On 3/20/24 3:11 PM, Indira wrote:
> The Real Bev wrote:
>
>>> It has to be a light conversation, not deep. And not continuous.
>>
>> Nope. Anything at all.
>
> In Myers-Briggs terms, maybe you're likely a strong "J" since you appear to
> make rigid rules for yourself that you expect others to follow as you do.

I don't expect anybody to do anything except eventually die. Everything
else is up to them. I make rules for myself based on 80+ years of
experience. I am happy to give advice, but don't require anyone to take
it. I'm willing to admit my shortcomings and adapt. Many are not.

> If you don't know what your last category is, take this test to find out.
> https://www.humanmetrics.com/personality

I tried to read this stuff decades ago and found it hopelessly useless.

> But from what you wrote, you're clearly a very strong "J" type person.

No idea what that is. If you seriously want me and everyone else to
know, spit it out.

--
Cheers, Bev
"Windows Freedom Day: a holiday that moves each year, the date of which
is calculated by adding up the total amount of time a typical person
must spend restarting windows and then determining how many work weeks
that would correspond to." -- Trygve Lode

The Real Bev wrote:

>> If you don't know what your last category is, take this test to find out.
>> https://www.humanmetrics.com/personality
>
> I tried to read this stuff decades ago and found it hopelessly useless.

I used to teach this stuff so I'm professionally trained in the corporate
world as to what it means, where many who "think" they understand it, try
to make it into what it's not. It has limitations. But it's also useful.

>> But from what you wrote, you're clearly a very strong "J" type person.
>
> No idea what that is. If you seriously want me and everyone else to
> know, spit it out.

In a nutshell, M-B takes only four characteristics of human beings, where
there are hundreds of possible characteristics, so that's the first
limitation - it's only measuring four things about human nature.

Only two of the four characteristics have anything to do with each other.
The other two characteristics have nothing to do with the rest of them.

The two that have anything to do with each other are the middle two.
b. How you prefer to... get data to make decisions
c. How you prefer to... act on that data to make decisions

The other two have NOTHING to do with each other, but are important too.
a. How you prefer to... energize and in what kind of environment
d. How you prefer to... organize your life and expect others to act

Andrew wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote on Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:14:35 +0100 :
>
>> Thus I am not reading or
>> commenting on what you said.
>
> Doesn't matter. It's all been said before since we've discussed this in the
> past in gory detail, where you don't remember anything that was said then.
>
> The fact remains, everyone thinks that cellphones must raise the accident
> rate simply because they're an added distraction, and they are an added
> distraction - but there is no reliable evidence that they have any effect
> whatsoever on the accident rate in reliably reported USA Census Bureau
> Statistics.
>
> Furthermore, the fact remains everyone thinks making laws to make people do
> safe things would lower the accident rate, but again, teh reliable
> scientific evidence shows thta also is not the case.
>
> The laws have no first order effects whatsoever on safety but they do have
> a minor but statistically valid second-order effect on length of hospital
> stay.
>
> This was covered on March 16, 2016 on this newsgroup, and again in even
> more gory detail on July 6, 2020 on this very newsgroup, Carlos.
>
> Morons (without a shred of evidence) disputed it then.
> Those same morons (with no evidence) dispute it now.
>
> Morons will always be morons, but the facts remain true.
>
> The main reason cellphones have no effect on the accident rate is likely
> two fold, one of which is there are hundreds of distractions. Adding one is
> like adding another hair to your head. It changes nothing in statistics.
>
> In addition, cellphones prevent accidents, so they have a cancelling effect
> on the accident rate because they may prevent as many as they cause.
>
> It's not clear why cellphones have no effect whatsoever on the accident
> rate, but what's eminently clear in the reliable records is there is no
> change in the downward trend of accident rates in the USA for decades.
>
> Just like the first post-Covid should have been a superspreader event if
> all the morons were correct (and it wasn't), the facts show that cellphones
> do not change the accident rate (neither up, nor down) in effect.
>
> As with the Fermi Paradox, if you feel otherwise, you have to answer this:
> Q: Where are the accidents?
>

Why not drop it then?
Fiddling with a phone while driving is illegal most places, but a real
smart guy could figure out ways to get away with it. Maybe even prove how
safe it is.

