Sqwertz wrote:
>
> Do men have an aversion to using coupons or discounts for groceries
> and other retailers?

I know a few men like that. The (dumb) bottom line to them is,
it's embarrassing to use coupons. They act like they would be
accepting welfare checks. Idiots.

Not me though. I look for discounts and I always look through the
coupon sections of the newspaper for coupons that I might use.
(Yes, I do still get the D&S printed newspapers delivered to my
door each morning).

Wednesday is my favorite newspaper day - contains all the local
grocery store sale flyers for the week.

On Saturday, January 13, 2018 at 6:43:00 AM UTC-6, Gary wrote:
> Sqwertz wrote:
> >
> > Do men have an aversion to using coupons or discounts for groceries
> > and other retailers?
>
> I know a few men like that. The (dumb) bottom line to them is,
> it's embarrassing to use coupons. They act like they would be
> accepting welfare checks. Idiots.
>
> Not me though. I look for discounts and I always look through the
> coupon sections of the newspaper for coupons that I might use.
> (Yes, I do still get the D&S printed newspapers delivered to my
> door each morning).
>
> Wednesday is my favorite newspaper day - contains all the local
> grocery store sale flyers for the week.

No, I use a coupon for something I buy, but manufacturers of plastic food product rarely offer coupons for what I buy.

John Kuthe...

On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 07:42:35 -0500, Gary > wrote:

>Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>> Do men have an aversion to using coupons or discounts for groceries
>> and other retailers?
>
>I know a few men like that. The (dumb) bottom line to them is,
>it's embarrassing to use coupons. They act like they would be
>accepting welfare checks. Idiots.

The problem is that it's wussy to use coupons. A real man doesn't
spend his time looking for coupons, when he can also wrestle a bear or
chop a tree. Coupons are for women, for when they're finished knitting
a sweater.

On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 11:47:02 -0800 (PST), John Kuthe
> wrote:

>On Saturday, January 13, 2018 at 6:43:00 AM UTC-6, Gary wrote:
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>> >
>> > Do men have an aversion to using coupons or discounts for groceries
>> > and other retailers?
>>
>> I know a few men like that. The (dumb) bottom line to them is,
>> it's embarrassing to use coupons. They act like they would be
>> accepting welfare checks. Idiots.
>>
>> Not me though. I look for discounts and I always look through the
>> coupon sections of the newspaper for coupons that I might use.
>> (Yes, I do still get the D&S printed newspapers delivered to my
>> door each morning).
>>
>> Wednesday is my favorite newspaper day - contains all the local
>> grocery store sale flyers for the week.
>
>No, I use a coupon for something I buy, but manufacturers of plastic food product rarely offer coupons for what I buy.

Besides, Chinese stuff is already as cheap as it can be.

John Kuthe wrote:
> On Saturday, January 13, 2018 at 6:43:00 AM UTC-6, Gary wrote:
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>> Do men have an aversion to using coupons or discounts for groceries
>>> and other retailers?
>> I know a few men like that. The (dumb) bottom line to them is,
>> it's embarrassing to use coupons. They act like they would be
>> accepting welfare checks. Idiots.
>>
>> Not me though. I look for discounts and I always look through the
>> coupon sections of the newspaper for coupons that I might use.
>> (Yes, I do still get the D&S printed newspapers delivered to my
>> door each morning).
>>
>> Wednesday is my favorite newspaper day - contains all the local
>> grocery store sale flyers for the week.
> No, I use a coupon for something I buy, but manufacturers of plastic food product rarely offer coupons for what I buy.
>
> John Kuthe...

That's just dumb.

On Saturday, January 13, 2018 at 2:43:00 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
>
> I know a few men like that. The (dumb) bottom line to them is,
> it's embarrassing to use coupons. They act like they would be
> accepting welfare checks. Idiots.
>
> Not me though. I look for discounts and I always look through the
> coupon sections of the newspaper for coupons that I might use.
> (Yes, I do still get the D&S printed newspapers delivered to my
> door each morning).
>
> Wednesday is my favorite newspaper day - contains all the local
> grocery store sale flyers for the week.

I'm surprised that paper coupons still exist. My guess is that they'll be replaced by phone apps. I saw my son scanning a gizmo with his phone recently. He got some fries or something like that. This this has some advantages over paper because it allows tracking of the user. This gives added value to promotions/marketing.

dsi1 wrote:

> On Saturday, January 13, 2018 at 2:43:00 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
> >
> > I know a few men like that. The (dumb) bottom line to them is,
> > it's embarrassing to use coupons. They act like they would be
> > accepting welfare checks. Idiots.
> >
> > Not me though. I look for discounts and I always look through the
> > coupon sections of the newspaper for coupons that I might use.
> > (Yes, I do still get the D&S printed newspapers delivered to my
> > door each morning).
> >
> > Wednesday is my favorite newspaper day - contains all the local
> > grocery store sale flyers for the week.
>
> I'm surprised that paper coupons still exist.

Yep, they are really "antique"...along the lines of printed airline timetables...


>My guess is that they'll be replaced by phone apps. I saw my son scanning a >gizmo with his phone recently. He got some fries or something like that. This >this has some advantages over paper because it allows tracking of the user. >This gives added value to promotions/marketing.


