revenue attached, I assume) or have other compromises.
The best options seems to be finding a TV that is reported to be usable without any sign-in and without internet connection. The number of models that fall in that category is getting smaller over time.
I'm confused, the article claims the TVs are uploading data when offline? That's is literally impossible. Are they using a different definition of offline from normal people?
Lack of access to the public doesn't necessarily mean there's an expectation of privacy. Criminals in jail typically have far less expectation of privacy in the US. That's been upheld by SCOTUS. Guards are (mostly) free to enter spaces and view prisoners at any time.
Not just that, but they go as far as claiming that single-use Solo cups are more environmentally than using a mug. Literally anything made cheap and quick and with little energy is better by their calculus. Doesn't pass the sniff test, IMO.
Not to mention the microplastics. Plus the Solo cups are transported over a great distance as well, between the fuel and packaging it could easily triple their carbon costs.
I have a handful of mugs that I've had for decades at this point, a couple even from my parents kitchen that they used some 30 years and probably before then.
And then there's thrift store mugs - sure they were almost certainly trucked to _somewhere_ a long time ago.
Which is insane. The federal government already knows who we are, via SSN, tax returns, and whatever else. The state already knows via tax returns, driver's license, and whatever else.
If we, collectively, don't want a true national ID, then federal regulations on state-issued IDs should be available (something roughly akin to ReadID, but with the ability to use the ID as a proof of age or other attribute as needed).
We'll get there eventually, but not before we try everything else first.
>Which is insane. The federal government already knows who we are, via SSN, tax returns, and whatever else. The state already knows via tax returns, driver's license, and whatever else.
"They can already send a drone to watch you and track your cell location and, and, and, why does it matter if they also slap up a million AI powered cameras?"
The point was to compare the proposed ID change with the state of surveillance before (bad but still not all that comprehensive) and after Flock et al (more comprehensive).
Whatever society needs... this is why we have elections and stuff.
Really, the broader point is I'm tired of giving away massive chunks of my PII (SSN, DL copies, etc) instead of just having something from the government that will say "Yep. He is who he claims."
If we, collectively, decide we need age-gated websites, then let's enable that properly. I shouldn't have to give NYT a scan of my DL and my SSN to gain access.
Huh, glad I grabbed my Neo two weeks ago. It's the "top" spec version, but still a good bit less than a MBA - seemed like a pretty reasonable replacement for the M1 iPadPro it replaced (wanted to go back to a normal laptop vs tablet).
He might be a treasure, but's he's also a prick. He has a long history of letting his on-screen persona leak into meatspace (or maybe it's the other way around) and that's not a good thing.
Edit - since people seem to not believe me, at minimum, he punched his producer [1]. Which wasn't the first time he turned violent - he punched Piers Morgan [2] for letting Clarkson's extramarital affairs go public. Oh, he also had poorly concealed extra-marital affairs.
And I'll admit I watch his shows. The first two seasons of Clarkson's Farm were good TV. And with May and Hammond, he provided years of entertainment for car enthusiasts. None of which should excuse his boorish behavior off-screen.
Same here. Watch it, it's good entertainment, he's still an asshole that uses people. In fact, even in the current show, where he used that insult on one of his employees who someone said she looked like pre-transition Caleb — that's exactly the kind of thing he does and he found that funny so couldn't help himself but use it.
I don’t know, in a world where dictators bomb whoever they want, if punching someone is the worst thing you can do. People continue to follow and fangirl the politicians who enact violence, so why should one go on a crusade against a tv star who gets a little hands on?
I wasn't conversing in the first place, I'm just bored of reading through exchanges where at some point someone says Aha! That's a fallacy! Got you, I win!
I know you weren’t. Which was my point: the conversation was not shut down. If pointing out someone’s manipulation is not OK to you, then you’re probably better off trying a different discussion board.
Where do you draw the line between money and speech? IE, would you "simply" ban all political advertising completely - one can scream from a soapbox and that's it?
First one, United flight from IAD to SJU, 4-5 hour delay, mechanical issue, with updates from the gate agent every 45 minutes or so, basically keeping us well apprised of the status of our plane (and when that plane was no longer viable, of the replacement plane and then replacement crew). "Flight crew saw a warning light and needs to talk to company" then "company says try again" then "that didn't work, maintenance crew coming to look at it" then a few more similar updates. No, there was nothing we could do with the info, but it was nice to know the problem was being worked - at least made me feel less out of control.
Second one, Aer Lingus from DUB to IAD, 4 hour delay, mechanical issue, no updates from the gate agent beyond "so sorry, we're delayed another hour" every hour or so. I found this much more frustrating. No, there was nothing I could do either way, but it would have been nice to know a bit more about what was wrong, who was working the problem, etc. This felt more out of control, and more frustrating.
reply