Get busy, and do something!

Hank Rogers wrote on Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:54:32 -0500 :

> Fiddling with a phone while driving is illegal most places

Plenty of things are illegal, where in California, it's now illegal to NOT
compost your food waste, but what does it mean to be illegal to you anyway?

New Law Gives California Green Light to Fine Residents
Who Don't Recycle Food Waste
https://californiainsider.com/california-news/new-law-gives-california-green-light-to-fine-residents-who-dont-recycle-food-waste-5579378

> Maybe even prove how safe it is.

Been there. Done that.
<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=1681&group=news.admin.peering#>

Andrew wrote on Thu, 21 Mar 2024 03:47:18 -0000 (UTC) :

>> Maybe even prove how safe it is.
>
> Been there. Done that.
> <https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=1681&group=news.admin.peering#>

Most people are shockingly stupid, but that's what we have to deal with.
1. The morons have it easy
2. They never look anything up
3. They just make it up all the time

Which is why only a moron believes cellphones raised the accident rate.
They're sure of it.

They're all Dunning-Kruger left of Mount Stupid morons.

Me?
I would have thought the same thing the morons did, at least at first.
But then I looked it up.

However, it's a bitch to look things up.

But I made it easier for everyone, with this thread.
https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=1692&group=news.admin.peering#1692

You're welcome.

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2024-03-17 22:12, Andrew wrote:
> > Stan Brown wrote on Sun, 17 Mar 2024 09:03:20 -0700 :
> >
> >> There is no such thing as "an automobile driver with
> >> the right of way."
> >
> > First, anyone who claims cellphones raise the accident rate, is a moron.
> > (see below for the reason why I say that with confidence)
>
> Over here, the law says it is forbidden to use a phone while driving,
> without a hands free system. And even with such a system it recommends
> to keep the conversation to a minimum, and is justified by causing
> accidents.

In our country (NL) there are similar laws and we *know* that use of
mobile phones causes accidents, including with severe injury and death
(like 4 people in a (other) car), because we keep detailed stats on
circumstances, cause, etc..

'Andrew' seems to have some problems with statistics, because the
accident rate not going up (BTW, it *does* go up in our country) doesn't
mean that use of mobile phones doesn't cause accidents (to anyone with a
somewhat functioning brain, it's blatantly obvious that it does). *Why*
he can't draw (t)his erronous conclusion, has been explained to him all
the previous times his silly claim came up. Some people learn, others
don't.

> You are free to call the lawmakers and the entire police system morons.

When 'Andrew' starts insulting, everyone knows he has no case, but
can't handle/admit that fact.

On 2024-03-20 15:14, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2024-03-20 18:57, Andrew wrote:
>
> Notice that by following up to groups with "politic" in the name, my
> filters automatically kill the subthread. Thus I am not reading or
> commenting on what you said.
>
> Removing:
> alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns

I should be as careful. I have the bad habit of not removing the booby
sites when replying x-thread...

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

On 3/20/24 8:47 PM, Andrew wrote:
> Hank Rogers wrote on Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:54:32 -0500 :
>
>> Fiddling with a phone while driving is illegal most places
>
> Plenty of things are illegal, where in California, it's now illegal to NOT
> compost your food waste, but what does it mean to be illegal to you anyway?
>
> New Law Gives California Green Light to Fine Residents
> Who Don't Recycle Food Waste
> https://californiainsider.com/california-news/new-law-gives-california-green-light-to-fine-residents-who-dont-recycle-food-waste-5579378
>
>> Maybe even prove how safe it is.
>
> Been there. Done that.
> <https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=1681&group=news.admin.peering#>
>
FWIW. Here we're expected to put our food waste in plastic bags, tie
them closed, and deposit the little bags on top of our yard waste in the
yard waste container. There was much discussion about the nature of
these plastic bags and whether or not we were required to buy
compostable plastic bags.