This is the trend...


--
Best
Greg

On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 20:20:32 -0800 (PST), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Saturday, January 13, 2018 at 2:43:00 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
>>
>> I know a few men like that. The (dumb) bottom line to them is,
>> it's embarrassing to use coupons. They act like they would be
>> accepting welfare checks. Idiots.
>>
>> Not me though. I look for discounts and I always look through the
>> coupon sections of the newspaper for coupons that I might use.
>> (Yes, I do still get the D&S printed newspapers delivered to my
>> door each morning).
>>
>> Wednesday is my favorite newspaper day - contains all the local
>> grocery store sale flyers for the week.
>
>I'm surprised that paper coupons still exist. My guess is that they'll be replaced by phone apps. I saw my son scanning a gizmo with his phone recently. He got some fries or something like that. This this has some advantages over paper because it allows tracking of the user. This gives added value to promotions/marketing.

Biddies and fuddyduddies like paper.

On Saturday, January 13, 2018 at 11:14:11 PM UTC-6, Bruce wrote:
>
> Biddies and fuddyduddies like paper.
>
>
Well, I must be both. I don't receive a newspaper to clip coupons
so I rely on Coupons.com. I can have them sent to my phone but
I'm only allowed to download that coupon once. However, if I print
that coupon I can immediately make as many copies I want. Paper
coupons still have their place but admit to only printing multi-
ples of 'valuable' coupons.

On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 21:52:54 -0800 (PST), "
> wrote:

>On Saturday, January 13, 2018 at 11:14:11 PM UTC-6, Bruce wrote:
>>
>> Biddies and fuddyduddies like paper.
>>
>>
>Well, I must be both. I don't receive a newspaper to clip coupons
>so I rely on Coupons.com. I can have them sent to my phone but
>I'm only allowed to download that coupon once. However, if I print
>that coupon I can immediately make as many copies I want. Paper
>coupons still have their place but admit to only printing multi-
>ples of 'valuable' coupons.

I prefer paper too. We don't have mobile range so I'm clueless when it
comes to mobile phones. If we ever move, I'll have to catch up.

In article >,
says...
> I wouldn't be surprised.
I deal with the people not likely to own smart phones as a profession.
OTOH, the majority of the population do carry these phones. For more
information, just go to any public place and look around. The only
people not gawking at cell phones are over the age of 60.

That doesn't tell you we don't own one. Only, that we use them a
different way.

Mine is for my convenience only, so mostly it's OFF and the number is a
closely guarded secret on a need to know basis only. If you ask for it,
that means I don't need you to know it.

I can get round the supermarket without asking anyone, even rfc, what I
should buy for dinner. I spend whole days out in the big wide world
without need of a life-coach, life-support and counselling.

Janet UK

dsi1 wrote:
>
> I'm surprised that paper coupons still exist.

Only in the Sunday newspaper and occasionally in the mail here.

> My guess is that they'll be replaced by phone apps.

That's been happening for a long time...online or phone coupons.
I still look at them all but not so often find a good one to use.
Even the printed newpapers are on the way out. Just a matter of a
few more years.

Janet wrote:
>
> I can get round the supermarket without asking anyone, even rfc, what I
> should buy for dinner. I spend whole days out in the big wide world
> without need of a life-coach, life-support and counseling.

Well said. I bought a cheap smart phone over a year ago (cheap)
but I still haven't activated it. I should have one for
emergencies only but not like most people who seem to be all
addicted to them.

I'm in the old school of holdouts, so it seems. I still get the
printed newspaper each day...I still prefer printed books...I
still pay most bills by written checks. IMO, just because new
things crop up constantly doesn't mean they are better.

I read an article in the newspaper just yesterday....GM is set to
start manufacturing, large scale, new cars in 2019 that have no
steering wheels, no pedals, no things on the dash for people to
use. Not for me. That is coming (to our roads) way too fast for
me - not enough testing time. I wouldn't be too quick to ride in
one plus it scares me a bit to be out on the roads with all these
completely automatic cars driving around. Sorry... nope.

IMO, by pushing this new tech so fast, there are going to be a
lot of horrible accidental deaths before it's perfected and
deemed safer.

On 1/14/2018 10:57 AM, Gary wrote:
> Janet wrote:

> I'm in the old school of holdouts, so it seems. I still get the
> printed newspaper each day...I still prefer printed books...I
> still pay most bills by written checks. IMO, just because new
> things crop up constantly doesn't mean they are better.

I think it's better I pay my bills through my bank's website
and save $$ on stamps and remembering did one of us mail the
bills?

> I read an article in the newspaper just yesterday....GM is set to
> start manufacturing, large scale, new cars in 2019 that have no
> steering wheels, no pedals, no things on the dash for people to
> use. Not for me. That is coming (to our roads) way too fast for
> me - not enough testing time. I wouldn't be too quick to ride in
> one plus it scares me a bit to be out on the roads with all these
> completely automatic cars driving around. Sorry... nope.

Unless you decide to stay off he roads completely, I hate to tell
you, you don't get to vote on it. The Jetsons are now (as Hank
said, {laugh!}).

Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
all the time now. Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
be safe to ride a motorcycle again.

nancy

Nancy Young wrote:
>
> Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
> all the time now. Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
> be safe to ride a motorcycle again.

Where's the fun in riding on a driverless motorcycle?

On 1/14/2018 11:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
> On 1/14/2018 10:57 AM, Gary wrote:
>> Janet wrote:
>
>> I'm in the old school of holdouts, so it seems. I still get the
>> printed newspaper each day...I still prefer printed books...I
>> still pay most bills by written checks.Â* IMO, just because new
>> things crop up constantly doesn't mean they are better.
>
> I think it's better I pay my bills through my bank's website
> and save $$ on stamps and remembering did one of us mail the
> bills?

I write about 12 checks a year. So far, our taxes and water bill have to
be a check. Grandkids birthdays too.
>
>> I read an article in the newspaper just yesterday....GM is set to
>> start manufacturing, large scale, new cars in 2019 that have no
>> steering wheels, no pedals, no things on the dash for people to
>> use.
>
> Unless you decide to stay off he roads completely, I hate to tell
> you, you don't get to vote on it.Â* The Jetsons are now (as Hank
> said, {laugh!}).
>
> Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
> all the time now.Â* Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
> be safe to ride a motorcycle again.
>
> nancy
>
>

Death rate on the roads has been going up. One reason is impaired
driving from drug use, texting, etc. Driverless cars will eliminate
much of that and get the stoners home safely.

I don't quite comprehend a car with not steering wheel or pedals though.
How do you move it to the other end of the driveway or into a
particular parking slot at the market? I can see it getting me from
Boston to Kansas but how do I get it to park on the left side of the
driveway on a private road?

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 4:01:58 AM UTC-10, Janet wrote:
>
> That doesn't tell you we don't own one. Only, that we use them a
> different way.
>
> Mine is for my convenience only, so mostly it's OFF and the number is a
> closely guarded secret on a need to know basis only. If you ask for it,
> that means I don't need you to know it.
>
> I can get round the supermarket without asking anyone, even rfc, what I
> should buy for dinner. I spend whole days out in the big wide world
> without need of a life-coach, life-support and counselling.
>
> Janet UK

I have no idea about cell phone usage in the UK. My comment were about their usage in my location. I assume that it's similar on the mainland - but I could be wrong.

On 1/14/2018 9:49 AM, Gary wrote:
> Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>> Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
>> all the time now. Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
>> be safe to ride a motorcycle again.
>
> Where's the fun in riding on a driverless motorcycle?
>
Lol, point...

On 1/14/2018 11:54 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 1/14/2018 11:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:

>> I think it's better I pay my bills through my bank's website
>> and save $$ on stamps and remembering did one of us mail the
>> bills?
>
> I write about 12 checks a year. So far, our taxes and water bill have to
> be a check.Â* Grandkids birthdays too.

For me it's taxes and sewer but the rest of the utilities were
all over automatic deduction from your checking before online bill
pay was all that common, here.

I really can't go back to worrying if the bills were mailed but I
try to support the post office by mailing occasional bills like
doctors or subscriptions.
>> Unless you decide to stay off he roads completely, I hate to tell
>> you, you don't get to vote on it.Â* The Jetsons are now (as Hank
>> said, {laugh!}).
>>
>> Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
>> all the time now.Â* Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
>> be safe to ride a motorcycle again.

> Death rate on the roads has been going up.Â* One reason is impaired
> driving from drug use, texting, etc.Â* Driverless cars will eliminate
> much of that and get the stoners home safely.

I've been driving a long time and a lot of miles but I never saw
such rampant distracted driving.

I love to drive so I don't want a steering wheel etc free car but
I must say it would come in handy if I had to drive at night, my
night vision is not what it was. A car that can take me home
would be nice.

> I don't quite comprehend a car with not steering wheel or pedals though.
> Â*How do you move it to the other end of the driveway or into a
> particular parking slot at the market?Â* I can see it getting me from
> Boston to Kansas but how do I get it to park on the left side of the
> driveway on a private road?

Maybe it could be like those hoverboards, you just lean the way you
want to go. It is an interesting question, maybe it will have a
touch screen you could use to guide the car.

nancy

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 5:58:21 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
> Janet wrote:
> >
> > I can get round the supermarket without asking anyone, even rfc, what I
> > should buy for dinner. I spend whole days out in the big wide world
> > without need of a life-coach, life-support and counseling.
>
> Well said. I bought a cheap smart phone over a year ago (cheap)
> but I still haven't activated it. I should have one for
> emergencies only but not like most people who seem to be all
> addicted to them.
>
> I'm in the old school of holdouts, so it seems. I still get the
> printed newspaper each day...I still prefer printed books...I
> still pay most bills by written checks. IMO, just because new
> things crop up constantly doesn't mean they are better.
>
> I read an article in the newspaper just yesterday....GM is set to
> start manufacturing, large scale, new cars in 2019 that have no
> steering wheels, no pedals, no things on the dash for people to
> use. Not for me. That is coming (to our roads) way too fast for
> me - not enough testing time. I wouldn't be too quick to ride in
> one plus it scares me a bit to be out on the roads with all these
> completely automatic cars driving around. Sorry... nope.
>
> IMO, by pushing this new tech so fast, there are going to be a
> lot of horrible accidental deaths before it's perfected and
> deemed safer.

I frequently ask folks over the age of 70 about their cell phones. What I expect to see are feature phones common 10 to 15 years ago. Sometimes it's older generation iPhones which their kids gave to them that they don't know how to operate. Some people over 70 do have the latest smartphones. Typically these are big haole guys that are well off and look like they're dressed for the golf course. They're into technology. Good for them.

I don't understand the attitude of people regarding self-driving cars. They seem to completely ignore the fact that humans are terrible drivers and that about 100 people die and over 10,000 are injured every day by this incredibly deadly consumer product. These new cars don't have to be perfect - merely better than human drivers.

On 2018-01-14 11:49 AM, Gary wrote:
> Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>> Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
>> all the time now. Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
>> be safe to ride a motorcycle again.
>
> Where's the fun in riding on a driverless motorcycle?
>


Really?

On 2018-01-14 11:54 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 1/14/2018 11:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>> On 1/14/2018 10:57 AM, Gary wrote:
>>> Janet wrote:
>>
>>> I'm in the old school of holdouts, so it seems. I still get the
>>> printed newspaper each day...I still prefer printed books...I
>>> still pay most bills by written checks.Â* IMO, just because new
>>> things crop up constantly doesn't mean they are better.
>>
>> I think it's better I pay my bills through my bank's website
>> and save $$ on stamps and remembering did one of us mail the
>> bills?
>
> I write about 12 checks a year. So far, our taxes and water bill have to
> be a check.Â* Grandkids birthdays too.
>>
>>> I read an article in the newspaper just yesterday....GM is set to
>>> start manufacturing, large scale, new cars in 2019 that have no
>>> steering wheels, no pedals, no things on the dash for people to
>>> use.
>>
>> Unless you decide to stay off he roads completely, I hate to tell
>> you, you don't get to vote on it.Â* The Jetsons are now (as Hank
>> said, {laugh!}).
>>
>> Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
>> all the time now.Â* Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
>> be safe to ride a motorcycle again.
>>
>> nancy
>>
>>
>
> Death rate on the roads has been going up.Â* One reason is impaired
> driving from drug use, texting, etc.Â* Driverless cars will eliminate
> much of that and get the stoners home safely.


Not according to the stats on Wikipedia. According to their data,
vehicle crash fatality rates have been declining fairly steadily for
about 40 years up to 2046.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...n_U.S._by_year
>
> I don't quite comprehend a car with not steering wheel or pedals though.
> Â*How do you move it to the other end of the driveway or into a
> particular parking slot at the market?Â* I can see it getting me from
> Boston to Kansas but how do I get it to park on the left side of the
> driveway on a private road?

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 7:47:28 AM UTC-10, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>
> Not according to the stats on Wikipedia. According to their data,
> vehicle crash fatality rates have been declining fairly steadily for
> about 40 years up to 2046.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...n_U.S._by_year

https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/6/1...istics-us-2016

On 1/14/2018 10:34 AM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 5:58:21 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
>> Janet wrote:
>>>
>>> I can get round the supermarket without asking anyone, even rfc, what I
>>> should buy for dinner. I spend whole days out in the big wide world
>>> without need of a life-coach, life-support and counseling.
>>
>> Well said. I bought a cheap smart phone over a year ago (cheap)
>> but I still haven't activated it. I should have one for
>> emergencies only but not like most people who seem to be all
>> addicted to them.
>>
>> I'm in the old school of holdouts, so it seems. I still get the
>> printed newspaper each day...I still prefer printed books...I
>> still pay most bills by written checks. IMO, just because new
>> things crop up constantly doesn't mean they are better.
>>
>> I read an article in the newspaper just yesterday....GM is set to
>> start manufacturing, large scale, new cars in 2019 that have no
>> steering wheels, no pedals, no things on the dash for people to
>> use. Not for me. That is coming (to our roads) way too fast for
>> me - not enough testing time. I wouldn't be too quick to ride in
>> one plus it scares me a bit to be out on the roads with all these
>> completely automatic cars driving around. Sorry... nope.
>>
>> IMO, by pushing this new tech so fast, there are going to be a
>> lot of horrible accidental deaths before it's perfected and
>> deemed safer.
>
> I frequently ask folks over the age of 70 about their cell phones. What I expect to see are feature phones common 10 to 15 years ago. Sometimes it's older generation iPhones which their kids gave to them that they don't know how to operate. Some people over 70 do have the latest smartphones. Typically these are big haole guys that are well off and look like they're dressed for the golf course. They're into technology. Good for them.
>

Beats being left in the street searching for non-existent pay phones...

> I don't understand the attitude of people regarding self-driving cars. They seem to completely ignore the fact that humans are terrible drivers and that about 100 people die and over 10,000 are injured every day by this incredibly deadly consumer product. These new cars don't have to be perfect - merely better than human drivers.
>

Designed and programmed by...wait for it...US!

Yeah, I can live without completely surrendering my 'autonomy' to the
collective...

Consider, most airplanes have self-flying technology, but takeoffs and
landings are still human-centric.

http://www.askthepilot.com/questiona...omation-myths/

The best analogy, I think, is one that compares flying to medicine.
Essentially, high-tech cockpit equipment assists pilots in the way that
high-tech medical equipment assists physicians and surgeons. It has
vastly improved their capabilities, and certain tasks have been
simplified, but a plane can no more €œfly itself€� than a modern operating
room can perform an organ transplant €œby itself.€�

€œTalk about medical progress, and people think about technology,€� wrote
the surgeon and author Atul Gawande in a 2011 issue of The New Yorker.
€œBut the capabilities of doctors matter every bit as much as the
technology. This is true of all professions. What ultimately makes the
difference is how well people use the technology.€�

That about nails it.

On 1/14/2018 10:57 AM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 7:47:28 AM UTC-10, Dave Smith wrote:
>>
>>
>> Not according to the stats on Wikipedia. According to their data,
>> vehicle crash fatality rates have been declining fairly steadily for
>> about 40 years up to 2046.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...n_U.S._by_year
>
> https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/6/1...istics-us-2016
>

http://www.askthepilot.com/questiona...omation-myths/

And aside from the tremendous safety and technological challenges, wed
also need a more or less full redesign of our aviation infrastructure,
from developing a fleet of highly expensive, currently nonexistent
aircraft, to a totally new air traffic control system. Each of these
would cost tens of billions of dollars and take many years to develop.
We still havent perfected the idea of unmanned cars, trains, or ships;
the leap to commercial aircraft would be harder and more expensive by
orders of magnitude. And after all of that, youd still need human
beings to operate these planes from afar.

Im not saying its beyond our capabilities. We could be flying around
in unmanned airliners, just as we could be living in cities on Mars, or
at the bottom of the ocean. Ultimately, it isnt a technological
challenge so much as one of cost and practicality.

I know how this sounds to some of you. Heres this Luddite pilot who
cant bear the prospect of seeing his profession go the way of the
teletype operator. Its precisely because Im an airline pilot that my
argument isnt to be trusted.

You can believe that if you want to, but I assure you Im being neither
naïve nor dishonest. And by no means am I opposed to the advance of
technology. What I am opposed to are foolish and fanciful extrapolations
of technology, and distorted depictions of what my colleagues and I
actually do for a living.

On 1/14/2018 12:47 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2018-01-14 11:54 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 1/14/2018 11:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>> On 1/14/2018 10:57 AM, Gary wrote:
>>>> Janet wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm in the old school of holdouts, so it seems. I still get the
>>>> printed newspaper each day...I still prefer printed books...I
>>>> still pay most bills by written checks.Â* IMO, just because new
>>>> things crop up constantly doesn't mean they are better.
>>>
>>> I think it's better I pay my bills through my bank's website
>>> and save $$ on stamps and remembering did one of us mail the
>>> bills?
>>
>> I write about 12 checks a year. So far, our taxes and water bill have
>> to be a check.Â* Grandkids birthdays too.
>>>
>>>> I read an article in the newspaper just yesterday....GM is set to
>>>> start manufacturing, large scale, new cars in 2019 that have no
>>>> steering wheels, no pedals, no things on the dash for people to
>>>> use.
>>>
>>> Unless you decide to stay off he roads completely, I hate to tell
>>> you, you don't get to vote on it.Â* The Jetsons are now (as Hank
>>> said, {laugh!}).
>>>
>>> Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
>>> all the time now.Â* Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
>>> be safe to ride a motorcycle again.
>>>
>>> nancy
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Death rate on the roads has been going up.Â* One reason is impaired
>> driving from drug use, texting, etc.Â* Driverless cars will eliminate
>> much of that and get the stoners home safely.
>
>
> Not according to the stats on Wikipedia.Â* According to their data,
> vehicle crash fatality rates haveÂ* been declining fairly steadily for
> about 40 years up to 2046.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...n_U.S._by_year
>>
>> I don't quite comprehend a car with not steering wheel or pedals
>> though. Â*Â*How do you move it to the other end of the driveway or into
>> a particular parking slot at the market?Â* I can see it getting me from
>> Boston to Kansas but how do I get it to park on the left side of the
>> driveway on a private road?
>

It was going down for a long time, but look at the recent years. Look
at the 10.5% increase in 2015. 2016 not looking good either.

2012[7] 33,782 2,969 1.14 313,914,000 10.75 Negative increase 2.6%

2013 32,893 2,988 1.10 316,129,000 10.40 Positive decrease -3.3%

2014 32,744 3,026 1.08 318,860,000 10.28 Positive decrease -0.9%

2015 35,485 3,095 1.15 321,370,000 11.06 Negative increase 10.5%

2016 37,461 1.18 323,121,000 11.59

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 7:58:47 AM UTC-10, Casa estilo antiguo wrote:
>
> Designed and programmed by...wait for it...US!
>
> Yeah, I can live without completely surrendering my 'autonomy' to the
> collective...
>
> Consider, most airplanes have self-flying technology, but takeoffs and
> landings are still human-centric.
>
> http://www.askthepilot.com/questiona...omation-myths/
>
> The best analogy, I think, is one that compares flying to medicine.
> Essentially, high-tech cockpit equipment assists pilots in the way that
> high-tech medical equipment assists physicians and surgeons. It has
> vastly improved their capabilities, and certain tasks have been
> simplified, but a plane can no more €œfly itself€� than a modern operating
> room can perform an organ transplant €œby itself.€�
>
> €œTalk about medical progress, and people think about technology,€� wrote
> the surgeon and author Atul Gawande in a 2011 issue of The New Yorker.
> €œBut the capabilities of doctors matter every bit as much as the
> technology. This is true of all professions. What ultimately makes the
> difference is how well people use the technology.€�
>
> That about nails it.

The newest commercial heavy aircrafts have less automatic systems built-in. I can't say why this is - something about giving the pilots a more active role in what they're getting paid for. Perhaps they're showing up on the job drunk too often. One of these days, even pilots won't be needed.

On 1/14/2018 11:10 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 1/14/2018 12:47 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2018-01-14 11:54 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 1/14/2018 11:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>>> On 1/14/2018 10:57 AM, Gary wrote:
>>>>> Janet wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm in the old school of holdouts, so it seems. I still get the
>>>>> printed newspaper each day...I still prefer printed books...I
>>>>> still pay most bills by written checks.Â* IMO, just because new
>>>>> things crop up constantly doesn't mean they are better.
>>>>
>>>> I think it's better I pay my bills through my bank's website
>>>> and save $$ on stamps and remembering did one of us mail the
>>>> bills?
>>>
>>> I write about 12 checks a year. So far, our taxes and water bill have
>>> to be a check.Â* Grandkids birthdays too.
>>>>
>>>>> I read an article in the newspaper just yesterday....GM is set to
>>>>> start manufacturing, large scale, new cars in 2019 that have no
>>>>> steering wheels, no pedals, no things on the dash for people to
>>>>> use.
>>>>
>>>> Unless you decide to stay off he roads completely, I hate to tell
>>>> you, you don't get to vote on it.Â* The Jetsons are now (as Hank
>>>> said, {laugh!}).
>>>>
>>>> Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
>>>> all the time now.Â* Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
>>>> be safe to ride a motorcycle again.
>>>>
>>>> nancy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Death rate on the roads has been going up.Â* One reason is impaired
>>> driving from drug use, texting, etc.Â* Driverless cars will eliminate
>>> much of that and get the stoners home safely.
>>
>>
>> Not according to the stats on Wikipedia.Â* According to their data,
>> vehicle crash fatality rates haveÂ* been declining fairly steadily for
>> about 40 years up to 2046.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...n_U.S._by_year
>>
>>>
>>> I don't quite comprehend a car with not steering wheel or pedals
>>> though. Â*Â*How do you move it to the other end of the driveway or into
>>> a particular parking slot at the market?Â* I can see it getting me
>>> from Boston to Kansas but how do I get it to park on the left side of
>>> the driveway on a private road?
>>
>
> It was going down for a long time, but look at the recent years.Â* Look
> at the 10.5% increase in 2015.Â* 2016 not looking good either.
>
> 2012[7]Â*Â*Â* 33,782Â*Â*Â* 2,969Â*Â*Â* 1.14Â*Â*Â* 313,914,000Â*Â*Â* 10.75Â*Â*Â* Negative
> increase 2.6%
>
> 2013Â*Â*Â* 32,893Â*Â*Â* 2,988Â*Â*Â* 1.10Â*Â*Â* 316,129,000Â*Â*Â* 10.40Â*Â*Â* Positive
> decrease -3.3%
>
> 2014Â*Â*Â* 32,744Â*Â*Â* 3,026Â*Â*Â* 1.08Â*Â*Â* 318,860,000Â*Â*Â* 10.28Â*Â*Â* Positive
> decrease -0.9%
>
> 2015Â*Â*Â* 35,485Â*Â*Â* 3,095Â*Â*Â* 1.15Â*Â*Â* 321,370,000Â*Â*Â* 11.06Â*Â*Â* Negative
> increase 10.5%
>
> 2016Â*Â*Â* 37,461Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* 1.18Â*Â*Â* 323,121,000Â*Â*Â* 11.59


Directly attributable to short attention span syndrome = cell phone
distracted driving!

http://exchange.aaa.com/safety/distr...acted-driving/

The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety has sponsored research on
distracted driving since the early 1990s.

The Foundations analysis of data from a 2006 study conducted by
Virginia Techs Transportation Institute revealed that 2013 Traffic
Safety Culture Indextaking your eyes off the road for more than two
seconds doubles your risk of a crash.

The Foundations annual Traffic Safety Culture Index, which
measures national attitudes towards road safety, consistently finds that
drivers are willing to engage in distracting behaviors behind the wheel
despite knowing the dangers. According to the 2013 Traffic Safety
Culture Index, 83 percent of motorists rated texting while driving and
58 percent rated cell phone use very serious threats to their safety,
yet many admitted performing these distracting behaviors while driving
within the previous month. Further, 88 percent of respondents said that
distracted drivers were somewhat or a much bigger problem today than
they were just three years ago.

The pervasiveness of a "do as I say, not as I do attitude toward
distracted driving highlights the need to spread awareness of the risks
and work with drivers to increase safety on the roads.

The Foundation is conducting groundbreaking research on the role of
mental distraction in crashes, including the safety of voice-activated
communications technologies.

View AAAs compendium and fact sheet on distracted driving research to
date.

http://publicaffairsresources.aaa.bi...-10.2.2014.pdf

On 1/14/2018 11:12 AM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 7:58:47 AM UTC-10, Casa estilo antiguo wrote:
>>
>> Designed and programmed by...wait for it...US!
>>
>> Yeah, I can live without completely surrendering my 'autonomy' to the
>> collective...
>>
>> Consider, most airplanes have self-flying technology, but takeoffs and
>> landings are still human-centric.
>>
>> http://www.askthepilot.com/questiona...omation-myths/
>>
>> The best analogy, I think, is one that compares flying to medicine.
>> Essentially, high-tech cockpit equipment assists pilots in the way that
>> high-tech medical equipment assists physicians and surgeons. It has
>> vastly improved their capabilities, and certain tasks have been
>> simplified, but a plane can no more €œfly itself€� than a modern operating
>> room can perform an organ transplant €œby itself.€�
>>
>> €œTalk about medical progress, and people think about technology,€� wrote
>> the surgeon and author Atul Gawande in a 2011 issue of The New Yorker.
>> €œBut the capabilities of doctors matter every bit as much as the
>> technology. This is true of all professions. What ultimately makes the
>> difference is how well people use the technology.€�
>>
>> That about nails it.
>
> The newest commercial heavy aircrafts have less automatic systems built-in. I can't say why this is - something about giving the pilots a more active role in what they're getting paid for. Perhaps they're showing up on the job drunk too often. One of these days, even pilots won't be needed.
>

Sorry but barring actual Star Trek transporter technology I just do not
believe that will happen.

And even then we'll need a human monitor in case Brundlefly gets in the
works...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4Cw_c748Yo

On 1/14/2018 1:12 PM, dsi1 wrote:

> The newest commercial heavy aircrafts have less automatic systems built-in. I can't say why this is - something about giving the pilots a more active role in what they're getting paid for. Perhaps they're showing up on the job drunk too often. One of these days, even pilots won't be needed.
>

I think it is also to keep the pilot's skills sharp too. When a real
emergency comes up they forget how to do the real handling if not done
in a long time.

On 2018-01-14 1:12 PM, dsi1 wrote:

> The newest commercial heavy aircrafts have less automatic systems
> built-in. I can't say why this is - something about giving the pilots
> a more active role in what they're getting paid for. Perhaps they're
> showing up on the job drunk too often. One of these days, even pilots
> won't be needed.
>

Which of those newest commercial heavy aircraft are you talking about.
My good friend is a recently retired airline pilot who flew mostly
Boeing 777. I get the impression from him that those aircraft ave every
improving avionics and from what I learned online it would seem so,

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 12:34:14 PM UTC-5, dsi1 wrote:

> I frequently ask folks over the age of 70 about their cell phones. What I expect to see are feature phones common 10 to 15 years ago. Sometimes it's older generation iPhones which their kids gave to them that they don't know how to operate. Some people over 70 do have the latest smartphones. Typically these are big haole guys that are well off and look like they're dressed for the golf course. They're into technology. Good for them.

I've got 9 years to go before I hit your benchmark. I've got an iPhone 5c.
When I bought it, I believe the first iPhone 6 had just come out.

I barely use it to make phone calls. The only app I use is spider solitaire.

> I don't understand the attitude of people regarding self-driving cars. They
> seem to completely ignore the fact that humans are terrible drivers and that
> about 100 people die and over 10,000 are injured every day by this incredibly
> deadly consumer product. These new cars don't have to be perfect - merely
> better than human drivers.

But I'm not one of those 100 or 10,000. I suppose when I'm ready to give up
driving, driverless cars will have had most of the bugs worked out of them
by the early adopters.

Cindy Hamilton

Gary wrote:

> Nancy Young wrote:
> >
> > Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
> > all the time now. Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
> > be safe to ride a motorcycle again.
>
> Where's the fun in riding on a driverless motorcycle?

Uh Gary, that was a woosh over your head. He had nothing about a
riderless motocycle but about clueless drivers off the roads and it
might be safer for motorcycles.

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 8:58:16 AM UTC-10, Dave Smith wrote:
>
> Which of those newest commercial heavy aircraft are you talking about.
> My good friend is a recently retired airline pilot who flew mostly
> Boeing 777. I get the impression from him that those aircraft ave every
> improving avionics and from what I learned online it would seem so,

Beats the heck out of me. I don't know. Probably some Airbus planes and certainly the newest 777 variants. These probably do include advanced avionics. I'm talking about automatic control systems.

On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 10:57:52 -0500, Gary > wrote:

>Janet wrote:
>>
>> I can get round the supermarket without asking anyone, even rfc, what I
>> should buy for dinner. I spend whole days out in the big wide world
>> without need of a life-coach, life-support and counseling.
>
>Well said. I bought a cheap smart phone over a year ago (cheap)

Of course cheap.

>but I still haven't activated it. I should have one for
>emergencies only but not like most people who seem to be all
>addicted to them.
>
>I'm in the old school of holdouts, so it seems. I still get the
>printed newspaper each day...I still prefer printed books...I
>still pay most bills by written checks. IMO, just because new
>things crop up constantly doesn't mean they are better.

You're just getting old.

>I read an article in the newspaper just yesterday....GM is set to
>start manufacturing, large scale, new cars in 2019 that have no
>steering wheels, no pedals, no things on the dash for people to
>use. Not for me. That is coming (to our roads) way too fast for
>me - not enough testing time. I wouldn't be too quick to ride in
>one plus it scares me a bit to be out on the roads with all these
>completely automatic cars driving around. Sorry... nope.
>
>IMO, by pushing this new tech so fast, there are going to be a
>lot of horrible accidental deaths before it's perfected and
>deemed safer.

The question is how many less horrible accidental deaths due to human
error there will be. Most car accidents are caused by human error.

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 9:21:56 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 12:34:14 PM UTC-5, dsi1 wrote:
>
> > I frequently ask folks over the age of 70 about their cell phones. What I expect to see are feature phones common 10 to 15 years ago. Sometimes it's older generation iPhones which their kids gave to them that they don't know how to operate. Some people over 70 do have the latest smartphones. Typically these are big haole guys that are well off and look like they're dressed for the golf course. They're into technology. Good for them.
>
> I've got 9 years to go before I hit your benchmark. I've got an iPhone 5c.
> When I bought it, I believe the first iPhone 6 had just come out.
>
> I barely use it to make phone calls. The only app I use is spider solitaire.
>
> > I don't understand the attitude of people regarding self-driving cars. They
> > seem to completely ignore the fact that humans are terrible drivers and that
> > about 100 people die and over 10,000 are injured every day by this incredibly
> > deadly consumer product. These new cars don't have to be perfect - merely
> > better than human drivers.
>
> But I'm not one of those 100 or 10,000. I suppose when I'm ready to give up
> driving, driverless cars will have had most of the bugs worked out of them
> by the early adopters.
>
> Cindy Hamilton

Lots of people feel like that. I've been hit too many times to have that attitude. That's why I had 3 Fiat 124 Coupes. Two of them got wacked. I've never hit anybody but I am certainly aware that my driving sucks. It's only a matter of time before something bad happens.

On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 8:24:40 AM UTC-10, Casa estilo antiguo wrote:
>
> Sorry but barring actual Star Trek transporter technology I just do not
> believe that will happen.
>
> And even then we'll need a human monitor in case Brundlefly gets in the
> works...
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4Cw_c748Yo

I love horror films. They make me laugh. Am I a bad person?

On 1/14/2018 2:40 PM, cshenk wrote:
> Gary wrote:
>
>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>>
>>> Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
>>> all the time now. Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
>>> be safe to ride a motorcycle again.
>>
>> Where's the fun in riding on a driverless motorcycle?
>
> Uh Gary, that was a woosh over your head. He had nothing about a
> riderless motocycle but about clueless drivers off the roads and it
> might be safer for motorcycles.
>

I think he had his tongue in his cheek when he wrote that.

On 1/14/2018 2:40 PM, cshenk wrote:
> Gary wrote:
>
>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>>
>>> Open that newspaper you get and see there are horrible accidents
>>> all the time now. Who knows, with driverless cars maybe it will
>>> be safe to ride a motorcycle again.
>>
>> Where's the fun in riding on a driverless motorcycle?
>
> Uh Gary, that was a woosh over your head. He had nothing about a
> riderless motocycle but about clueless drivers off the roads and it
> might be safer for motorcycles.
>
>
I D I O T !

On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 11:21:52 -0800 (PST), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 12:34:14 PM UTC-5, dsi1 wrote:
>
>> I frequently ask folks over the age of 70 about their cell phones. What I expect to see are feature phones common 10 to 15 years ago. Sometimes it's older generation iPhones which their kids gave to them that they don't know how to operate. Some people over 70 do have the latest smartphones. Typically these are big haole guys that are well off and look like they're dressed for the golf course. They're into technology. Good for them.
>
>I've got 9 years to go before I hit your benchmark. I've got an iPhone 5c.
>When I bought it, I believe the first iPhone 6 had just come out.
>
>I barely use it to make phone calls. The only app I use is spider solitaire.
>
>> I don't understand the attitude of people regarding self-driving cars. They
>> seem to completely ignore the fact that humans are terrible drivers and that
>> about 100 people die and over 10,000 are injured every day by this incredibly
>> deadly consumer product. These new cars don't have to be perfect - merely
>> better than human drivers.
>
>But I'm not one of those 100 or 10,000. I suppose when I'm ready to give up
>driving, driverless cars will have had most of the bugs worked out of them
>by the early adopters.
>
>Cindy Hamilton

I seriously doubt there will ever be driverless cars here in the
boonies, we still don't have the latest high speed internet and most
areas don't have cable. I can just see driverless cars dealing with
large critters on the road, gravel/dirt road.