• anagram

The anagram of `Greater or EQual` is `lauQE ro retaerG`.

Hope that helps. (It doesn't)

Let's say I plug my ears and through random chance do what the police officer is asking me to do. Have I committed a crime by doing that?

How do you know that you did what the officer was asking you to do, if you don't know what he was asking you to do because you weren't listening to it? The question presupposes that you know what the officer asked.

From the officer's perspective, no, you haven't committed a crime, because all the officer knows is that you did what he or she told you to do. But good luck reproducing that random chance event. Generally to obey either the letter or the spirit of a command, you have to at least know what the letter of the command was.

anagram

The anagram of `Greater or EQual` is `lauQE ro retaerG`.

Hope that helps. (It doesn't)

Dammit. Acronym.

I get those words confused for some reason.

Let's say I plug my ears and through random chance do what the police officer is asking me to do. Have I committed a crime by doing that?

How do you know that you did what the officer was asking you to do, if you don't know what he was asking you to do because you weren't listening to it? The question presupposes that you know what the officer asked.

From the officer's perspective, no, you haven't committed a crime, because all the officer knows is that you did what he or she told you to do. But good luck reproducing that random chance event. Generally to obey either the letter or the spirit of a command, you have to at least know what the letter of the command was.

In this hypothetical case, I don't know what the officer said to do, but I did do what the officer said to do.

anagram

The anagram of `Greater or EQual` is `lauQE ro retaerG`.

Hope that helps. (It doesn't)

Dammit. Acronym.

I get those words confused for some reason.

I also got it wrong because what I said was a palindrome.

An anagram would be Regal Rear Quote

Let's say I plug my ears and through random chance do what the police officer is asking me to do. Have I committed a crime by doing that?

How do you know that you did what the officer was asking you to do, if you don't know what he was asking you to do because you weren't listening to it? The question presupposes that you know what the officer asked.

From the officer's perspective, no, you haven't committed a crime, because all the officer knows is that you did what he or she told you to do. But good luck reproducing that random chance event. Generally to obey either the letter or the spirit of a command, you have to at least know what the letter of the command was.

In this hypothetical case, I don't know what the officer said to do, but I did do what the officer said to do.

In the hypothetical case, you don't know you did do what the officer said to do.

Someone, such as yourself, who didn't hear the command but observed what you did, would assume that you did it by happenstance.

Someone, such as the cop, who did hear the command and observed you to do what the command said to do, would assume that you did it in obedience to the command. They would be wrong, but their assumption is the one that counts in this case.

anagram

The anagram of `Greater or EQual` is `lauQE ro retaerG`.

Hope that helps. (It doesn't)

Dammit. Acronym.

I get those words confused for some reason.

I also got it wrong because what I said was a palindrome.

An anagram would be Regal Rear Quote

A palindrome is a special type of anagram. It's an anagram where, if you rearrange the letters by swapping every Nth letter from the beginning with every Nth letter from the end, you will end up with the same thing that you had at the beginning.

But what you said wasn't a palindrome, either. "Greater or EQual, lauQE ro retaerG" would be a palindrome. Although the point of a palindrome is usually to try to make real words with both halves of it...

It was still an anagram, what you said, since you just took all of the letters and reversed them. Although anagrams usually also have the point of trying to make real words...

ןɐnbǝ ɹo ɹǝʇɐǝɹƃ

If that's really a problem, try something intended for people who are blind; they usually run much faster than for the sighted. (Fast enough that I for one can't cope at all. OTOH, I read extremely quickly…)

Truth. I have a friend who's blind, and loves playing around with tech stuff. Andanytimeshe'sgotherphonereadingstuff,italwayssoundslikethisandIcanbarelymakeouteverythirdwordorso. But she has no trouble understanding it.

Yeah, I've recently read an article about a blind programmer's working experience.
I could not understand one word of what the screen reader was saying. Not even starting or ending words.

I also got it wrong because what I said was a palindrome.

Not it wasn't! It was the reverse.

Also it was technically an anagram.

Edit: :oznah:

• it's also very difficult to do without actually applying the brakes

In my experience barely touching the pedal turns on the brake light, long before the pedal position at which actual brakes engage.

The way to surprise a tailgater is to use the handbrake. He'll never see it coming!

I was told* to shift into a lower gear. That'll slow you down initially (without brake lights), but will still allow you to quickly accelerate should the guy get close to you.

• In my experience barely touching the pedal turns on the brake light, long before the pedal position at which actual brakes engage.

Press the button to open the back of the car. That'll make the driver of the car behind think you're totally insane and he'll immediately back off!

In my experience barely touching the pedal turns on the brake light, long before the pedal position at which actual brakes engage.

Press the button to open the back of the car. That'll make the driver of the car behind think you're totally insane and he'll immediately back off!

I doubt you'd even notice if I unlock the trunk of my sedan.
The only things that would happen are a light on my dashboard turning on and a pretty quiet click as the latch unlocks.
Of course, I haven't tried doing it while moving, but from my admittedly very limited understanding of aerodynamics it wouldn't likely spring open.

• from my admittedly very limited understanding of aerodynamics it wouldn't likely spring open

Gas struts.

Also, I've got a station wagon. The driver behind will notice!

• This post is deleted!

• from my admittedly very limited understanding of aerodynamics it wouldn't likely spring open

The back of the vehicle should be in a low pressure zone, so it's entirely possible that it'd open at least partly. Of course, for the same reason, anything lightweight in the trunk could potentially get sucked out, so it's probably not a good idea.

• so it's probably not a good idea

• The back of the vehicle should be in a low pressure zone,

• The back of the vehicle should be in a low pressure zone,

E_EUROCENTRIST_VIEWPOINT

E_EUROCENTRIST_VIEWPOINT

That would be E_MURICAN_CENTRIST_VIEWPOINT, not EUROCENTRIST.

Blame GIS. I did see some weather maps of Europe, but I didn't notice any of Australia (or Asia, or Africa, or ...), and that seemed to be one of the ones that made the point clearly.

• If the guy behind you does that, it probably means you're driving too slowly in the left lane. Speed up or move over and he'll stop. Usually.

I've been tailgated in any and every lane, and it doesn't matter how fast you're going; tailgating is dangerous and illegal. You are never under any obligation to speed up unless there's a minimum speed limit in place. (Which does happen in some jurisdictions.)

You may, however, be under an obligation to move to the right.

• You are never under any obligation to speed up unless there's a minimum speed limit in place. (Which does happen in some jurisdictions.)

Not true in Washington State. If you have a lane to your right, and you're obstructing traffic behind you, you're required to move to the right. (The speed of travel is irrelevant to this law-- even if you're 10 over the limit, and the guy you're obstructing wants to drive 20 over the limit, you're still in violation.)

A lot of States have similar laws.

EDIT: well technically you aren't required to speed up, but you are required to get out of the guy's way. And if you're holding up 5+ cars, you're required to get out of their way even on single-lane roads, which means pulling onto the shoulder or into a driveway until all the cars you've been obstructing have passed.

• I have THREE new investment opportunities! Who wants to finance a USEFUL PRODUCT?

## Loud Noise Alarm

Have you ever wondered if there was a loud noise you couldn't hear? This new device will play an alarm whenever there is a loud noise, so you can be sure you hear it.

## Point-Blank Fire Detector

Ever wonder if that thing you're sticking your hand in is a fire? This 37% heat-shielded device will tell you if you're putting it into a hot thing. No warranty available.

## Malware Virus Software

Are you annoyed by antivirus software that's always wrong about whether you have a virus on your computer? Malware Virus Software solves that problem in two easy steps:

1. Infects your computer with malware
2. Tells you you have a virus

## Malware Virus Software

Are you annoyed by antivirus software that's always wrong about whether you have a virus on your computer? Malware Virus Software solves that problem in two easy steps:

1. Infects your computer with malware
2. Tells you you have a virus

That's old hat. Just about every year there's a new virus like that.

You are never under any obligation to speed up unless there's a minimum speed limit in place. (Which does happen in some jurisdictions.)

Not true in Washington State. If you have a lane to your right, and you're obstructing traffic behind you, you're required to move to the right. (The speed of travel is irrelevant to this law-- even if you're 10 over the limit, and the guy you're obstructing wants to drive 20 over the limit, you're still in violation.)

A lot of States have similar laws.

EDIT: well technically you aren't required to speed up, but you are required to get out of the guy's way. And if you're holding up 5+ cars, you're required to get out of their way even on single-lane roads, which means pulling onto the shoulder or into a driveway until all the cars you've been obstructing have passed.

That's..... actually a pretty sensible law that I never knew existed...

How does it work if the lane to the right is full though? I assume you're not forced to speed up (at least past the limit)/move over if the lane is full or if you're trying to pass someone?

• How does it work if the lane to the right is full though?

If the law in question is vaguely OK, it'll have a condition that you should only move over if it is safe to do so. Whatever “safe” means, but probably doesn't include driving into an 18 wheeler or off a cliff edge.

• That's..... actually a pretty sensible law that I never knew existed...

Eh it's been on the books forever. We also have a law that says if the freeway contains 3 or more lanes, semi-trucks can't occupy the left-most lane, but truck drivers never follow that one.

How does it work if the lane to the right is full though?

Full of what?

If you're signalling to merge, there's another law that says motorists are supposed to yield to you.

I assume you're not forced to speed up (at least past the limit)/move over if the lane is full or if you're trying to pass someone?

I still don't get your assertion about lanes being "full". Traffic lanes are fluid, there's always room for another car to merge in. Unless there's like a bridge out a mile down the road or something crazy.

If you're trying to pass someone and there's a guy riding your ass because you're not doing it fast enough, then you're really shitty at passing people. Either give up on the pass or hit the gas, slow-poke. (Note that also in Washington State, you can exceed the speed limit while passing. Not sure you could argue that to a traffic cop, but it's on the books.)

If you're signalling to merge, there's another law that says motorists are supposed to yield to you.

If there really is such a law (I doubt it), that's a retarded law.
If you're changing lanes, you are the one who is supposed to yield to those who are already in the lane.

• If there really is such a law (I doubt it), that's a retarded law.

I dunno, I never really thought about it. I assume there's some kind of advice somewhere that says "hey don't be an asshole and let people merge in if they're signaling, dickweed." Maybe I'm wrong, whatever.

If you're signalling to merge, there's another law that says motorists are supposed to yield to you.

If there really is such a law (I doubt it), that's a retarded law.
If you're changing lanes, you are the one who is supposed to yield to those who are already in the lane.

This news article seems to agree with you, but still recommends you to not be a dick.

If there really is such a law (I doubt it), that's a retarded law.

I dunno, I never really thought about it. I assume there's some kind of advice somewhere that says "hey don't be an asshole and let people merge in if they're signaling, dickweed." Maybe I'm wrong, whatever.

In my jurisdiction there isn't a law about that but a recommendation to not be a dick.
It is explicitly written in the road rules that it is recommended to let one car at a time pass from each lane or from each direction when the lane or intersection is blocked. But it isn't a law and you are absolutely allowed to be a dick if you want to. The driver who doesn't have the right of way must verify that he is being yielded to.

# Loud Noise Alarm

Have you ever wondered if there was a loud noise you couldn't hear? This new device will play an alarm whenever there is a loud noise, so you can be sure you hear it.

"hey don't be an asshole and let people merge in if they're signaling, dickweed."

Whether it's a law or just good advice, good luck getting people to follow it.

We also have a law that says if the freeway contains 3 or more lanes, semi-trucks can't occupy the left-most lane, but truck drivers never follow that one.

Applies to cars towing trailers too. Limited to the 2 right lanes. Trying telling that to the pickup towing a boat trailer at 75 in the left lane (CAs speed limit for towing is 55)

anagram

The anagram of `Greater or EQual` is `lauQE ro retaerG`.

Hope that helps. (It doesn't)

Dammit. Acronym.

I'm So Meta Even This Acronym.

• A remote control car that goes around swearing at people

• @wild-monkey Welcome to the forums!

@wild-monkey Welcome to the forums!

@Wild-Monkey
appeared!

@wild-monkey Welcome to the forums!

@Wild-Monkey
appeared!

@Wild-Monkey used `Create Bad Idea`! It's super effective!

• CRISPR involves an X-shredder inserted into the DNA of male rats, destroying the X chromosomes in their sperm. The natural process uses bacteria to fight off viruses by snipping away at the rats’ DNA.

By passing on only the Y chromosome they would never have female offspring, resulting in increasingly few females – and therefore a sharp population decline.

Did we learn NOTHING from Jurassic Park???

CRISPR involves an X-shredder inserted into the DNA of male rats, destroying the X chromosomes in their sperm. The natural process uses bacteria to fight off viruses by snipping away at the rats’ DNA.

By passing on only the Y chromosome they would never have female offspring, resulting in increasingly few females – and therefore a sharp population decline.

Did we learn NOTHING from Jurassic Park???

Did we learn nothing from extincting other species through attempted population control?

CRISPR involves an X-shredder inserted into the DNA of male rats, destroying the X chromosomes in their sperm. The natural process uses bacteria to fight off viruses by snipping away at the rats’ DNA.

By passing on only the Y chromosome they would never have female offspring, resulting in increasingly few females – and therefore a sharp population decline.

Did we learn NOTHING from Jurassic Park???

Jurassic Park 3D Movie CLIP - Life Finds a Way (1993) - Steven Spielberg Movie HD – 01:23
— Movieclips Coming Soon

CRISPR involves an X-shredder inserted into the DNA of male rats, destroying the X chromosomes in their sperm. The natural process uses bacteria to fight off viruses by snipping away at the rats’ DNA.

By passing on only the Y chromosome they would never have female offspring, resulting in increasingly few females – and therefore a sharp population decline.

Did we learn NOTHING from Jurassic Park???

Because there isn't a single other species in the entire UK that would be at all capable of attempting to exploit that newly-empty niche.

CRISPR involves an X-shredder inserted into the DNA of male rats, destroying the X chromosomes in their sperm. The natural process uses bacteria to fight off viruses by snipping away at the rats’ DNA.

By passing on only the Y chromosome they would never have female offspring, resulting in increasingly few females – and therefore a sharp population decline.

Did we learn NOTHING from Jurassic Park???

Because there isn't a single other species in the entire UK that would be at all capable of attempting to exploit that newly-empty niche.

# "We gave these rats birth defects and hoped that they would have rat sex and then somehow that controls the rat population I guess?"

CRISPR involves an X-shredder inserted into the DNA of male rats, destroying the X chromosomes in their sperm. The natural process uses bacteria to fight off viruses by snipping away at the rats’ DNA.

By passing on only the Y chromosome they would never have female offspring, resulting in increasingly few females – and therefore a sharp population decline.

Did we learn NOTHING from Jurassic Park???

Because there isn't a single other species in the entire UK that would be at all capable of attempting to exploit that newly-empty niche.

# "We gave these rats birth defects and hoped that they would have rat sex and then somehow that controls the rat population I guess?"

#NotAllRats

• @boomzilla quoted:

CRISPR involves an X-shredder inserted into the DNA of male rats

They want to use a shredder to create mutant rats...

At this point I'm disappointed if none of the researchers are named April O'Neil.

CRISPR involves an X-shredder inserted into the DNA of male rats, destroying the X chromosomes in their sperm. The natural process uses bacteria to fight off viruses by snipping away at the rats’ DNA.

By passing on only the Y chromosome they would never have female offspring, resulting in increasingly few females – and therefore a sharp population decline.

Did we learn NOTHING from Jurassic Park???

Rather smacks of this:

“We got a bit carried away,” said Moist. “We were a bit too creative in our thinking. We encouraged mongooses to breed in the posting boxes to keep down the snakes…”

Lord Vetinari said nothing.

“Er…which, admittedly, we introduced into the letter boxes to reduce the numbers of toads…”

Lord Vetinari repeated himself.

“Er…which, it’s true, staff put in the posting boxes to keep down the snails…”

Lord Vetinari remained unvocal.

“Er…These, I must in fairness point out, got into the boxes of their own accord, in order to eat the glue on the stamps,” said Moist, aware that he was beginning to burble.

“Well, at least you were saved the trouble of having to introduce them yourselves,” said Lord Vetinari cheerfully. “As you indicate, this may well have been a case where chilly logic should have been replaced by the common sense of, perhaps, the average chicken."

Did we learn NOTHING from Jurassic Park???

I was rather thinking that this sounds like the Krogan plot from Mass Effect:

By passing on only the Y chromosome they would never have female offspring, resulting in increasingly few females – and therefore a sharp population decline.

This tells me that in a decade or two, when we'll need the super rats to save the galaxy, they will be really pissed at us for messing with their genes.

• IT announced they will be pushing a software "upgrade," with instructions regarding the notifications and dialogs one should expect during the process:

... click Yes, I trust the publisher.... In this case, the publisher is McAfee...AMCFG.EXE

You'd think IT would realize this is a BAD IDEA.

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.