The yard waste containers are picked up by a grabber-truck and the
contents dumped into the truck. Supposedly the bags are removed by
employees in hazmat suits where the yard waste trucks dump their
contents. They are then transported... somewhere... something.

I think unicorn poop may be involved, but I have no actual cite for
that. I can't imagine that the little bags aren't completely torn up by
rolling around in a truck full of twigs, logs, etc. but what do I know?

I'm sure that this works as well as plastic-recycling, aren't you?

--
Cheers, Bev
I remember when everybody posted to Usenet with their real,
deliverable e-mail address. Of all the sins committed by the
spammers, destroying the viability of the open Internet was the worst.
(Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, news.admin.net-abuse.email)

On 2024-03-23 21:14:20 +0000, The Real Bev said:

> On 3/20/24 8:47 PM, Andrew wrote:
>> Hank Rogers wrote on Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:54:32 -0500 :
>>
>>> Fiddling with a phone while driving is illegal most places
>>
>> Plenty of things are illegal, where in California, it's now illegal to NOT
>> compost your food waste, but what does it mean to be illegal to you anyway?
>>
>> New Law Gives California Green Light to Fine Residents
>> Who Don't Recycle Food Waste
>> https://californiainsider.com/california-news/new-law-gives-california-green-light-to-fine-residents-who-dont-recycle-food-waste-5579378
>>
>>
>>> Maybe even prove how safe it is.
>>
>> Been there. Done that.
>> <https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=1681&group=news.admin.peering#>
>>
>
> FWIW. Here we're expected to put our food waste in plastic bags, tie
> them closed, and deposit the little bags on top of our yard waste in
> the yard waste container. There was much discussion about the nature
> of these plastic bags and whether or not we were required to buy
> compostable plastic bags.
>
> The yard waste containers are picked up by a grabber-truck and the
> contents dumped into the truck. Supposedly the bags are removed by
> employees in hazmat suits where the yard waste trucks dump their
> contents. They are then transported... somewhere... something.
>
> I think unicorn poop may be involved, but I have no actual cite for
> that. I can't imagine that the little bags aren't completely torn up
> by rolling around in a truck full of twigs, logs, etc. but what do I
> know?
>
> I'm sure that this works as well as plastic-recycling, aren't you?

Last year here in New Zealand, the Auckland City Council delivered
little green hand-carried bins to every house. These are meant to be
used to put food waste in and collected from the kerbside each week.

And, as with most of these greenie knee-jerk reaction ideas, it's a
complete and utter waste of time and money.

1. It was forced on every household and the cost is an added fee in the
household city taxes ... whether or not you wanted the bin, whether or
not you use the bin. So those who already compost their own food waste
are paying for a service they don't need or want. (For comparison, the
general rubbish collection is paid for via tags you buy to put on the
bin which, if not stolen beforehand, are taken off when the bin is
emptied. The recycling wheelie bins are emptied for "free", although
would be included in increased household city taxes.)

2. The bins are small and light (especially when empty), so they blow all
over the street in windy weather.

3. Houses now put out two bins every week (three every second week when
the recycling is collected) on the same day in the collection area,
meaning the kerbside and/or pavement is covered in bins, and then
when empited many are left on the road.

4. There are presumably* now two rubbish trucks going around doing the
collecting every week on the same day. Three trucks on every second
week when the recycling wheelie bin also goes out. (* I've never
bothered to see if both the general rubbish and food waste is simply
dumped into the same collection truck, but recycling does go in a
separate truck to general rubbish.)

5. All the food waste is *supposedly* trucked down south to another city,
three hours drive away, for processing into whatever they use it for:
biogas, fertiliser, etc. (The same company processess the food waste
from all over New Zealand's North Island.)

On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:14:20 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> FWIW. Here we're expected to put our food waste in plastic bags, tie
> them closed, and deposit the little bags on top of our yard waste in the
> yard waste container. There was much discussion about the nature of
> these plastic bags and whether or not we were required to buy
> compostable plastic bags.

There are two kinds of people when it comes to composting ability, one of
which lives in an area where it's not feasible to compost into the ground.

I'm lucky in that I compost everything back into the ground, which requires
five things to do well, all of which I have an abundance of to do it right.
1. Layers of shredded paper/cardboard + kitchen/yard greens & browns
2. Space (to put the compost while it's being degraded by microbes)
3. Water (to enable the microbes to survive while dining on your scraps)
4. Periodic aeration (as oxygen consuming microbes do a better job)
5. Time (each bucket of compost takes about 3 months to decompose)

It would also be nice to have an outdoor industrial sized blender, as a
wood chipper is too big & messy and a kitchen blender far too small.
> The yard waste containers are picked up by a grabber-truck and the
> contents dumped into the truck. Supposedly the bags are removed by
> employees in hazmat suits where the yard waste trucks dump their
> contents. They are then transported... somewhere... something.

I always wanted to see what it looks like at the scrap yard where they have
to separate the broken lightbulbs from the bags of dog poop & the like. :)

> I think unicorn poop may be involved, but I have no actual cite for
> that. I can't imagine that the little bags aren't completely torn up by
> rolling around in a truck full of twigs, logs, etc. but what do I know?
>
> I'm sure that this works as well as plastic-recycling, aren't you?

It seems that for a short while, China bought our plastics but now it's no
longer feasible where a lot seems to be dumped into the oceans instead.

Frank Slootweg wrote on 21 Mar 2024 15:34:47 GMT :

> In our country (NL) there are similar laws and we *know* that use of
> mobile phones causes accidents, including with severe injury and death
> (like 4 people in a (other) car), because we keep detailed stats on
> circumstances, cause, etc.

There's a HUGE difference between an "accident" and the "accident rate".

> 'Andrew' seems to have some problems with statistics, because the
> accident rate not going up (BTW, it *does* go up in our country) doesn't
> mean that use of mobile phones doesn't cause accidents (to anyone with a
> somewhat functioning brain, it's blatantly obvious that it does). *Why*
> he can't draw (t)his erronous conclusion, has been explained to him all
> the previous times his silly claim came up. Some people learn, others
> don't.

I never once said inattentive driving doesn't cause accidents, Frank.

>> You are free to call the lawmakers and the entire police system morons.
>
> When 'Andrew' starts insulting, everyone knows he has no case, but
> can't handle/admit that fact.

I'm extremely well educated, Frank, which if you consider that mere fact to
be an insult to you, then that's your issue to deal with Frank. Not mine.

Read what I wrote, which is that the reliable statistics in the USA (and
Australia, by the way, but not in the UK for some odd reason) clearly and
emphatically show the accident rate in all fifty states has not changed
from its steady downward trend every year for the past few decades.

That steady downward trend remained such before, during & after the
meteoric rise in the use and ownership of cellphones while driving.

If you want to dispute those reliable statistics, you need to provide
something more than your "guess" that all reliable statistics are wrong.

On 3/23/2024 2:14 PM, The Real Bev wrote:

<snip>

> The yard waste containers are picked up by a grabber-truck and the
> contents dumped into the truck.  Supposedly the bags are removed by
> employees in hazmat suits where the yard waste trucks dump their
> contents.  They are then transported... somewhere... something.

In my area the food waste and yard waste are turned into compost which
is available to residents for free. They do a good job at removing the
non-compostable stuff that gets dumped into the yard waste bins.

In fact, today is the first day of the seven month window that it is
open:
<https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/environment-sustainability/compost-site>

There are no garbage police, yet, but it does benefit residents to sort
their trash into the gray, blue, and green bins because garbage rate
increases are tied to the amount of waste that ends up in the landfill,
versus waste that is turned into compost, or waste that is,
theoretically, recycled (I say "theoretically" because most of the
recycled material is usually no longer recycled (other than aluminum cans)).

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards